It is an odd irony that David Cameron’s family’s trust should be called Blairmore. Blairless might have been more apt.
It is also, I suspect, a dangerous precedent for him to have revealed the details of his tax affairs. If politicians are to be routinely exposed to this sort of scrutiny, I wonder how much the potential pool of capable people willing to stand for public office will shrink? It is all very well for penniless career politicians, who have never had a real job, and whose families have no money, to volunteer their tax returns. They have nothing to declare.
People who have inherited some wealth might want a bit more privacy for their families, and should not be discouraged from politics. If anything, they are likely to be rather cleverer and hard-working than the norm; with a bit of luck they will have inherited some useful genes, and are likely to have been well educated. Besides, since they have some money, they are less likely to nick some of the public’s money (time after time, history has shown us that scandals about Tories tend to be about sex, whereas scandals about Labour politicians tend to be about hands in the till). A body politic consisting only of people born in poverty is as unhealthy as one consisting only of the rich.
We are told that David Cameron was left £300,000 by his father and given £200,000 inter vivos by his mother. That is a lot less that Tony Blair has amassed by rattling his tin.