Why is Lynton Crosby to become a knight? He has HARMED the UK
Lynton Crosby: Knighted for undermining Her Majesty’s Opposition?
Why?
If Lynton Crosby is knighted in the New Year Honours, then it will be for services to the Conservative Party, not to the United Kingdom.
It is yet another perversion of the honours system by the Tories – look at their attitude when it comes to creating members of the House of Lords – and it is not to be tolerated.
This Blog shall certainly not be calling him Sir Lynton at any time in the future.
The reported decision to knight Lynton Crosby, the Tories’ election mastermind, has sparked a fresh row over alleged cronyism in the honours system.
Mr Crosby, soon to by Sir Lynton when the New Year Honours are officially announced, was brought in by the Conservatives for the 2005 election and has widely been credited as the force behind their surprise victory in May.
The official reason for the award will not be revealed until Thursday but campaigners have voiced outrage and claimed the decision “demeans the honours system”.
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
just about sums camoron up. croynyism at its worst
Totally agree this is a travesty and devalues the few knighthoods that are truly deserved for services to the UK not some political payoff. Did he really mastermind the Cons sucess or was it just by introducing blatant lies and false promises plus the fact that the UKIP voting skewed the votes to their favour? Would have also helped if the UK voting process was much fairer and reflected the whole votes cast. But hey ho will also not be doffing my cap to this discredited knighthood.
why is it honour worthy to serve an immoral party political system devised by the despicable tories.
For services to corruption and downright dishonesty I presume.
who is he ?
and thats the problem not only for the uk but the whole world
he sounds like a spin master a person behind the scenes out to do away with democracy a person who is the main root of all the worlds ills
i may be wrong but seldom am
He was Cameron’s election strategist and his plan was not to push the Tory side but to undermine Labour.
thanks mike
whatever he is or was in no way does he deserve any type of medal. those like my wife who provide round the clock care to those at the end of their lives on the minimum wage need whatever medals are going first i would have thought ?
It is a normal thing to give honours to this who have helped political parties. Blair did it for people who lent money to Labour. Harold Wilson gave inours to some very unsavoury characters. One knighthood went to someone who then committed suicide while under investigation for fraud. That is apart from honours for his friend who made Wilson’s Gannex raincoat. Honours are hardly every given for good reasons. It is probably better to stop all honours
You’re saying it’s all right to do a thing that is wrong, because other people did it first.
No.
It is still wrong.
Sorry if you thought I was condoning it. I certainly think it is shameful. The references to previous instances was to illustrate that all PM’s have the opportunity to use the honours system as they will with nobody able to sanction them. If it was a proper honours system then there should be either strict paramaters as to why they are being selected ie for the good of the Country – or there should be a broader group of people making the selection. Absolute power is always likely to result in people acting carte blanche.
Lynton Crosby, David Cameron’s political strategist, says the Prime Minister has ‘God on his side’
Wednesday 09 July 2014
By Tim Walker
7:30AM BST 09 Jul 2014
Although Alastair Campbell was adamant that Tony Blair “didn’t do God” while he was in Downing Street, David Cameron has been cheerfully speaking up for the Christian faith, saying that the nation should be much more “evangelical”.
Whether the PM was encouraged to spread the word by Lynton Crosby, his political strategist, is not clear, but the two men clearly think about faith a great deal and quite possibly see it in the most unlikely contexts.
When I bumped into the eccentric Australian at a gathering in Marylebone, I innocently inquired if he thought it augured good or ill for Cameron to attend sporting events. When he turned out to see the Tour de France, Mark Cavendish had, alas, promptly fallen from his bike and dislocated his shoulder. “Oh, not at all,” Crosby told me. “We’ve got God on our side.”
This struck me as an interesting theological position: did God’s backing necessarily confer success in sporting events or did He sometimes take the view that there was joy to be had through suffering? So I said: “I beg your pardon?”
Crosby looked straight at me with the same fervour in his eyes that I have seen in Billy Graham’s. “We’ve got God on our side,” he repeated, firmly.
Cameron is sticking two fingers up at everything decent minded people regard as acceptable behaviour. He uses the Nations honours system to reward his cronies just because he can do it. He is not the first to do this however. Nor is he likely to be the last. Harold Wilson did it making his aide into Lady Falconer. Gordon Brown did it with Fred Goodwin. The motto seems to be.” I can do it so I will do it. And no one can stop me from doing it”.
Spencer Livermore was the equivalent of Lynton Crosby as Ed Milband’s and Brown’s campaign manager. He was made a peer in August by Labour. It is a thank you for running good campaign, although in the cases of Brown and Miliband that may not be true. Part of a political campaign is to undermine the opposition and Crosby did that very well with Miliband helping as much as he could.
Your version of events, as usual. Crosby’s campaign was all about undermining Labour.
As for Livermore – don’t think for a moment that I approve of his ennoblement.
23rd Oct 2013 – 12.31pm PMQs –
“Lynton Crosby’s responsibility is to destroy the Labour party.” Cameron thunders.
Lynton Crosby, who has declared that his role is to destroy the Labour Party, rather than promote the Conservatives, based on any notion of merit, is all about such a targeted “divide and rule” strategy. This is a right wing tactic of cultivating and manipulating apostasy amongst support for the opposition. It’s a very evident ploy in the media, too, with articles about Labour screaming headlines that don’t match content, and the Sun and Telegraph blatantly lying about Labour’s policy intentions regularly. Propaganda isn’t obvious, and that’s how it works.