Boris Johnson - Indictment for Misconduct in Public Office

Sonic67

Eh?  It was a number on a bus, proposing the amount of money we 'send' to the EU.  Assuming we left the EU in 2019, I questioned why it will take 5 years to 'send' that money to the NHS instead.

Sonic67

Yep. "We send money (                                                                               

Except we still haven't.
Because it's still going to the EU.

If we left the EU tomorrow, didn't even pay the divorce bill and sent all of that to the NHS, you'd be on here saying, "you can't do that!"

Or are you saying all the money we give to the EU should be going to the NHS instead? In which case, good on you.

It also just says we should be giving the money to the NHS instead of the EU. It doesn't even promise it will happen.

It's no different to saying, "want to earn thousands?" "Call this number now!" It's left to you assume that calling that number will get you thousands. It's not saying it will happen. It's two seperate things. "Do you like ice cream?" "Support Liverpool Football Club." You might assume supporting LFC get's you ice cream from the wording, but it's unrelated.

Rasczak

Just refer to the treasury's own publication.

The facts behind the £350m per week EU membership claim

How much does Britain pay to the EU?
The origin of the £350m claim appears to come from the Treasury's statement on the amount the UK was forecasted to spend on the EU in 2015.

In 2015, the UK’s full membership fee was estimated to end up being £17.8 billion. This is the rough equivalent of £350m per week.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/483344/EU_finances_2015_final_web_09122015.pdf

Sonic67

Police are enforcement, it is the courts that decide criminality or not.  As for tit-for-tat, if it has the scope to improve the quality and reliability of public debate then is that a bad thing?

weaviemx5

Yep. If a policeman is walking down the street and sees a guy being beaten up he will arrest the guy with reasonable confidence the CPS will go with it. It didn't happen here.

And let's go with innocent until proven guilty.
No. I was amused when someone tried to give Blair a citizen's arrest.

Tony Blair: bar worker attempts citizen's arrest on former PM at trendy Tramshed restaurant

Sonic67

Again, you're going out of your way to make an irrelevant point when I just said that people would ask why the UK Government, after Johnson fanfaring that we send £350m per week to the EU, would take 5 years after leaving the EU (therefore stop sending £350m to the EU per week) to show an increase of that much for the NHS?  

I'm not really sure what you mean by, "If we left the EU tomorrow, didn't even pay the divorce bill and sent all of that to the NHS, you'd be on here saying, "you can't do that!" ?  It was Boris Johnson and the Leave Campaign that suggested sending it to the NHS instead, I'm sure he had a plan to do it in the event of leaving.

springtide

Again you are missing the exact point. It's saying, "we give money to the EU, give it to the NHS instead."

We are still giving it to the EU and it's only a vague suggestion anyway.

We need to leave the EU and stop funding the EU.

And we increased the money going to the NHS anyway, despite that.

Theresa May unveils £20bn boost for NHS
Because you want the money going from the EU to go to the NHS when you'd moan if we did exactly that right now.

Do you want the money we give to the EU to go to the NHS instead? Right now? Or should we pay our divorce bill etc?

nheather

The case is NOT
- not about  Brexit
- not about sending the money to the NHS

It IS about:
- the figure of £350 million was used by Boris in an official capacity as a government figure, and that this figure was not only incorrect, but Boris new so at the time, and this was done with the intention of misleading the public for the benefit of the campaign

It will be hard to prove I’m sure, but Boris is on record in a TV interviews of quoting a yearly figure of £10 billion, which implies he was aware of the true figure

The timing is was it is, it’s been ongoing for a couple of years, but only first saw court about a month ago in a private hearing.

Ruperts slippers

I think the purpose of this is to further disrupt the Brexit process and especially to disrupt BJ’s campaign to become Conservative Leader and Prime Minister.

I doubt the actual court case will be successful but by then it will have achieved its purpose to create damage and slur.

As others pointed out, it will be a sad day when we can roll out private prosecutions at minimal individual cost (because of crowdfunding) anytime a politician lies or misrepresents something.  Here, BJ is being specifically targeted but truth is you could apply the same process for a whole range of MPs and organisations on both sides of the Brexit Process (or any other political process).

Cheers,

Nigel

Rasczak

If we don't leave the EU as the voters requested there wont be any future campaigns.

My own view from studying and reading politics is the general public were not influenced in the slightest by either sides campaign, people had already chosen their allegiances long before the referendum began. Surely the judiciary would have to prove this was the case for the litigation to be successful.

The ad on the bus doesn't even imply the whole sum of £350 million is to be spent on the NHS, and neither did Boris explicate the whole sum would be ear marked for the NHS.

In working class terminology the whole façade is a 'Load of bollocks'.