Parliament’s standards watchdog is said to believe that Boris Johnson’s holiday to Mustique was worth more than double the £15,000 he declared in the Commons register.
Kathryn Stone, the commissioner for standards, has also said the bill had not been met by Tory donor David Ross as the Prime Minister has insisted, according to the Daily Mail.
The revelation will heap further pressure on Mr Johnson as he faces various investigations into whether he properly declared any donations to cover the lavish refurbishments of his official flat.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson investigated over £15,000 Mustique holiday after 2019 election win
Downing Street insisted the Prime Minister “transparently declared the benefit in kind” of the luxury Caribbean holiday, and noted that Mr Ross confirmed the declaration is “correct”.
The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards confirmed this week she is still investigating whether Mr Johnson properly declared the holiday on the private island 16 months ago.
In the Register of Members’ Interests, the Prime Minister declared the trip with fiancee Carrie Symonds as a “benefit in kind” from the Carphone Warehouse founder who has a villa on the island.
But according to reports, Ms Stone believes the break was worth more than twice the declared £15,000.
Mr Johnson was said to have refused to accept the ruling and is trying to have it overturned to avoid the risk of being suspended as an MP.
A Downing Street spokesman said: “The PM transparently declared the benefit in kind in the Commons Register of Interests. The Cabinet Office was aware of the declaration and was content it was appropriate.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson's staycation fantasy as boom claims burst
“A spokesman for Mr Ross confirmed the PM’s declaration is correct and the accommodation was facilitated as a donation in kind.”
This week, a spokesman for Mr Ross said in a statement: “Mr Ross facilitated accommodation for Mr Johnson on Mustique valued at £15,000.
“Therefore this is a benefit in kind from Mr Ross to Mr Johnson, and Mr Johnson’s declaration to the House of Commons is correct.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel