BY BEN KERRIGAN
The claim that David Cameron put part of his anatomy in the mouth of a dead pig is very damaging for the Prime Minister and the Conservative Party. The claim in a book written by ex Conservative treasurer, Lord Ashcroft, is admittedly reflective of a grudge against Cameron for bypassing by not giving him a major post in the Coalition government, though he contradicts himself by saying it is not ”about settling scores”. The allegation cannot be dismissed as easily as being suggested. Downing street have officially said it would not ‘dignify the claims’ , but have still unjustifiably fallen short of categorically denying it, and this is what gives some credibility to this damaging and embarrassing claim. Lord Ashcroft has been deputy treasurer of the Conservative Party and has donated millions to the party to help it fight and win marginal seats.
It is no secret that David Cameron has admitted smoking Cannabis at University, though this is not really damaging given the prevalent use of Cannabis for recreational purposes in modern Britain today. Cannabis remains illegal, but is not a class A drug. The effects of cannabis has long been a controversial issue, with many users disputing the validity of some of the criticisms levied against it. Sexual activity with an animal(especially a dead one) is quite something different, something that repels the senses of most decent citizens. It makes no difference if this was done as part of a ritualistic initiation; the fact is that no prospective Prime Minister should stoop to such embarrassing lows. Any student with aspirations so high ought to be prudent enough to foresee the possibility that such despicable act would eventually come to light- history is never a thing to overlook when vying for such highly esteemed posts as one of the Prime Minister.
Are the claims true? Well, that’s a no brainer because any half intelligent person would know that a libel suit should immediately follow any untrue statement deliberately put in the public domain. No sensible person would allow a false statement of that magnitude circulate in the media without challenging it. That’s common sense. And Lord Ashcroft tis no fool to write a book about a fallacy that can later be exposed. Cameron’s girlfriend has come to his defense, claiming the Prime Minister was the straightest person at Oxford University, who always got teased. What she has not said is whether she was present at every meeting of the Piers Gavestin Society- the club in question associated with the damning claim about the Prime Minister. Conservative Party sources have denied Cameron’s involvement, but that is no good. The Prime Minister needs to categorically deny the allegation himself, otherwise the allegation can be assumed to be true. The allegation is specific- all Mr.Cameron needs to say is that it is not true. However, he can’t say that if it is true because such denial could create more problems if someone comes out and solidifies the claim. As things stand, it is extremely embarrassing for the PM’s family and the party, and a special present to all of Cameron’s enemies.
IMPLICATIONS
The implications of such a claim are several. First if true, it shows that this is a man who would do anything for power. It has no bearing on whether he rules the country well or not, but it raises real questions in relation to the extent to which he would sacrifice his dignity in exchange for power. A Prime Minister above all ought to hold in high regard, the fundamental principle of ethics and morality. Leading a country involves more than wining an election. It essentially assumes the leader possesses the principles they intend to impose on the people. The act the PM is accused of doing is so degrading that it requires a clear denial from the Prime Minister. The motive of the guy who leaked it was cruel, but ultimately the real question is whether it is true or not. If it is true, the PM position is not really tenable. He would have inevitably lost the last elections had this information emerged at the time, so why should he remain in power if it is true? Lord Ashcroft decided not to drop his bomb before the elections for obvious reasons- he has a vested interest in the Conservative party, given his rich investments to the party over the years. If not he could have buried the Prime Minister before the elections, but that would have given MIlliband an easy win, which Lord Ashcroft did not want to happen.Ashcroft, who stepped down from the House of Lords this year is ranked 74th in The Sunday Times rich list. Cameron looks like he is walking on slippery ice at the moment.
