Cameron: discrediting the honours system?
“To his somewhat slender list of achievements while in office, David Cameron has now added another,” said the Daily Mail: “the cynical devaluing of Britain’s honours system.” His resignation honours list, made up largely of “aides, spin doctors, former ministers, donors and assorted cronies”, is a disgrace. In what “warped world” is Cameron’s former director of communications, Craig Oliver, worthy of a knighthood? Or Gabby Bertin, his one-time spin doctor, and “director of external affairs”, worthy of a peerage? Why should Samantha Cameron’s “stylist”, Isabel Spearman, receive an OBE? This is a “chumocracy” looking after its own “in a way which will sicken most people”.
I seem to be one of the few who wasn’t shocked by Cameron’s resignation list, said Charles Moore in The Daily Telegraph. “He certainly went too far, but a prime minister who wishes to thank those who have worked well for him is better than one who doesn’t.” People accuse him of arrogance, but I suggest another explanation. “Most of those honoured lost their jobs because of his decision to hold the EU referendum… He surely feels guilt.” And it’s worth remembering that “titles are an incredibly cheap way for the state to retain the services of talented people who could make much more money privately”, said Andrew Roberts in The Sunday Telegraph. Whether working as civil servants, or special advisers, or helping to run political parties, these “special” people play a vital role in our democracy.
“It is one thing to bestow impressive-sounding titles on chums and patrons,” said The Times. But elevating them to the House of Lords – giving them a role in making the nation’s laws – “emits a particular cronyist stench”. Cameron’s new peers include his former chief of staff, Ed Llewellyn, his head of operations, Liz Sugg, and his policy adviser, Camilla Cavendish. He also ennobled big Tory party donors, such as the financiers Andrew Fraser and Jitesh Gadhia. That is the most shocking part of the story, said Andrew Grice in The Independent. Cameron vowed to take “big money” out of politics, and to reform the House of Lords; he did neither. In 2011 he was presented with a sensible plan to reform funding for political parties, with a £10,000 cap on individual donations; he rejected it. But this dirty old system may be on its last legs. I am told that Theresa May regards Cameron’s list as “distasteful”, and that she will “think hard about future appointments” to the Lords. With luck, we might move on from “Dave’s mates to May’s meritocrats”.