Why critics are bashing departing British PM Cameron's picks for honors

Former Prime Minister David Cameron is being accused of 'cronyism' for awarding high honors to political allies who were part of the 'Remain' campaign. Along with Cameron, they were unable to prevent Britain's vote to leave the EU.

Matt Dunham/AP/File
Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron speaks to announce his resignation as his wife Samantha looks on, outside 10 Downing Street, London, on the day following Britain's vote to exit the European Union. Dozens of staff, allies and advisers to former Prime Minister David Cameron have received honors from Queen Elizabeth II, a move that has been criticized by opposition politicians.

David Cameron was accused on Friday of cronyism that would "embarrass a medieval court" after he rewarded a long list of his political aides and allies with some of Britain's highest honors to mark his resignation as prime minister.

Cameron stepped down last month after he failed to persuade voters to back staying in the European Union in a referendum, and many of those on his "Resignation Honours" list were prominent in the campaign to remain in the bloc.

Outgoing prime ministers can put forward a list of people to receive honors, ranging from peerages and knighthoods to lesser honors such as membership of the Order of the British Empire.

Among the most prominent names on the list are cabinet ministers Michael Fallon, Patrick McLoughlin and David Lidington, all of whom favored remaining in the EU.

George Osborne, who resigned as finance minister after the Brexit referendum, is made a Companion of Honour.

Also honored is Isabel Spearman, a former fashion public relations executive who worked for Cameron's wife Samantha as a stylist and assistant, and Thea Rogers, an adviser credited with smartening up Osborne's public image.

Cameron's former spin doctor, Craig Oliver, was given a knighthood. Three prominent donors to the Conservative Party were also either made lords or knights.

Cameron's list was attacked by opposition politicians and those who had successfully backed leaving the EU, who argued that he was rewarding the failed "Remain" campaign.

Leave.EU, a group that backed Brexit, said Cameron had "used his final 'losers list' to lavish titles and social status on personal friends, party donors and failed Remain campaigners."

Tom Watson, deputy leader of the opposition Labour Party said Theresa May, who succeeded Cameron as prime minister, should have vetoed the list.

"The fact she has allowed this cronyism to go ahead shows that the Tories will always put their own interests first, Watson said.
Tim Farron, leader of the Liberal Democrats, said the list was "so full of cronies it would embarrass a medieval court."

Cameron, who has been on holiday with his family in Corsica, has not commented. Media attention has focused instead on his striking swimming trunks, said to have cost 225 pounds ($300). Downing Street declined to comment.

The list also held some embarrassment for Labour, which appointed a prominent human rights lawyer, Shami Chakrabarti, as a peer in the House of Lords.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said last year he saw no reason to appoint people to the unelected upper house. He had also appointed Chakrabarti to head an inquiry into anti-Semitism in the party, prompting Jewish leaders to say the review could not be seen as independent.

A Labour statement said: "Shami Chakrabarti shares Jeremy's ambition for reform of the House of Lords." (Additonal reporting by William James; editing by Stephen Addison)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.