Boris Johnson reveals how his family spent their child benefit

January 7, 2013 9:42 am

Boris on where the £47,547.40 in child benefit (his calculation) has gone:

“We’re looking at 10 half-decent ski holidays here, or about five luxury safaris. We could have laid down a cellarful of Chateau Lafite, or picked up an Old Master drawing, or a share of a lovely little place in Spain.”

This is probably intended to be an argument against Child Benefit. But it’s not exactly an argument for Boris Johnson…

Most people facing cuts are looking at more serious drawbacks than downsizing their ski holidays. But then again, most people facing cuts aren’t paid £250,000 for their second job, and wouldn’t call it “chickenfeed”.

boris-johnson-image-2-869365646

  • Chilbaldi

    Boris has a point re child benefits though, doesn’t he? A point which he makes very well to 99% of the country other than Labourlist.

    • John Ruddy

      Surely Child Benefit goes to the mother, not the profligate father?

    • Amber_Star

      Figures show that the cost to administer the Child Benefit tax rules is higher than the saving.

      And the Coalition may be about to give tax relief for employing a nanny; if the relief applies at higher rates of tax, Boris & Co. are about to get a nice replacement for any child benefit they’ve lost.

      • Hugh

        “Figures show that the cost to administer the Child Benefit tax rules is higher than the saving.”

        Is there a link to those figures?

      • Brumanuensis

        In reality no-one knows what the administrative costs will be, for any mooted savings through means-testing. This in itself is pretty damning, but I imagine that the fact that the government have chosen the most complicated method imaginable (or as the IFS put it, it creates ‘incoherence’ and ‘administrative complexity’) means that savings may well be nominal.

  • JoblessDave

    This article is an odd one, with a message (“Boris is rich”) that doesn’t seem to have been fully thought through:

    a) The original article context clearly says that this is what £50,000 could have paid for, rather than saying that it is what it paid for (although, as the picture shows, Boris is known to take ski holidays).
    b) Is the official Labour position on this not that Boris, like any other millionaire (to whom £250,000 is indeed “chickenfeed”), SHOULD be entitled to receive it, even if it allows additional luxuries (such as the ski holidays)?
    c) Here’s the really critical point: if all millionaires were encouraged to live lives of Scrooge-like austerity in solidarity with the rest of us, we would suffer far more – a sort of democratic “beggar-thy-neighbour” policy: no – we want the rich kids to spend all their money on baubles: preferably British-made to keep the money inside our economic borders.

  • Winston_from_the_Ministry

    Did he call it “chickenfeed”?

    I can’t find the phrase in his article anywhere.

    • John Ruddy

      He called his Telegraph money “chickenfeed”, not the child benefit.

  • billbat

    Boris, Dave and George are also going to get a Tax Cut in April. Austerity? Only for us Plebs. They will be able to have even more Ski Holidays and Vintage Wine!!!

    • Hugh

      No, actually, the reduction in the point at which the 40% rate applies (kicking in at £34,370 as opposed to 35k) and the removal of child benefit means Boris and Dave are likely to be worse off come April. George might be raking in enough to benefit from the income tax cut, but then other tax changes also leave the most wealthy worse off.

  • franwhi

    It’s not “probably” an argument against Child benefit it IS an argument against child benefit for the rich from an article in Sunday’s Telegraph. I’m not a Boris fan but presenting his words shorn of all context is too easy and looks like a cheapshot since nobody lampoons Boris better than Boris.

Latest

  • Comment Jim Murphy has set out an ambitious (and Labour) vision for development

    Jim Murphy has set out an ambitious (and Labour) vision for development

    Since its earliest days Labour has been an internationalist party and proud of it, too. From Keir Hardy and Harold Wilson to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, those who shaped Labour’s vision in the 20th and early 21st Century regarded the fight against poverty overseas as a natural extension of the fight against poverty at home. If Labour wins in 2015, we look forward to our proud tradition continuing. But with the clear focus of the current leadership on the […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Party democracy is important, so let’s fight for it

    Party democracy is important, so let’s fight for it

    Contrary to popular belief (and by popular belief, I mean the belief that prevails amongst the Shadow Cabinet and its apparatchiks) the Labour Party does not exist as a fan club for the Parliamentary faction. The Labour Party is an instrument through which ordinary people can shape their own lives and change the future of this country in a direction that is beneficial to our people. The recent decision by the Labour leadership to vote with the Coalition and implement […]

    Read more →
  • Comment What can Labour offer young people?

    What can Labour offer young people?

    Tony Blair proclaimed in 1997 that his three main priorities in government were ‘education, education, education.’ This has not translated to an increase in votes from young people.  Voter turnout between 1997 and 2005 amongst those aged 18-24 fell from an estimated 54.1% of this age range in 1997, down to 38.2% in 2005.  By contrast, voter turnout amongst those who are aged over 65 has never fallen below 70% since 1964.  As voters aged over 65 are more likely […]

    Read more →
  • News Iraq Inquiry report now expected in 2015

    Iraq Inquiry report now expected in 2015

    Sir John Chilcot’s report into the Iraq War is now not expected to be published until spring 2015, leaving worries for Labour as to how it will affect the election campaign. The Independent reports that “discussions between the inquiry and the Cabinet Office remain deadlocked, and a year-long stand-off is now unlikely to be resolved before the current parliamentary session ends. Even if a deal were reached over the summer recess, legal protocols and procedures would push the Iraq report’s […]

    Read more →
  • Featured MPs should not be employing their own staff

    MPs should not be employing their own staff

    Over the weekend, Eric Joyce made a very sensible suggestion. He may have a penchant for violence that is unbecoming of a Member of Parliament, and he may be some way down the list of people you’d go to for comment on Parliamentary standards – but on this one issue he was completely right. Joyce went on Sky News yesterday and said that MPs should not be employing staff directly, they should be employed by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority […]

    Read more →