The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Cameron

  • Ex-PM Cameron returns to UK govt as foreign secretary

    Ex-PM Cameron returns to UK govt as foreign secretary

    Former British Prime Minister David Cameron made an unexpected return to high office yesterday, becoming foreign secretary in a major shakeup of the Conservative government that also saw the firing of divisive Home Secretary Suella Braverman.

    Prime Minister Rishi Sunak appointed Cameron, who led the U.K. government between 2010 and 2016 and triggered the country’s exit from the European Union, as part of a Cabinet shuffle in which he also sacked Braverman and named James Cleverly, who had been foreign secretary, to replace her.

    Braverman, a law-and-order hardliner, drew anger for accusing police of being too lenient with pro-Palestinian protesters. Sunak made additional changes to the government throughout the day, naming Victoria Atkins as the new health secretary and moving her predecessor, Steve Barclay, to the environment portfolio.

    The bold changes are an attempt by Sunak to reset his faltering government. The Conservatives have been in power for 13 years, but opinion polls for months have put them 15 to 20 points behind the opposition Labour Party amid a stagnating economy, persistently high inflation, an overstretched health care system and a wave of public sector strikes.

    Cameron’s appointment came as a surprise to seasoned politics-watchers. It’s rare for a non-lawmaker to take a senior government post, and it has been decades since a former prime minister held a Cabinet job.

    The government said Cameron had been appointed to Parliament’s unelected upper chamber, the House of Lords. The last foreign secretary to serve in the Lords, rather than the elected House of Commons, was Peter Carrington, who was part of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s government in the 1980s.

    Read Also: Former PM Cameron appointed to British House of Lords

    Cameron, 57, said Britain was “facing a daunting set of international challenges, including the war in Ukraine and the crisis in the Middle East.

    “While I have been out of front-line politics for the last seven years, I hope that my experience – as Conservative leader for 11 years and prime minister for six – will assist me in helping the prime minister to meet these vital challenges,” he said in a statement.

    Cameron’s foreign policy legacy is mixed. As prime minister, he backed NATO-led military intervention in Libya in 2011 that toppled Muammar Gadhafi and deepened that country’s chaos. In 2013, he tried and failed to gain Parliament’s backing for UK airstrikes against President Bashar al-Assad’s forces in Syria. He also announced a short-lived “golden era” in U.K.-China relations shortly before that relationship soured.

    And he will be forever remembered as the unwitting author of Brexit, a rupture that roiled Britain’s politics, economy and place in the world. Cameron called a 2016 EU membership referendum, confident the country would vote to stay in the bloc. He resigned the day after voters opted to leave.

  • Cameron: being PM is ‘the greatest honour’

    Cameron: being PM is ‘the greatest honour’

    To David Cameron, being Prime Minister had been “the greatest honour” of his life. He resigned yesterday as United Kingdom’s (UK’s) Prime Minister.

    Flanked by his wife and children in Downing Street, he said the UK was “much stronger” than when he took over six years ago.

    He went to Buckingham Palace to tender his resignation to Queen Elizabeth II, who later appointed Mrs. Theresa May as his replacement.

    Earlier, Mr Cameron took Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) for the final time, telling MPs he would “miss the roar of the crowd”.

    After taking the mantle of office, Mrs May, a former home secretary, was set about naming her own frontbench team.

    Before driving to Buckingham Palace, Mr Cameron spoke outside No 10, Downing Street, saying he had “not got every decision right” but added: “I do believe that today, our country is much stronger.”

    “Politicians like to talk about policies, but in the end, it’s about people’s lives.”

    He cited the government’s record on employment, the National Health Scheme (NHS) and defence as examples.

    Cameron wished his successor well, saying she would provide “strong and stable leadership”, and paid tribute to his wife Samantha and his children.

    As the family left for the final time, he said his only wish was “continued success for this great country that I love so very much”.

    A statement from Buckingham Palace confirmed he had tendered his resignation as prime minister and the Queen was “graciously pleased” to accept.

    In the House of Commons, Conservative members of parliament (MPs) rose as one to applaud Mr Cameron at the end of his 182nd PMQs session as prime minister, as did former Lib Dem Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg.

    Their Labour party’s counterparts also joined in with the clapping, including leader Jeremy Corbyn.

    Mr Cameron told his MPs that he intended to stay in public life and would be “willing them on”, saying “nothing is impossible”.

    In his final remarks, he reprised a comment he made to Tony Blair during his first PMQs as opposition leader in 2005, saying: “I was the future once.”

    During a generally light-hearted and jocular session of PMQs, the former prime minister said he had clocked up 5,500 questions at the dispatch box, joking that he would leave it to others to decide how many he has answered.

    He dismissed suggestions that he will look to take over as the host of Top Gear or England manager, joking they “sound even harder” than being PM.

    Cameron also stressed his love for Larry, the Downing Street cat – amid rumours that he was not a fan – a point he later emphasised on Twitter and swapped warm wishes with Jeremy Corbyn, saying he had almost come to admire the Labour leader’s “tenacity” in hanging on to his job.

    Defending his economic, social and foreign affairs achievements, Mr Cameron said there had been “many amazing moments” over the past six years of “public service in the national interest”.

    He “warmly congratulated” Mrs. May, who sat next to him during the session, on her election and told Mr Corbyn that “when it came to female prime ministers, I am pleased to say pretty soon it is going be two-nil”.

    Mr Corbyn said that although he had often disagreed with the former prime minister, he thanked him for his service over the last six years and praised him for his backing for equal marriage and his efforts to secure the release of Shaker Aamer from Guantanamo Bay.

    The Labour leader also paid tribute to Mr Cameron’s wife Samantha and his family, who watched the proceedings from the public gallery. His daughters Nancy and Florence were seen to give their father a wave and cheer him on during the session.

    Earlier, told the Telegraph he came into Downing Street to “lead people through difficult decisions so together we could reach better times”, adding “as I leave today, I hope people will see a stronger country, a thriving economy, and more chances to get on in life.”

    After saying goodbye to Downing Street staff, Cameron later tendered his resignation to the Queen at Buckingham Palace.

    The British Broadcasting Corporation’s (BBC’s) royal correspondent Nicholas Witchell said the private audience was likely to be a short one, potentially about 20 minutes.

    Soon after, Mrs May, accompanied by her husband Philip, made her own way to the Palace, where she accepted the monarch’s offer to form a new government.

    Queen Elizabeth was reported to have asked Mrs. May, who has become the 13th leader of her reign, about her “intentions and programme” for the UK government.

    Mrs May, who at 59 is the oldest prime minister since Jim Callaghan in 1976, returned to No 10, Downing Street as the country’s second female prime minister.

    Expectedly, she briefly addressed her countrymen before meeting top officials, including Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heyward, and received a full national security and defence briefing.

    She will be asked to hand-write letters to the commanders of the UK’s four Trident submarines about what to do in the event of a catastrophic nuclear attack on the UK and to appoint two nuclear “deputies” – ministers who will take decisions on the deterrent if she has been rendered incapable.

    She is also expected to take calls from a number of foreign leaders.  Mrs. May announced key appointments within hours after taken the baton last night.

    As the immediate past home secretary, Mrs May was the only remaining candidate in the Tory leadership contest following Andrea Leadsom’s withdrawal on Monday.

    The contest began when Mr Cameron, who had been prime minister since 2010, announced he would step down after losing the European Union (EU) referendum in June.

    Removal vans were spotted outside Downing Street on Tuesday, as Cameron’s ministers paid tribute to him in his final cabinet meeting.

    Former Culture Secretary Maria Miller rejected suggestions that Cameron’s legacy would be totally defined by the decision to leave the EU, saying that while this seemed “a very big part of the political bubble” now, other achievements would endure.

    She told Sky News that the prime minister “championed gay marriage and social justice while putting the Conservative Party in the centre ground” of politics and leaving behind a “strong economic foundation” to cope with the uncertainty caused by Brexit.

    The swift transition of power came after the expected nine-week leadership campaign was truncated to just a couple of days by leading Brexit campaigner Andrea Leadsom’s surprise withdrawal.

    Mrs May, who backed a vote to remain in the EU, made six appointments yesterday. She will unveil her full ministerial team in the next couple of days.

    Those named yesterday as secretaries are: Boris Johnson (Foreign); Phili Hammond (Chancellor); Ms. Amber Rudd (Home); David Davids (Brexit), Michael Fallon (Defence) and Liam Fox (International Trade.

    Fallon was retained as the Defence Secretary. Ms. Rudd, who was Energy Secretary was named by Mrs. May as her replacement as the Home Secretary.

    Asked her about her prospects before she was named the Home Secretary, Ms Rudd told reporters: “I haven’t been told anything yet so I’m just going to get on with my day job”.

  • …AND CAMERON CAME CALLING

    FAR from the ‘fantastically corrupt’ pronouncement by outgoing Prime Minister of UK, David Cameron, and his recent resignation over Brexit, you must have heard of plans to showcase eight Nigerian films at this year’s edition of Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) for which one Cameron Bailey has come to Nigeria; the crux for me is to say that it is no time to dance yet.

    Yes, Cameron Bailey, the Artistic Director of TIFF was in Lagos this week, where he was introduced at a press conference organised by Lagos State government to announce Toronto’s readiness for Lagos and Nollywood filmmakers during the 10-day film event holding in September. However, before we hit town with songs of victory for Nollywood – about how one of the leading film festivals in the world has come down from their high horses to ‘scout’ for Nollywood films, it is pertinent to understand that this is a privilege given to Nollywood to prove our worth to the world.

    Nigeria renewed its politics of ‘attention seeking’ from international film festivals more than 15 years ago, and seems to have the ear of TIFF because, somehow, Bailey, as a person, shares the aspiration of Nollywood. Amongst Afolabi Adesanya, former MD of Nigerian Film Corporation; Peace Anyiam-Osigwe, CEO of Africa Movie Academy Awards (AMAA) and Steve Ayorinde, Commissioner of Information and Strategy, Lagos State, there had long existed a tie with Bailey who has also visited Nigeria several times in the past.

    Although it has been difficult to get a Nigerian film into the festival’s mainstream as a journalist rightly observed at the press conference, one could imagine how Bailey must have tried to let this happen. One of such chances for Nollywood was a documentary called ‘Peace Mission’ showcased at the festival in 2008. If we expected this to soften the grounds for us, it did not work out because years after, those who curate African films for TIFF hardly find a Nigerian film for their line-ups. And when in 2013, Biyi Bandele’s “Half of a Yellow Sun” got official premiere at the festival; one could safely say that it earned that little space on the strength of the British Film Institute (BFI) which gave 30 percent sponsorship to the film and the lead actor of the film, Chiwetel Ejiofor, who incidentally featured in another film (12 Years A Slave) selected by the festival that same year.

    Here we are again, with Bailey pulling another stunt for Nollywood. Indeed, to have Nigeria on the number 8 slot, after cities such as Istanbul, Buenos Aires, Mumbai, Athens, Seoul, Tel Aviv and London, and the first to be profiled from Africa whereby South Africa has consistently made the line-up in the TIFF mainstream, couldn’t be short of playing our politics well. Thus, we just must create a good impression, not only on the organisers of the festival but on filmmakers and distributors world over, who will be attending the festival.

    Again, we develop so much gluttony for government largesse when the issue concerns film, and when that is not forthcoming, we speak blackmail because we think that by the cultural export nature of motion picture, we are doing the government a favour. This is why a filmmaker who claimed robust knowledge of Lagos and the Yoruba language wants the state government to bankroll a film project he thinks should be selected for the TIFF’s City-to-City showcase. I have said it several times that filmmaking is the filmmaker’s business just as farming is the farmer’s business and source of livelihood. If farmers don’t blackmail government by claiming that they feed the nation, then our filmmakers must have a rethink. All that government owes any sector of the economy is an enabling environment and intervention funds which may even come in form of loans. A commercial filmmaker who is waiting for government’s grant is just yet to define his purpose.

    Meanwhile, the City-to-City showcase is not about some propaganda films about Lagos, and Lagos is not looking for new films to take to TIFF, as there are more than enough productions and filmmakers whose works naturally have the flavour and colour of Lagos, a city which no one can afford to ignore in Nigeria, a former Federal Capital Territory, commercial nerve of West Africa and home of Nigeria’s creative industry.

    Interestingly, Bailey described Lagos as “the city of Fela Kuti’s music which has also given birth to one of the world’s most vibrant film industries.” Continuing, he said: “The 1,000 low-budget features ‘Nollywood’ produces each year generate about $1-billion in box office. Now, from that commercial hotbed, a new generation of filmmakers is emerging to both advance and challenge Nollywood. Bigger budgets, greater artistic ambition – the new cinema of Lagos is bold, exciting, and ready to take its place on the international stage. We’re excited to share the creativity of this remarkable city’s filmmakers with TIFF audiences in September.”

    Above is the synopsis of what TIFF is looking for, and I like the part that talks about the new cinema in Lagos and greater artistic ambition. We still have this quality even among the old crops in Nollywood, so, let’s pitch our works before August and stop cajoling government to fund our livelihood in the name of film.

  • Cameron: Fantastically un-Nigerian

    Cameron: Fantastically un-Nigerian

    Not too long ago, he ruffled the Nigerian feather following the leaking of his sidetalk in London with the British monarch. Footage captured by an eavesdropping television cameraman had gone viral. Looking a bit tipsy after what many in Abuja would imagine to be one glass too many, Prime Minister David Cameron sensationally declared that citizens of Nigeria, Britain’s biggest former colony on the African continent, “are fantastically corrupt”. But gutted by the outcome of the Brexit referendum last weekend with its apocalyptic consequences for what was once the imperial British empire, this is obviously the darkest hour in Cameron’s political career and perhaps one of those harrowing moments he would wish he never sought tenancy at No 10, Downing Street. Or took the needless gamble to conduct the national poll in which a slim majority voted the United Kingdom out the European Union. Resulting in what is arguably the biggest blow after World War II to the European quest to foster greater unity.

    Poor Cameron, if only fate had made him Prime Minister of the very country he had so fantastically derided, he would not have found himself in this sort of mess. And if he did, sundry escape routes would sure be open for a quick getaway. Were he a Nigerian leader, he, to begin with, would have long ago classified membership of EU as “non-negotiable” and branded those agitating otherwise as “subversive elements” out to undermine the golden legacy of “our heroes past”. In fact, members of Cameron’s party – or ethnic group – would have complemented that with a far more emotive argument that the proponents had indeed been commissioned to either distract or destabilize or derail the sitting government. Why now?, they would cry. To be sure, someone would be thoughtful enough to rush to the court and obtain an injunction – preferably perpetual – against further touting, if not contemplation, of that very idea. So, from the official angle, the odds would have been deliberately stacked so high against the proposal of plebiscite. In the event that did not work, efforts would then be calibrated in such a manner to give the notion of opinion poll a bad name.

    Before anything else, leaders of the ruling party would have helped themselves to the raft of contracts for the supply of both software and hardware for the polls, with those that lost out in the bazaar resorting to self-help by simply blowing the whistle, inviting public scrutiny of the entire process. If there was no such in-fighting, there still could be the chance that the “emergency contractors” would fail to deliver on time or the right quality, thus leaving the window ajar for another sort of litigation after the exercise. If precedents already set by many sub-national governments on creation of more local councils are enough guide, then what would have transpired on the appointed day for the said referendum would simply have been a kangaroo exercise in which fully incentivized state officials would be at liberty to allocate figures to fit a pre-determined outcome. Whichever side the pendulum eventually swung, heavy dust would still have been raised. Just as the final ballot was being counted at the collation centre, someone would have rushed out to read a pre-written letter of protest, calling for outright cancellation.

    Perceived sundry irregularities would have been painstakingly listed. With a straight face, someone was likely to report that lots of underage voters were paid to thumbprint ballots at several locations. Or, someone would not consider it out of place to allege “computerized fraud” and “smuggling of mercenary voters” to a particular polling centre. Against this murky backcloth, the stage would thus have been set for Cameron to exercise his power of discretion in the overall “national interest”. Either way, it would still be a win-win case for the incumbent. In view of the humiliating loss suffered by the incumbent party in the exercise, two clearly marked escape routes would be open to him. He would be at liberty to summarily annul the entire process, citing “overwhelming” evidence of irregularities. But in case he was able to resist the temptation of that option, it still would remain his preserve to snatch victory from the jaw of defeat. Without any scruple or shame, a spin would then be brought to the matter.

    The Prime Minister would simply have declared that he was exceedingly humbled by the clarity of the voice of the majority that the country exit the union, even though that conflicted with the personal view he had humbly expressed during the campaign. “My people have spoken,” he would then declare in summary, setting the tone for the clincher. “And where my people stand is where I will stand as their humble steward. Let us therefore see today as historic and an affirmation of the supremacy of the bottomup approach to democracy. In short, permit me to reaffirm my resolve to continue to lead our people in the direction they want to go.” Such transparent duplicity! On a lighter note still, the following joke allegedly made by the inimitable President Robert Mugabe after the Brexit polls has been making the rounds on the social media in the past few days. It goes thus: “The colonials are reaping what they deserve now; for the Lord is not a God of injustice. For as they have wrongly and unjustly divided Africa and raped our natural resources; so would God divide their households.

    “Today, fantastic stupidity is when an idiot cynically calls for an unnecessary referendum in furtherance of his personal ambition and not only lose the vote, but end up disuniting the country, partially unbundle the European Union, make the world’s financial markets lose $2 trillion in a few hours, as well as lose his job to boot. “What do I know…I was here when he came to office; I am still here as he shamefully leaves office.”

    But make no mistake about it: Cameron had to offer resignation not necessarily out of his free will, but more to the dictation of a political culture that imposes personal responsibility for choices made and in submission to the awesome weight of durable institutions of democracy that cannot be easily manipulated. That is the supreme lesson we should take away from the Brexit mishap. Well, last week’s edition of this column generated lots of reaction. In deference to the readers, I today yield the space to just a few.

    For Tunji Bello, Ihonbvere, Onyinma

    Here is wishing happy birthday to Mr. Tunji Bello (SSG to Lagos State Government) who turns 55 today; Professor Julius Ihonbvere (SSG to Edo State Government) who turned 60 last Saturday, and Chief Tony Onyinma, a media juggernaut, who added another year on Wednesday. As for Ihonbvere, all roads lead to Benin City tomorrow as human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, SAN, delivers a commemorative lecture.

     

  • Cameron’s fantastic Brexit gamble

    SIR: The Britain’s vote to leave the European Union has precipitated a trajectory towards economic recession in Britain and also tentatively cast a shadow over the global economy.

    Political pundits have argued that David Cameron and his colleagues had suffered from their short-sightedness that resulted in their self-inflicted defeat and political disaster when they called for referendum on EU.

    The Brexit is an evidence of global submission to anger, frustration and centrifugal proclivities especially among the younger voters across the globe.

    The same narrative is trailing the orchestration of Donald Trump’s candidature in the forthcoming presidential election in the U.S.

    Just as Brexit protagonists would discountenance every other merit imbued in a globalised politics by taking a myopic view on domestication of employment and foreign aids, the American “TrumpXits” are likely to carry the day in the forthcoming election not because Donald Trump is a better candidate than Hillary Clinton, but because of the new shift in global democracy from a centripetal political structure towards exiguous and prebendal permutations.

    Whilst the Brexit would accentuate the vestige of democratic nuances which puts the ascendancy of number above the most logical metrics, the Nigerian situation demands a different paradigm.

    First of all Britain did not join the EU through the instrumentality of war with any member of the EU and her exit through referendum was peacefully executed. The Nigerian sovereignty has been challenged on several occasions by separatists whose agenda for a new sovereignty have remained nebulous. For instance what is the ultimate aim of an Islamic state as demanded by Boko Haram? Can you grant the secession of a part of a sovereign state at the expense of another part? Can the Itsekirilive happily ever after with their Urhobokinsmen without a further call restructuring?

    The fundamentals that underlies Brexit rather negate the Nigerian experience and just like the ultimate gamble of David Cameron and his colleagues has consumed their political prospects leaving Britain with political and economic uncertainty, Buhari must be circumspect enough not to yield to centrifugal agenda. Moreover that the agitation for restructuring is getting more pronounced in the regime of anti-corruption is suspect. May be Professor Wole Soyinka and others should do more introspection.

     

    • BukolaAjisola,

    Lagos.

  • Cameron steps down after Britain votes to quit EU

    Cameron steps down after Britain votes to quit EU

    Mr. David Cameron is on his way out as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom after  the majority of British voted on Thursday  that their country should  leave the European Union (EU).

    The PM had urged the country to vote Remain but was defeated by 52% to 48% despite London, Scotland and Northern Ireland backing staying in.

    Speaking outside 10 Downing Street moments after the official result was released yesterday, an emotional  Cameron  said “fresh leadership” was needed.

    “The British people have voted to leave the European Union and their will must be respected.The will of the British people is an instruction that must be delivered,” he said as he choked back tears .

    He will step down in October.

    Former Mayor of London and public face of Vote Leave,Boris Johnson is being touted as a likely successor.

    He  began  to set out his vision for a revitalised, outward looking country in a speech just hours after his long-time rival tearfully declared that he would stand aside in the aftermath of the  referendum.

    He said there was “no need for haste” about severing the UK’s ties.

    He said voters had “searched in their hearts” and the UK now had a “glorious opportunity” to pass its own laws, set its own taxes and control its own borders.

  • Cameron’s blunder

    Cameron’s blunder

    •If Nigeria is ‘fantastically corrupt’, then Britain is fantastically adept at safe-keeping our ill-gotten wealth!  

    British Prime Minister David Cameron obviously said nothing new when he described Nigeria as ‘fantastically corrupt’. “We’ve got some leaders of some fantastically corrupt countries coming to Britain… Nigeria and Afghanistan, possibly the two most corrupt countries in the world,” Cameron was caught on camera telling the Queen of England at Buckingham Palace at an event to mark the Queen’s 90th birthday.

    Everyone, including Nigerians themselves, know and admit that this country is corrupt. Or, where else in the world, except probably in Afghanistan, could corruption have been so palpable as in Nigeria, with all the revelations so far made in the ongoing $15billion arms fund scandal? Where else could someone who has not done any job for government got alert that millions had been dropped into his account? Where else could a military general have been so rich as to have between him and his wife and son billions of stolen public funds? Where else could the National Security Adviser (NSA) have been alleged to become an Automated Teller Machine (ATM), doling out billions of Naira to all manner of persons for things that have nothing to do with security, except in a country that is fantastically corrupt?

    Coming from the prime minister of a country that is home to much of the world’s stolen wealth, Mr Cameron should know countries that are corrupt and those that are fantastically so!

    But it was unfortunate that a prime minister who was due to host a major international anti-corruption summit only a few hours from the time he whispered into the Queen’s ear could have made such a statement. It would have been pardonable if Mr Cameron had acknowledged the efforts of the present Nigerian government in tackling corruption. Indeed, it reeks of bad faith not to acknowledge this fact, much more so that President Muhammadu Buhari was in the United Kingdom then to solicit Mr Cameron’s support in recovering some of Nigeria’s looted wealth stashed away in Britain.

    We are however happy that Mr Cameron seemed to have acted on his own given the reactions of both the Commonwealth Secretary-General Baroness Scotland, who saw Mr Cameron’s remarks as ‘unfortunate’ adding that countries like Nigeria needed support rather than criticism; and the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, who intervened that: “But this particular president is not corrupt… he’s trying very hard”.

    We are equally delighted that President Buhari gave a prompt and appropriate response to Mr Cameron’s unfortunate statement: “I am not going to demand an apology from anybody. What I am demanding is a return of assets … This is what I am asking for. What would I do with an apology? I need something tangible”. What Nigeria needs badly now is the assets stashed away in the United Kingdom and Mr Cameron should do everything within his powers to have them returned to Nigeria.

    Mr Cameron conveniently forgot that his country is a haven of a third of the stolen assets in the world. He is also oblivious of an adage that “the real thief is not the person who stole palm oil from the market but the person who took it from him”. The logic is simple: if Nigerian and other countries’ leaders who steal from their treasuries have no safe haven like Britain, they will think twice before stealing.

    We rest our case with the befitting quote from the editorial of The Guardian of London on May 12: “When Mr Cameron was caught on camera on Tuesday boasting to the Queen of the “fantastically corrupt countries” turning up at Lancaster House this week, he might have mentioned that Afghanistan is a failed state that did not get any less failed over 13 years of British intervention. And he should certainly have mentioned that the president of Nigeria, Muhammadu Buhari, is coming to London to lobby it to sort out the tax havens in its own backyard”. Nothing could have been more consoling.

    So, when next Mr Cameron is going to carpet any country for corruption, he should remember to remove the log in his own country’s eye before complaining about the speck in others’. Mr Cameron will do well to help us recover our stolen wealth put in his country by some of our political and other leaders.

     

  • Cameron in fantasy land

    Since he became Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron has cultivated the habit of ruffling feathers, especially those of Nigerians and, sometimes, some of his own people, and to no particular end. This week, standing slightly bowed before Queen Elizabeth at Buckingham Palace, he blurted out a phrase that has since so animated Nigerians back home, in the offices, on the road and everywhere else that it could well have helped them absorb the shock of a fuel price increase that was announced shortly after. On the eve of a multi-national anti-corruption summit in London, the Prime Minister was filmed telling the monarch that Nigeria and Afghanistan were among “fantastically corrupt” countries attending the meeting. President Muhammadu Buhari was billed to deliver a keynote address on Thursday entitled: Why we must tackle corruption together.

    It may never be known why Mr Cameron said what he said about Nigeria and Afghanistan, nor what he hoped to achieve by saying it. Was he hinting in a Cameronic way at the indiscretion of allowing representatives of such dirty countries into clean Britain? Or was he trying to warn as many Brits as would attend the summit to beware some strange characters in their midst, a way of mobilising them to come with something like a 14-foot-long spoon when refreshment was served? Mr Cameron’s agenda was not clear.

    In Nigeria, however, the effect was electric. Suddenly, the phrase “fantastically corrupt” popped up in almost any conceivable or inconceivable stretch of utterance. Trust us; we sure got something good out of Mr Cameron’s latest offering. The laughter must have helped to calm things down momentarily.

    A few years ago, when our usually distracted federal lawmakers chalked up enough willpower to pass a definitive law against gay practices, prescribing 14 years for anyone convicted of same-sex indulgences, the British Prime Minister responded with such an imperial threat that it was clear at least in his mind who between him and then President Goodluck Jonathan was king and who subject. Britain, Mr Cameron declared, would withdraw aid from Nigeria and any other country where people of gay persuasions are denied their sexual preferences, whether to engage in sex at will or marry or live together.

    Nigerians fought right back, calling the Prime Minister’s bluff and essentially asking if he imagined their country was still a colonial corner of Britain. Thankfully, the lawmakers and Dr Jonathan himself held their ground.

    In fact, it would seem as though imagination or fantasy were a crucial part of Mr Cameron. Back in his own country, he has called a Muslim cleric a supporter of ISIS, the terrorist group wreaking havoc in Syria and Iraq and indeed Europe and elsewhere. He later apologised after the man threatened to sue. It is possible that Mr Cameron spoke fantastically in a sense that would suggest that he imagined or fantasized more than he actually knew of his subject of attack.

    Minds, generally, are notoriously difficult to read, let alone Mr Cameron’s. It would have been quite satisfying to know how his works considering some of the unflattering revelations touching on the Cameron family’s sense of propriety if not outright corruption. The Prime Minister’s father Ian, a renowned stockbroker, was named in the Panama Papers, a dizzying tome of leaked offshore tax-free accounts which earned Mr Cameron himself a notable protest if not call for his outright resignation by the outraged British public. The Prime Minister fumed and fussed in defence of his daddy before conceding apologetically that he ought not have handled the matter the way he did. If there was such legendary streak of integrity running over in his family, why did his father not look hard enough for a place in Britain to stash his wealth? Why Panama?

    If Mr Cameron intended to impress the queen with the notion that Britain has been as clean as a whistle since he became Prime Minister six years ago, it is difficult to determine what effect his effort had on the monarch. Right in majestic Britain, Mr Cameron has been perceived by some as showy, vain and unreliable. It has been pointed out that once in a few hours Mr Cameron changed his clothes four times. His rivals have labeled him a chameleon.

    They were probably harsh, perhaps seeking only to knock it into every British skull that Mr Prime Minister was up to no good. That is incorrect because Mr Cameron’s schoolmates have admitted that he was exemplary, a first-class material. He may well have been but one teacher also once dismissed him as “very confused…his speech filled with contradictions,” perhaps hazy with misunderstanding.

    That may not the true picture of the man who has presided over the affairs of Great Britain for six years but it could provide a few insights into his fantastic core.

    Yet, did Mr Cameron really miss the mark on Nigeria’s corruption profile? Not quite. I think he only disappointed his fellow leaders to whom such comments must be kept private, never voiced in public. Mr Cameron himself did not intend his comments for the public, a point that President Muhammadu Buhari made in his defence, telling CNN’s Christiane Amanpour that somehow people like her got to know about it.

    In any event, the PM said what he said and we all have heard what we heard. Are Nigerians fantastically corrupt? Some, in fact, a few, are. Majority are quite clean.

    The question is: Why do leaders like Prime Minister Cameron look the other way while the crooked lay their loot in their strongest vaults?

    President Buhari did well to say he was not interested in Mr Cameron’s apology; only to hand back what Nigerian crooks took to Britain and other havens. Mr Cameron has a fantastic opportunity to redeem himself and return to the real world.

  • Cameron’s remark and the reality

    SIR: If you shut up truth and bury it underground, it will but grow and gather to itself such explosive power that the day it burst through it will blow up everything in its way- Emile Zola.

    Nigeria scenario is like city on a hill that can never be hidden! Nigeria as a country is known for the good the bad and the ugly. This we live with and feel it on a daily basis, hence, the mocking coming from David Cameron, the British Prime Minister.

    Days before the anti-corruption summit that President Muhammadu Buhari was expected to give a keynote address, Cameron described Nigeria and Afghanistan as ‘fantastically corrupt “. But it did not occur to Cameron that British started it all, from the colonial era where both human and material resources were siphoned and then acting as a ‘safe haven” for criminally-minded Nigerians.

    Of course the president has responded to Cameron’s unholy comment by saying he was not going to demand for apology but rather that the looted fund in Britain be returned to Nigeria. You can insult us, but give us our cash. Good response anyway…

    President Buhari rode into office through his perceived no nonsense principles and integrity.  His vision came to fulfilment at a time stealing was defined as not corruption in Nigeria; a time when  mind-boggling and heart quaking revelations of the looting of trillions of naira pension funds, NNPC and funds allocated for ammunition to fight Boko Haram.

    Nigeria is fantastically corrupt; what is new about that? Are Nigerian leaders not truly and fantastically corrupt? Is there corruption still not going on in the oil sector? Where are the Panama guys; or the series of inconclusive elections and the budget padding all happened in the recent time? We heard of diversion of fuel to Chad and Cameron leading to scarcity in the land; what about the untold hardship that Nigerians have suffered since the inception of this administration? Marketers celebrate at the new fuel pump price while the poor masses weep for the additional burden. Nigerians are asking whether there is any difference between Jonathan government and Buhari’s. So, there’s nothing like “looking at an old snapshot of Nigeria” as Garba Shehu, Senior Special Assistant to Buhari on media puts it.

    Truth must be told, Nigeria under President Buhari must build institutional capacity to fight corruption. Mere arrest and jail or plea bargain as it is at the moment is like digging a shallow grave; it will not stand the test of time.

    I don’t see any reason why we should criticize Cameron. Have Nigerians forgotten so soon the salacious stories being told by the President of corruption perpetuated under previous administration? The continuous flogging of unsubstantiated corruption figures gives Nigeria a bad image in the eyes of the world. The president is duty-bound to protect and market the image of the country while he preaches the gospel of change at home and abroad. So, the mocking from Cameron and others shouldn’t be a thing of concern.

     

    • Alifia Sunday,

    Ilorin, Kwara State.

  • Cameron was being honest about corruption – Buhari

    Cameron was being honest about corruption – Buhari

    President Muhammadu Buhari has defended British Prime Minister, David Cameron’s comments, caught on video this week, about Nigeria being “fantastically corrupt.”

    Buhari insisted that Cameron had nothing to apologize for, as he was merely talking about what he knows.

    “I think he’s being honest about it,” he told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour. “I don’t think you can fault him.”

    Speaking at an anti-corruption conference on Wednesday, Buhari said: “I am not demanding an apology from anybody, I am demanding a return of assets.”

    During a conversation with the Queen that was captured on camera on Tuesday, Cameron declared Nigeria and Afghanistan “possibly the two most corrupt countries in the world.”

    The comment came as world leaders gathered in London for an anti-corruption summit, which has been largely overshadowed by Cameron’s gaffe.

    The social media backlash was swift and Nigeria’s presidential spokesman said they were “embarrassing to us.”

    A 2015 report by Transparency International, an independent anti-corruption group, scores Nigeria the world’s 136th most corrupt country, out of 168. Afghanistan fares worse in the survey, coming in at number 166.

    But President Buhari said he was more concerned with fighting corruption than talking about it.

    He said his administration was making inroads with clearing a backlog of “ghost workers” who are claiming salaries fraudulently and by arresting those who embezzled government funds during the previous administration.

    At the opening of the anti-corruption summit on Thursday, Buhari said: “When it comes to tackling corruption, the international community has looked the other way for too long.

    “Nigeria is calling on this summit to trace and facilitate the recovery of stolen funds and assets hidden in secret accounts,” he added.

    Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani also called for a more concerted effort in bringing criminals to justice.