'BY JOVE, THINK I HAVE GOT IT AT LAST!' thanks to everybody's input on here.
Ok, the support he gave his partners plus the 10% bribe (whoops sorry incentive), generated extra income from their last year's figures; we don't know this though do we ? and always difficult to judge how much his presence at their events has produced any extra.
We don't know where the 10% extra was drawn from .. wouldn't be fair to draw from the normal Mayoral events .. would take monies from other charities then, wouldn't it ?
Really only the extra from last year (difficult to tell if they would have raised this anyway) that his partners raised should have been included in the total figure in my way of thinking, and not the extra 10% either if taken from the general fund (well, maybe, was raised and just shuffled about) We do not know if this was paid from his own pocket or not .. but, if it was, would just be considered as a donation so could be included I suppose ..
Can understand past Mayors and the current Mayor feeling a little miffed by the way the figure has been presented, as not entirely correct, and to rub salt into the wound, he was boasting that he had raised 5 times more than any other Mayor.
Not saying wasn't helpful to the charites that donated either, or illegal, does just appear to be an electioneering tactic to me.
Think I may have confused meself even more..
