When looked upon impulsively, what Johnson paid for furnishing his Downing Street flat, is not something worth getting in a pickle about. However, if you allow the whole story to sink in, it does become more sinister. There are so many aspects to it that, in my mind, are difficult to comprehend.

£30k Allowance

First, we now know that the PM gets £30k a year for the upkeep of the flat. A substantial amount but it is the listed building of the PM, so fair enough.

It is said that Theresa May, the former PM, used that money on furniture from John Lewis, a middle-class, home furnishings retailer. Most people with a few quid like a bit of John Lewis; it is regarded as a good quality name producing stylish home furnishings.

However, that was not good enough for Johnson’s latest fiancée, so she took upon designing it herself. Fair enough, not everyone likes John Lewis and if we all had the same style, life would be rather dull. However, some are saying the refurbishment costed £200,000. This seems an extraordinary amount for a property you don’t own and might not be living in for long.

Once again, it is all about choice, and if Miss Symonds deemed £200,000k necessary, fair enough. Well, fair enough if she, or Johnson, is footing the bill. This is where everything becomes a bit murky. It is alleged that Johnson didn’t foot the bill. It came from a third party (or parties) loan and it was not declared to the public.

Declaring Loans or Donations

A loan to an MP is supposed to be declared to the public. Why? Well, because there can be assumptions made that the loan has been made in exchange for a return in favours. Why do donors hand out money? From the goodness of their heart and a wish for their good friends in Number 10 to live in opulence?     

I doubt it somehow and that is the point of the matter. If there are no laws to protect the public from seeing ministers taking bungs in return for influence, what are we? No better than the countries we openly condemn for having corrupt government’s, that’s what. The PM is supposed to lead by example with regards to corruption, yet two of the last three (Johnson and Cameron) have, allegedly, abused their positions in return for financial gain.

Nothing to Declare?

Someone said to me today that I only go on about it because I hate Johnson and that any other PM would do the same. Whilst it is true that I hate Johnson, the point here is that a sitting Prime Minister is being accused of not declaring where funds for an extravagant refurbishment came from.

If there is nothing to hide and there is no wrongdoing, just declare it. It’s quite simple to say nothing is wrong and where the original money came from. However, he won’t do that. No matter how many times he was asked, including a multiple-choice option from the leader of the opposition, he failed to answer the question.

There must a reason for not declaring a donation or loan and my guess is that it is not a good reason.

Have a good weekend.