Edwina Currie's defense of Boris Johnson's spending was not the trap she might have hoped for

Emily ThornberryLabor MP for Islington South and Finsbury, took to Twitter/X to share something she had noticed. Boris Johnsonof spending for 2022 to 2023 – as a former prime minister, obviously, since he gave up his parliamentary seat when it appeared he was facing suspension.

His thread of eight tweets suggested that once again the rules had been changed to account for Johnson's failure to follow them.

Here's a curious story involving Boris Johnson, the annual stipend of former prime ministers, and the man Kemi Badenoch chose to replace her in PMQs last month. Oh, and 67,803 taxpayer dollars were given to Johnson when he had no right to claim them. (1/8)

-Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) December 13, 2024

We first go back to 31 March 2023, when a new version of the guidelines was published covering the Public Service Expenses Allowance of 115,000 per year for former Prime Ministers. From what I could see, the only change from the previous guidance was to the section below on complaints processes. (2/8) pic.twitter.com/k4wZO2ahgp

-Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) December 13, 2024

That interested me. Why did they change the guidelines to make the rules less explicit about when claims must be submitted and whether late claims will be accepted? So I asked the Cabinet Office if any late claims had come in that year? (3/8) pic.twitter.com/pC5pmsR2zt

-Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) December 13, 2024

This seemed quite definitive on Alex Burghart's part, and when the 2022-23 annual report he had mentioned in his response was released five months later, it was equally definitive that no complaints had been received belatedly or otherwise on the part of Boris Johnson. (4/8) pic.twitter.com/49BHXqeET1

-Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) December 13, 2024

So far, everything was clear. But then we come to the Cabinet Office annual report for 2023-24, published yesterday, which tells us that Boris Johnson submitted a late claim for 67,803 office expenses incurred in the 2022-23 financial year, and was fully refunded. (5/8) pic.twitter.com/Bykel6liry

-Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) December 13, 2024

Now you might think it's no coincidence that the Cabinet Office weakened the rules preventing late payments in the same year that Boris Johnson realized he was going to lose $68,000 out of his own pocket for not having submitted their expense reports on time. (6/8)

-Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) December 13, 2024

But surely this cannot be true. Otherwise, it would mean that Alex Burghart was not entirely factual in the PQ response he gave me in April 2023, and that the Cabinet Office was also wrong when it published its annual report in September 2023 . (7/8)

-Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) December 13, 2024

There is, however, a simple way to allay this skepticism. The Cabinet Office simply needs to tell us when it received requests for reimbursement for Boris Johnson's expenses in 2022/23 and when it decided to let him have the money. Watch this space for answers. (8/8)

-Emily Thornberry (@EmilyThornberry) December 13, 2024

Clearly the Cabinet Office has not responded, but the allegations hardly came as a shock.

I am shocked at the suggestion that the rules have been changed to allow Boris Johnson to bend them. https://t.co/1514l7uiIB

-Mike Cameron (@mikercameron) December 14, 2024

I find it astounding and deeply depressing that our Parliament is run with much less strict rules than those of a limited company. And senior politicians are blatantly taking advantage of it. https://t.co/BgQxOqLkE6

– Jonathan Dayman (@jonathdayman) December 14, 2024

Hard detective work. Johnson is just a mess and a liar and everyone around him is demeaning themselves and lying on his behalf. Surely, having received no expenses for that year, they would have called his office to clarify the situation. No? Lying to cover it up https://t.co/dnpIybvZvN

– Professor Moriarty (@calmoriarty) December 13, 2024

Former Conservative MP and surprisingly frequent commentator on current affairs, Edwina Currie intervened to divert attention from the scandal surrounding Victoria Starmerthe clothes.

She left a very open goal, in which several entertaining interventions were thrown in – mainly regarding whatever Johnson had received from donors.

1.

But not his wallpaper, his takeaway or his computer lessons.

– Colin the Dachshund (@DachshundColin) December 15, 2024

2.

I just didn't pay
– own takeaways
– marriage
– accommodation after being PM
The Bamfords did it despite questions about the huge amount of taxes they owe

– Dave Lawrence (@dave43law) December 14, 2024

3.

Johnson didn't pay for one of Britain's most expensive legal teams to defend his multiple lies in Parliament, did he?
The British taxpayer footed the bill on top of everything he stole from them

– Capman #FBPE (@Euro_toff) December 14, 2024

4.

Johnson was the most corrupt, fraudulent, greedy, greedy Prime Minister this country has ever seen and he STILL steals the public purse now. He ruled over a government of outright thieves (VIP Lane sound familiar?). Amazing that you can fight on this terrain.

– Snow (@Lookinupatstars) December 14, 2024

5.

But not his many vacations, his legal fees, his food deliveries, his wedding, his wallpaper and his interior design. You must have forgotten.

– Alan Thompson (@AlanThompson58) December 14, 2024

6.

But not her $25,000 wedding. Or a vacation. Or food during Covid.

– Cllr Kathryn Walker (@KathrynDW59) December 14, 2024

7.

But did he do it? Did he really do it? When every aspect of his existence was financed by “generous” donations. What if someone gave me a lavish free vacation, renovated my apartment at great expense, and paid for my wedding… but I bought myself a bag of chips on the weekend with “my own money”…?

–Duncan Bamford (@duncan_bamford) December 15, 2024

8.

I can say it. https://t.co/njrJrPEGi2 pic.twitter.com/JuX6me0MJi

-Lloyd Lewis (@LloydGeorge57) December 14, 2024

9.

We paid for Johnson's mistress from 2012 to 2016, Jennifer Arcuri. They went on an overseas trip and she was at the launch of Prince Andrew's D5 summit. She obtained a special entrepreneur visa.
Of course, it was a quid pro quo. Our counterpart however.
The evidence was later deleted. And we paid his legal fees. pic.twitter.com/n2P5X8BL7u

– Cockney Campaign (@cockneycampaign) December 15, 2024

10.

It looked like he had taken them out of a dumpster.

– Bibi blackwood (@Bibiblackwood7) December 14, 2024

11.

Are you sure?

– SoccerMomma (@SoccerMomma12) December 14, 2024

As much as we “actually” hate, Ms. Currie, well, actually …

LEARN MORE

The Johnsons wanted their wallpaper donor to fund a $150,000 treehouse at Checkers. 19 favorite reactions

Source Emily Thornberry Picture Screenshot