The bottom line is this:
- the PM has not broken the law,
- his family has not broken the law,
- and he paid tax on all matters
I suspect that the Prime Ministers approach might be explained by his finding the focus on his recently expired father upsetting - I remember feeling the same when the daily mail had a pop at Ed Miliband's parents: http://www.thejournal.co.uk/news/north-east-news/hexham-mp-supports-opposition-leader-6142212
As one journalist has put it this week: "Some Labour MPs - particularly on the Corbynite flat earth left, but a few others who should know better too - have in their attacks displayed an extraordinary and terrifying ignorance of law and economics. The Cameron family trust is entirely legal. Tax avoidance, which many of us practice when we put money in an ISA rather than an account subject to tax, is emphatically not the same as tax evasion, which means evading taxes you are legally obliged to pay. In addition, hundreds of thousands of Britons have ordinary investments in trusts that may involve off-shore activities. The income that flows back into the UK and any capital gain is subject to UK tax, which the Camerons paid. In their case the tax that has been avoided - not evaded - is tax in Panama. The Panamanians don't want it. They deliberately keep their taxes right down to attract investors and trusts.
But aren't there some dodgy money-launderers and foreign despots using the same techniques as the Camerons used? Yes. But there are some dodgy people operating inside the UK too. Does that mean we should we all close our bank accounts here and cease trading for fear of taint by association? The implication is that the Camerons shouldn't have a legal - entirely legal - trust because some bad people from shady countries use similar vehicles as the end point for their ill-gotten gains. It makes no sense.
It is hard then to avoid the conclusion that the only reason the Camerons (who have handled the media response poorly) are under attack is because they are wealthy and by most people's definitions rich. Add in the hilarious spectacle of moralising by certain newspaper groups that have used off-shore vehicles themselves in their dealings, like the Guardian of all people, and you are left with a week in the UK that might have been scripted by Victorian genius Anthony Trollope. It has been sanctimonious, envious Britain at its worst."
Clearly, the benefits of capitalism need to be seen by all, but the free movement of capital and cross border investment - fuelled by deregulation and technology - has had overwhelmingly positive effects, both for the UK generally and all of us as citizens. Has the PMs team communicated badly this week - probably. But has he done anything wrong? No. Not at all.
The last and best word in this is from the Spectator: