Life on Gilligan’s Island (Part 35)

Gilligan hasn’t stopped sockpuppeting and he certainly hasn’t stopped his smearing of Ken Livingstone. In this blog, he paints Ken as an artful tax-dodger. Naturally, his regular readership of cranks, racial purists, weirdos and cultists laps this stuff up. These two comments are pretty typical.

Gilly is beside himself with joy.

Ken has been accused of tax avoidance in the past. In 2000, before first being elected mayor, he channelled his non-parliamentary earnings through a company called Localaction. There, too, he paid corporation tax, rather than income tax, on it. His defence at the time was much the same – he’d paid further amounts in income tax on what he drew out of the company.

Hmm. I wouldn’t mind but his other employer, Boris Johnson, isn’t exactly whiter-than-white – if I can use that hoary auld expression – when it comes to financial matters.  No pun intended. All right, Andy?

I found this on Facebook. Bozza is being interviewed by the BBC’s Steven Sackur. Apparently, writing regular articles for the Daily Telegraph and The Spectator pays chicken-feed. Oh yes, that’s what he said. Nowhere Towers wonders what Emperor Windbag’s tax arrangements are like and whether or not Gilligoon will comment on those at some point. Unlikely.

The worst part of this interview is when Johnson attempts to wriggle out of Sackur’s question by saying “I don’t presume to ask you what you earn from the taxpayer”.  This is typical Bozza: shout down the interviewer or deflect the question.

For most of us, £250,000 is not “chicken-feed” and is a life-changing amount of money. Ah, the rich, they don’t know they’re born.

UPDATE: @ 2304

BBC London News ran an item about this story earlier. Livingstone will wind up his company if he becomes mayor. The BBC also reported that Ken earns around £230,000 a year for his media appearances. Johnson, on the other had, receives a salary of £140,000 per annum as London’s self-styled Emperor, while receiving a further £250, 000 for his Telegraph column and who-knows-what for his other writings. It seems to me Bozza is a bit of a moonlighter when it comes to his day job.

As I finish this, the peevish Gilligan has churned out another blog with pretty much the same theme as the last one. Only this time he manages to squeeze the Oscars into the title. Oh how I larfed.

It must be a slow news day over at Canary Wharf.


Filed under London

2 responses to “Life on Gilligan’s Island (Part 35)

  1. Beaban

    For me the worst part (although it’s a tough choice) is when he suggests to Sackur that ‘maybe you’d rather I didn’t make those contributions to charity’ which somehow implies that he gives most of his extra income to charity whilst insulting the viewers’ intelligence with an intellectually dishonest answer,

    • The word “charity” being employed like a word of power to cast all demons aside. The demon in this case being Sackur. Bozza knows that his image of the loveable buffoon disarms many of his critics but it’s beginning to wear a little thin. That clip really shows his true unabashed colours.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s