Sajid Javid clashes with BBC presenter Charlie Stayt over Boris Johnson's 'wrong' figure

The Prime Minister said earlier this week that his National Insurance cut would result in an extra £500 into the pocket of everybody. However, the Institute of Fiscal Studies has argued that it would actually only result in £85 per person. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was pressed on the disputed issue by BBC News host Charlie Stayt.  

Mr Stayt said: “Your response to what Boris Johnson which was that up to 9,500 that will mean £500 into the pockets of everybody which is the quote.

“Your response to that was we have even very clear.

“The problem here is that Boris Johnson has said that and it wasn’t true.

“In fact, the figures show the Institute of Fiscal Studies are saying the figure people will have in their pocket is £85 a year.

READ MORE: Election poll tracker: Labour’s misery cemented as one in five back 

“And your response is we have been very clear.

“It seems like and a lot of people are saying this, it is the opposite of clear.

“You put a number out and subsequently in documents that follow you then have to repair the damage which is tell the truth.”

Mr Javid replied: “It is not like that at all, the Prime Minister was asked a question and he has given an answer.”

Earlier this week following the ITV debate between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn polling guru, Sir John Curtice explained why Mr Johnson will be the happiest out of the two men: “Anybody who listened to that will be clear of two gentlemen who wanted to talk about two different politics with two very different themes.

READ  Apprentice's Dean Ahmed lays into Lewis as he says '5-year-old' could have done better

“Boris Johnson ‘Get Brexit done’ and Jeremy Corbyn trying to say we should end austerity and reduce inequality.

“I think where Boris Johnson tended to score, however, is not only was his narrative clearer, but he was also better at supporting his arguments with examples.

“Jeremy Corbyn seemed to be much more comfortable in complaining on what he thought had gone wrong, but less specific about how he would change things in future.”


Leave a Reply