LIZ Truss is being rewarded for "gross failure", an SNP MP has said, after it was reported she nominated one person for an honour for every four days she served as prime minister.
Fourteen people remain on the ex-PM’s resignation honours list, which is currently being vetted by the House of Lords appointments commission.
The Times reports that the list could have been longer but that at least two people turned down a nomination.
READ MORE: Government considering sending migrants to Ascension Island
One person told the newspaper they thought it would be “humiliating” to receive an honour from Truss, who was prime minister for just 49 days, while another said they didn’t deserve the nomination.
In total, Truss (below) nominated four people for life peerages and 12 for honours such as knighthoods, damehoods, OBEs, CBEs and MBEs.
According to previous reports, the nominated life peers include Conservative Party donor Sir Jon Moynihan and Matthew Elliott – who ran the Brexit campaign in 2016.
Speaking to The National, SNP MP Tommy Sheppard said: "This is yet a further example of disgraceful Tory patronage.
"Not only does Truss get rewarded for gross failure but she is allowed to reward others. The whole system is corrupt and corrupting.
"It should be scrapped and replaced with a proper civic awards process that rewards genuine public service.
"That's what we could have in an independent Scotland."
The others are said to be Ruth Porter, Truss’s deputy chief of staff in No 10 and Mark Littlewood, the outgoing head of the Institute for Economic Affairs – a think tank that backed Truss’s disastrous mini-Budget.
It is understood that former chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng has not been included on the list.
One source also told the newspaper that the list was “very modest” and that it was customary for those departing No 10.
The news is likely to renew criticism of the honours system, which previously sparked debate over Boris Johnson's list of more than 40 awards.
It is understood that Truss submitted her own list several months ago and that the names are still being vetted with the former PM’s office declining to offer any comment.
Those on the list have not been given any indication of how long it might take before a final decision is made.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel