DURING the days of wall-to-wall coverage of the death of Prince Philip, other news items have been squeezed off the agenda.
This was always going to be the case. The protocols and procedures that govern how media outlets respond to the death of a senior royal are long-established.
While it might have felt a bit dystopian to see all channels switch to the same programme and to have an election campaign suspended for an (apparently mandatory) period of “national mourning” – it wasn’t surprising. Though it does perhaps make the argument for updating the media guidance on royal deaths to something more in keeping with the times.
Many have been critical of what they see as fawning and syrupy uncritical coverage of the life of the Duke of Edinburgh. The BBC in particular came under fire. So much so, they had to set up a dedicated page to deal with the volume of complaints. Ratings took a hit and BBC Two lost two-thirds of its audience compared to the previous week.
But while all that was going on, there was still some cracking journalism to be found.
The Times and Sunday Times have been ploughing away at the Greensill lobbying scandal for a few weeks now. Once the death of Prince Philip slips down the news agenda, it is sure to be replaced with a far greater attention on this bombshell story.
Or at least: it should be.
What has been uncovered is an incestuous abuse of power. Former prime minister David Cameron is right at its centre.
READ MORE: 'I broke no rules': David Cameron speaks on lobbying scandal after weeks of silence
While Cameron was using his connections to lobby Chancellor Rishi Sunak to change the UK Government’s emergency loan scheme to benefit financial services company Greensill Capital, he was also working as an adviser to the company. He also reportedly held share options that were worth tens of millions of pounds.
In one email, Cameron said that the scheme in its current form was “nuts” which is politician speak for “damaging to my own personal financial interests”.
The company was initially told no changes would be made and that: “We cannot consider your request further.’’
From reading the emails obtained by journalists you can see that David Cameron was not willing to accept that first no. Noes are for the little people, not powerful former prime ministers who are used to getting what they want. So his campaign continued – with some limited success. He managed to secure privileged access to top-level officials to make Greensill’s case again and again.
Remember – all this took place while Boris Johnson was ill in hospital with coronavirus. At the time, the country was in deep crisis and you would expect that the Government’s full attention would be on protecting lives and livelihoods.
READ MORE: Matt Hancock 'had private drink' with David Cameron and Lex Greensill
Yet it seems from this story that it somehow managed to find the time to indulge the demands of a financial services company, take part in high-level Zoom meetings and give them special treatment by listening to their unworkable proposals.
The company has since gone bust and many jobs are on the line.
Cameron may have been unsuccessful in lobbying on behalf of Greensill Capital on that particular issue (or protecting his shares, which are now worthless) but the company has been in receipt of huge amounts of taxpayers’ money through other government financial support schemes.
It became an accredited lender in the Coronavirus Large Business Interruption Loan scheme and through that, it has emerged that it loaned £400 million to a steel empire when the maximum amount to any one company was meant to be capped at £50m. Add that to the ever-growing shopping list of questions that the UK Government has to answer on this scandal.
How did Greensill manage to introduce a new scheme for NHS workers’ pay? Might it have something to do with the “private drink” Matt Hancock had with David Cameron and the financier in 2019 that wasn’t officially recorded?
In responding to the scandal, Labour’s Bridget Phillipson said: “Every day brings fresh revelations about the culture of cronyism’’ in government. She called for a “full and thorough investigation into what happened”.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson told to force indyref2 mid-pandemic to prevent Yes victory
Rightly, there is now mounting pressure on him to address all the issues that have been raised. However, unedifying as his behaviour may have been, it is as nothing compared to the way the current UK Government has behaved.
We have seen countless examples throughout the pandemic of rampant cronyism, a lack of transparency and a demonstrable recklessness with regards to taxpayers’ money.
David Cameron should answer for his behaviour. But the most serious questions should be reserved for Boris Johnson and his Government.
We all remember the cash for access scandal. Here, it seems like if you have access to powerful people, they’ll give you some taxpayer cash.
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