What's new

David Cameron: does he qualify as an honorary Pakistani?

Cpt. Rishwat

T20I Captain
Joined
May 8, 2010
Runs
43,490
I am reading with increasing wonder about Cameron's links with Greenskill Capital, a financial services company that went bust owing hundreds of thousands to NHS linked organisations.

Cameron is a shareholder who stood to make millions from Greenskill. How do people feel about a former PM who seems to have put personal gain ahead of national interest? Is this just what we expect from an unashamedly capitalist culture or should the PM of a country hold to a higher standard? That too a British PM who the world expects to be a standard bearer for honesty and transparency?
 
It’s the new breed of Tories - amoral, venal and with no sense of duty to country, only to self.

The last decent ones such as Grieve were purged by Johnson.
 
And yes, public servants shout be held to a higher standard. As Patel was under Mrs May.
 
And yes, public servants shout be held to a higher standard. As Patel was under Mrs May.

I'm reading more and more murky stuff about Greenskill, now they are being linked with steel tycoon Sanjeev Gupta who is described in the Sunday Times as a "bottom-feeder" of the worst kind. His GFC Alliance company is now close to unravelling with allegations of financial chicanery...but is this just the nature of pure capitalism laid bare?
 
https://news.sky.com/story/greensill-scandal-current-lobbying-rules-are-pretty-good-and-cameron-didnt-do-anything-wrong-says-minister-12278981

David Cameron did not do anything wrong when lobbying for Greensill Capital and "meticulously observed the rules", the environment secretary has told Sky News.

George Eustice also said current rules on lobbying are "pretty good". But Labour's shadow communities secretary, Steve Reed, claimed "Tory sleaze is well and truly back", adding that the Greensill revelations are "really quite shocking".

And in a warning that the Conservative government could be damaged by the scandal, Tory grandee Sir Bernard Jenkin, who chairs the Commons Liaison Committee, said gains made in so-called "red wall" seats during the last election could be lost because of what he called the "shameful" lobbying controversy. Asked on Sky's Sophy Ridge on Sunday about David Cameron's conduct, Mr Eustice said: "Has he done anything wrong? Well, on the face of it, no. There's a review that is going on, we mustn't prejudge that."

Mr Eustice added: "I don't think he took advantage of any rules, no. He meticulously observed the rules that he himself actually put in place after some concerns around lobbying a decade ago. He put in place these restrictions on what ministers can do for a period of two years."

The environment secretary did concede, however, that Mr Cameron might have taken a different approach. "He himself has said that with hindsight it probably would have been better if, rather than texting ministers, he had instead written letters to set out his views more formally," Mr Eustice said.

"He himself has conceded that if he had his time again, he wouldn't have texted Rishi Sunak and wouldn't have texted others - he would instead have written through formal channels."

Regarding rules on lobbying, Mr Eustice said: "Fundamentally, I think the systems we have in place with ministers declaring interests with the ministerial code and the focus on that and how ministers conduct themselves in office is actually a pretty good one.

"But that is not to say you couldn't make tweaks or changes, and also there will be a time and a place for that after these reviews have concluded." In recent weeks it has emerged that Mr Cameron, who was employed by Greensill Capital's owner Lex Greensill in 2018 after he left Downing Street, approached serving ministers about the involvement of the finance firm in government-backed financial support schemes during the coronavirus crisis.

The Sunday Times has reported that on 23 April last year, Mr Cameron emailed Matthew Gould, who worked for him in the Cabinet Office while he was prime minister.

Mr Gould had moved on to head the health service's digital arm, NHSX. Mr Cameron reportedly mentioned Earnd, an employee payment app developed by Greensill Capital, that was offered within the NHS.

Mr Cameron reportedly wrote to Mr Gould: "Our ask is about electronic staff records, as Earnd will be much slicker if it can obtain access to employee data... I think some help from you would go a long way."

It was revealed last weekend that David Cameron took Lex Greensill for a private drink with Health Secretary Matt Hancock to discuss Earnd. George Eustice was asked on Sky News about Mr Hancock's interest in a family company that has contracts with the NHS.

In March, Mr Hancock declared in the MPs' register of interests that he owns more than 15% of shares in Topwood Limited, a firm which specialises in secure storage, shredding and scanning of documents.

Mr Eustice said: "The reason we know about this is because Matt Hancock did what all ministers do in this case, which is to declare that interest.

"And so he did the right thing, he declared that - he had no role whatsoever in any procurement around that business, so yes there is nothing wrong with ministers having financial interests, providing they declare them in the appropriate way."

Asked whether lobbying rules were "broken" if they allowed ministers to hold financial interests in companies making money from their government department's contracts, the minister replied: "I'm not sure I would agree with that.

"Ministers can move around a lot - famously we tend not to spend too long in one particular role." Writing for The Observer, Sir Bernard Jenkin said the lobbying controversy should "matter" to Boris Johnson.

Sir Bernard wrote: "He does not need to pretend to be a saint, but his 'red wall' voters, who gave him his majority, will start to dismiss him unless he can show he is more open, more transparent and very different from the out-of-touch elite he defeated in the 2016 referendum and ousted from government."

He added: "This crisis presents an opportunity for a reset in politics and Whitehall, which could begin to restore public confidence."

Boris Johnson has promised that a top lawyer will be given "carte blanche to ask anybody whatever he needs" as part of a review into the activities of Greensill Capital.
 
This is nothing, wait until the stories of Hancock et al come out about how they conned the public during the pandemic
 
It’s the new breed of Tories - amoral, venal and with no sense of duty to country, only to self.

The last decent ones such as Grieve were purged by Johnson.

If I remember right, the old breed of Labour was shown to be “amoral, venal and with no sense of duty to country, only to self” by the expenses scandal. They were pretty much stealing directly from the government.
 
Well UK does provide safe heavens for the likes of nawaz and altaf hussain, so they might aswell give honary citizenship to other corrupts and criminals of the world
 
Well UK does provide safe heavens for the likes of nawaz and altaf hussain, so they might aswell give honary citizenship to other corrupts and criminals of the world

Misbah ul Haq is welcome in the UK to, we may consider him for the honorary citizenship, maybe a knighthood to and some kebab rolls for all his obese followers
 
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/22/lex-greensill-given-extraordinarily-privileged-government-access-inquiry-finds

The businessman Lex Greensill was given “extraordinarily privileged” access to Downing Street while the government’s process for managing lobbying is insufficiently transparent and allows access to a “privileged few”, a report into the Greensill lobbying scandal commissioned by the prime minister has concluded.

The former prime minister David Cameron and the late cabinet secretary Jeremy Heywood have been criticised in the 141-page review drawn up by the City solicitor Nigel Boardman.

Cameron “understated” the nature of his relationship with Greensill when lobbying officials, the report said.

A covering memo to the prime minister in 2012 pointed to Lord Heywood as the person primarily responsible for Greensill being given a role in government, the report claimed.

But Boardman’s review has defended existing lobbying rules, saying that while there are improvements to be made, “the current system and those operating within it worked well”.

“Engagement between government and a wide range of interested parties, which many refer to as ‘lobbying’, is vital to the proper functioning of democracy,” Boardman said.

The report has shied away from criticising serving ministers and advisers who were lobbied by Greensill and Cameron, prompting strong condemnation from Labour. Angela Rayner, the party’s deputy leader, said the report had been set up as “a classic Boris Johnson cover-up and whitewash to protect the government”.

Boardman, 70, was appointed in April to run an independent investigation into government contracts and lobbying involving a number of senior Conservative politicians including Cameron, the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, the MP and former health secretary Matt Hancock and the peer Francis Maude.

It appeared the supply chain financier Greensill had been given privileged access to Downing Street when Cameron was the prime minister and Heywood was the cabinet secretary. After leaving government, Cameron became an adviser to Greensill Capital and lobbied ministers including Sunak for access to government-backed loans.

Lord Maude and current ministers appear to have escaped criticism while Heywood, who died in 2018, has been criticised.

The report, totalling 141 pages, says: “It is clear from the evidence that I have reviewed that Mr Greensill had a privileged – and sometimes extraordinarily privileged – relationship with government.”

Boardman concludes that Cameron, the former Conservative party leader, “could have been clearer about his relationship with Greensill Capital” in his communications with the Treasury, the Bank of England and officials.

Cameron told Boardman that Greensill Capital was paying him “a good amount of money every year” and he had equity and participated in a discretionary uncapped bonus scheme.

The Conservative party leader contacted the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) before a camping trip with Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, and Lex Greensill.

Cameron and Greensill had a breakfast briefing with Simon Collis, the ambassador to Saudia Arabia, before the trip, and the FCDO helped arrange meetings between Greensill employees and Saudi ministers.

The review also sheds new light on meetings Cameron and Hancock that took place in October 2019.

Hancock told Boardman that he had not expected other Greensill employees to be there and had thought he was just meeting Cameron. Cameron said that Hancock did know beforehand that he would be accompanied by colleagues including Greensill himself.

According to an email sent by Cameron to Hancock that was released to the review, Hancock was impressed by Greensill’s proposal to allow NHS workers to draw down on their salary early through an app.

The review claims hat Heywood was “primarily responsible” for Greensill securing a role in government, during Cameron’s premiership.

There was mention of Greensill’s appointment to the Cabinet Office’s economic and domestic secretariat being referred to an “approvals board”, to which Heywood, who worked with the financier at Morgan Stanley, responded: “Sure – though it is bureaucracy gone mad!”

Greensill was given two sets of official IT and security access for the Cabinet Office and, withHeywood’s support, No 10, the review said.

The role in government provided Greensill “with a marketing platform for Greensill Capital’s business with the private sector”.

“It is unclear why Mr Greensill was permitted to remain an adviser to government on supply chain finance under these circumstances,” Boardman wrote.

Critics have claimed that Boardman should not have been in charge of the inquiry because of his close relationship with the government and the Conservative party – he has been a non-executive director at the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and is a former Tory party candidate.

Reacting to the report, Suzanne Heywood, the widow of Lord Heywood of Whitehall, said: “The conclusions of this review are a convenient diversion from the embarrassment the collapse of Greensill Capital continues to cause this government.

“Boardman has run a deeply flawed process from beginning to end, gagging representation for my late husband to facilitate his scapegoating, glossing over the ministerial approval of Francis Maude and the then government for Mr Greensill’s appointment.”

Rayner said the terms of the inquiry had been limited to avoid a wider investigation of lobbying, privileged access and the revolving door between Whitehall and business.

“The rules that are supposed to regulate lobbying are completely unfit for purpose and require radical and immediate overhaul,” she said.

Responding to the report, Cameron said he was “pleased that the report provides further confirmation that I broke no rules”.

“I have said all along that there are lessons to be learnt, and I agree on the need for more formal lines of communication.”
 
Well UK does provide safe heavens for the likes of nawaz and altaf hussain, so they might aswell give honary citizenship to other corrupts and criminals of the world

You conveniently forgot Surrey estates owned by Benazir/Zardari eh :)
 
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/10/david-cameron-urged-to-address-reports-he-made-10m-from-greensill

David Cameron is under growing pressure to answer further questions about his involvement in Greensill Capital, given he reportedly made up to $10m (£7m).

After BBC Panorama reported on the sum he made for a part-time job over two and a half years, the former prime minister was urged to divulge what he knew about the company’s financial troubles before it collapsed this year. Cameron has shied away from the limelight since it first emerged he texted Whitehall officials and politicians including the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, pushing for Greensill to get the largest possible allocation of government-backed loans under the Covid corporate financing facility.

But after his spokesperson denied he received anything like the remuneration reported, Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, urged him to “come clean”. She said if the reported $1m (£720,000) salary, $4.5m (£3m) in shares and $700,000 (£504,000) bonus were wrong, Cameron should correct the record “so that the British public knows how much he has gained from influencing government policy”.

The Labour MP Darren Jones, chair of the Commons business select committee, said questions remained about whether Cameron knew Greensill was in financial trouble when he was lobbying on its behalf, in the run-up to the collapse of the bank run by his former adviser, the Australian financier Lex Greensill.

Jones said Cameron should clarify if he was aware Greensill was having to “move money around to cover up businesses that were in essence bankrupt while he cashed out his shares and at the same time was lobbying his friends in Whitehall and officials to get public-backed funds to shore up a failing business – and therefore a huge commercial interest for him”.

He added: “It seems to me that David Cameron didn’t have any position with any accountability attached to it, but he seemed to be in the boardroom, he seems to have been on Lex Greensill’s private jet, and if he was in the room, and on the private jet, and in the boardroom, the question is how much did he know about how much the business was in trouble while asking for public funds to shore it up?”

Prof Paul Heywood of the University of Nottingham, who studies political corruption, said that given Cameron raised concerns about lobbying while in Downing Street, the former prime minister should also explain why he did not do a better job of addressing the issue when he had the chance.

Heywood told the Guardian: “The claim that Cameron took no part in executive decision-making at Greensill may be technically correct, but it calls into question his acumen and judgment if he was lobbying so assiduously on behalf of a company he now claims to have little knowledge of in terms of its real financial position. He should have known – so he is damned either by commission or omission …

“What the whole episode shows is that there is definitely privileged access to those who have friends in high places, and the rewards available to them are not only wholly disproportionate, but reinforce the very status quo that the ‘levelling-up’ agenda is supposed to be all about bringing to an end.”

In a statement, Cameron’s spokesperson said what he was paid was a “private matter” and that he “acted in good faith at all times”, adding there was “no wrongdoing in any of the actions he took”.

They said Cameron had “no idea” until December 2020 that Greensill was in danger of failing and that he lobbied the government “not just because he thought it would benefit the company, but because he sincerely believed there would be a material benefit for UK businesses at a challenging time”.

Lex Greensill defended his handling of the ordeal, telling the BBC that Greensill Capital had “complied with relevant rules”.
 
Back
Top