Mrs May’s chance to exorcise the sleaze left by Dave’s chumocracy
Theresa May has one tremendous advantage over her predecessor, David Cameron. No one doubts the integrity of the anglican vicar’s daughter.
even so, the danger is that she might become blighted by the toxic legacy of the previous Tory leader.
This is the result of a series of deeply worrying allegations about how Mr Cameron abused public office during his six years as Prime Minister.
Principal among these is the suggestion that the Conservatives ‘bought’ their 2015 General election victory by breaking the law that limits how much candidates can spend. already the electoral Commission, which polices election campaign spending, has fined the party an unprecedented £70,000 for failing to declare or accurately report more than £275,000 of spending.
as part of a parallel investigation, the Crown Prosecution service (CPs) has said it may bring charges against up to 30 — repeat, 30! — Conservative officials and MPs in connection with this alleged fraud. at least 12 police forces have sent files relating to the cases to the CPs.
Most dangerous of all, however, are the Mail’s revelations of links between Cameron’s inner circle of political cronies and the tax-dodging taxi firm Uber.
yesterday, in the latest damning report, Guy adams revealed that there is huge pressure for a full parliamentary inquiry to be held into this shady affair.
The public must be told the whole truth about how Cameron’s chumocracy successfully lobbied in secret to make sure plans to regulate Uber were dropped. It is vital that we are also told about the operation then led by No 10 officials to cover up their own murky activities. It is a morality tale for our times. since 1865, London taxi- drivers have had to serve a long apprenticeship to ensure they have ‘the knowledge’ to navigate their way around the capital.
B UT suddenly their livelihoods, and those of hackney carriage drivers in other British cities, have become threatened by the arrival of Uber, a cut-price rival which allows people to summon a minicab by using an app on their mobile phone.
The company was assisted in gaining a stronghold on the market after officials in Mr Cameron’s No 10 team bullied then London Mayor Boris Johnson’s City hall into abandoning tough new regulations that would have hampered Uber.
The Mail has revealed that, at the time, Uber employed rachel Whetstone, one of Mr Cameron’s closest friends and the godmother of his late son Ivan, as its head of Pr.
More than that, there is a well- founded suspicion that Uber managed to corrupt the process of government itself. The Competition and Markets authority, an independent regulator responsible for protecting the public from unfair monopolies, also seems to have been pressured by government officials to support the tax-avoiding internet giant in its battle against traditional black cab drivers.
What’s most disturbing is that there is evidence of a cover-up of all this in the Cameron administration, with officials in No 10 and at the Department for Business, Innovation and skills giving misleading responses when asked under Freedom of Information laws about their involvement on behalf of Uber.
Not surprisingly, following the Mail’s revelations, the Information Commissioner has announced an investigation into whether government officials breached the act to try to keep their lobbying secret. Deliberately destroying, hiding or altering requested information is a criminal offence.
Mr Cameron’s cause has not been helped by the fact that his Old pals’ act: George Osborne and David Cameron former Chancellor, George Osborne, now gets £650,000 a year for four days’ work a month for a U.s. financial giant which is one of Uber’s major backers. Ms Whetstone quit her £1 million-a-year Pr role at Uber at the same time as the Information Commissioner’s Office began its investigation.
None of these allegations affects Mrs May directly. however, they cause her a very serious dilemma.
Does she use the powers of her office to protect her predecessor as Prime Minister? Or does she order an inquiry and ensure justice is done — even though it may be hugely embarrassing to the Toryled government that ran the country between 2010 and 2016, of which she was a senior member?
It would be understandable if she wanted to safeguard her party’s reputation. But by not acting she would risk damaging her image as a politician of rectitude at the worst possible time — during an election campaign.
M Ore problematic is that while she has the freedom to act over the Uber controversy, the election expenditure fraud issue is out of her control.
The scandal goes to the heart of how British democracy works.
It seems that Cameron’s Tories, in their desperation to see off the threat of both Labour and Ukip, broke legal spending limits.
The party, too, stands accused of thwarting the police investigation and the party chairman, Patrick McLoughlin, has shown no signs of understanding how serious this business is.
Mrs May must make it crystal clear that the Conservative Party will co- operate fully with the police and other authorities. she should also make sure none of those implicated in the election fraud scandal is involved in the forthcoming campaign, either as a candidate or as a party official.
Take Craig Mackinlay, Tory MP for south Thanet. It is alleged that more than the legal limit of £15,000 was spent to help get him elected for the seat in 2015 ahead of his Ukip rival, Nigel Farage.
It is a principle of english law that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. But I believe it would send out the wrong message if Mr Mackinlay was chosen to fight south Thanet again.
The Uber and election expenses scandals offer Theresa May a chance to consign to the past the culture of cronyism and sleaze which, it is now clear, besmirched the Cameron administrations.