Boris Johnson has been criticised for a “clear misuse” of official figures by the statistics watchdog after he revived the widely-discredited referendum pledge that up to £350 million a week extra could be spent on the NHS after Brexit.
Sir David Norgrove has written to the Foreign Secretary saying he is “surprised and disappointed” he has repeated the claims an article setting out his vision for Britain’s future outside the European Union.
A letter sent by Sir David Norgrove to Boris Johnson saying he is “surprised and disappointed” that he has revived the widely-discredited pledge that up to £350 million a week extra could be spent on the NHS after Brexit
The chairman of the UK Statistics Authority said the figure “confuses” the gross and net contributions the UK makes to EU coffers.
He wrote: “I am surprised and disappointed that you have chosen to repeat the figure of £350 million per week, in connection with the amount that might be available for extra public spending when we leave the European Union.”
“It is a clear misuse of official statistics,” Sir David added.
Sir David Norgrove (Jonathan Brady/PA)
It is not the first time the figure has been disputed by the Authority.
The watchdog initially warned Vote Leave the number lacked “clarity” because it referred only to the UK’s gross annual contribution and did not take into account Britain’s rebate or money that comes back from the EU.
It went on to rebuke the group for continuing to use the “misleading” figure during the referendum campaign, saying it was “disappointed” by the approach.
Mr Johnson revisited the claim in a 4,000-word article for the Daily Telegraph setting out the direction he wants Brexit to take.
Boris Johnson has been criticised for a “clear misuse” of official figures by the statistics watchdog (Frank Augstein/AP)
Mr Johnson’s aides said Sir David was complaining about the headline on the newspaper article rather than the Foreign Secretary’s words.
A spokesman said: “Boris has spoken to Norgrove and he has made clear that he was complaining about the headlines and not Boris’ piece and, in fact, admitted that Boris’ wording in the piece was absolutely fine.”