Former prime minister David Cameron has opened up about the death of his six-year-old son Ivan in 2009 – and described the “chaos” of caring for him while balancing a life in politics.
Speaking to Sky’s Kay Burley, the former Tory leader, 58, said the loss of Ivan – who had Ohtahara’s syndrome – was “completely transformational”.
Lord Cameron said:“Bringing up children is hard enough but if you have a child who is having seizures every day, is having to be fed through a tube and needs to be cared for all night as well as all day, who’s going in and out of hospital.
“I can still remember the chaos… of you’re in hospital, then you’re back home, then you’re back again. I had just become an MP [when Ivan was born]. I remember turning up for debates in the House of Commons completely exhausted because I’ve been in St Mary’s Paddington [hospital] all night.
“I remember this great blessing of having your first child. In spite of all the difficulties he had with the seizures and cerebral palsy and everything – you still remember this beautiful, smiling boy that you would rest on your lap and look after and love.
“The extraordinary thing about grief is to start with, there’s nothing but black clouds. But after a while, happy memories do break through.”
Image: Ivan Cameron died in 2009 Pic: Reuters
Lord Cameron unquestionably a safe pair of hands
Striding determinedly towards me, hand outstretched to offer a firm eye-contact handshake, Lord Cameron cuts a powerful image as he arrives for our interview.
I first met him as a friendly, fresh-faced MP when he was put forward by the government in the 2005 election campaign to hold the party line on myriad topics. He was calm, friendly and self-assured. When he left, I had turned to the cameraman and said: “I bet you £20 he’s a future PM.”
A warm smile spread across Lord Cameron’s face as I shared the recollection with him.
That faded into watery-eyed steel as we talked about the desperate loss of his son Ivan who died when he was just six-years-old. We touched on many other emotions too – considered politician when discussing Israel; polite stonewalling for who he wants to win the Tory leadership election; a useful lack of recall on whether he really did tell Boris Johnson “I will f*** you up, forever” over his stance on Brexit and a cheeky to-and-fro about SwiftGate.
He may no longer be in frontline politics but Lord Cameron is unquestionably a safe pair of hands in the unpredictable world of politics.
Lord Cameron, who resigned as prime minister after the 2016 Brexit referendum before returning for a stint as foreign secretary under Rishi Sunak, has recently started working with a joint US-UK venture that aims to develop 40 new treatments for rare diseases in the next decade.
Advertisement
The partnership between the University of Oxford and the Harrington Discovery Institute in Cleveland, Ohio sets out to bring together academia, pharmaceutical companies, philanthropy and venture capital, Lord Cameron has said. He will be the chair of the centre’s advisory council.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
He told Sky News he believes Ivan’s life “could be very different” if he was born today, saying he and his wife Samantha “didn’t really get an answer” on Ivan’s condition.
“Back then, the first genome was being sequenced, the whole code of the human being – it took seven years and cost $2bn,” he said.
“Today, you can sequence a genome in an afternoon and it will cost you a few hundred dollars so we can see the full DNA, the genetic, biological makeup of a human being.
“That might not provide you with an answer but in some cases it will.
“There are thousands of different rare diseases, but about 80% seem to have a genetic base.
“There have been children born with those sorts of symptoms [that Ivan had] who’ve been identified through genomic medicine, who’ve had treatments, and that has improved their condition.
“There would be a very good chance that if Ivan was born today, and we immediately sequenced the genome, you could spot what was wrong, [and] that you might be able to take steps.”
Lord Cameron also said he felt “lucky” that he and his wife “took the risk” of having more children after Ivan. They share two daughters and another son – Nancy, Florence and Arthur.
“At the time there was no genomics and genetic counselling back then,” he said.
“[It] was, ‘well, maybe it’s genetic, maybe it’s not’. Could be one in four, could be one in 1,000 – who knows?
“I’m lucky we took the risk. We have three happy, healthy children.”
The former prime minister also opened up about assisted dying, which MPs are set to vote on after a bill was introduced in parliament.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:43
What is assisted dying?
He says he’s “got an open mind” and is “thinking about” the issue.
“I haven’t supported it before on the basis that I’ve always worried about vulnerable people being put under pressure,” he said.
“Once you have some form of assisted dying, what’s the pressure put on people by relatives? I’ve always had that worry and concern.”
But his mind was changed “over the years of watching this debate and listening to the passionate arguments that people have put forward, having also known people with things like motor neurone disease and seen the deterioration and know how awful the end can be”.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
In a wide-ranging interview, he also dismissed claims in Boris Johnson‘s new book that Lord Cameron would “f*** him up” if he supported the Leave campaign in the 2016 Brexit referendum, saying: “That’s not my recollection.
“Any recollection I have is that I had a proper discussion and argument – heated at times.”
Lord Cameron also reflected on a plan to sanction two Israeli ministers while he was foreign secretary, saying it did not go ahead because the work had not been completed and that he was advised it was “a political act in the wrong direction”.
But he added the plan was “a better option than what [Labour] have done in terms of the partial arms embargo on Israel”.
“We do back Israel’s right to self-defence. We just had two missile attacks from Iran into Israel,” he said.
“We’re trying to help prevent that from happening using our own planes and the military. It seems to me utterly bizarre to be banning some arms exports from Israel.”
But around the Belgrave Circle, something different was going on.
YouTube
This content is provided by YouTube, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable YouTube cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to YouTube cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow YouTube cookies for this session only.
Because this is the spot where Leicester‘s three parliamentary constituencies meet, and in 2015 they were all held by Labour MPs who saw their majorities increase.
It’s a different story now.
Stand in the middle of the roundabout and face towards Abbey Park and you’ll see the city’s only remaining Labour seat – that of cabinet minister Liz Kendall.
Image: Liz Kendall (left) and Jonathan Ashworth’s (right) constituencies used to meet at Belgrave Circle roundabout until Ashworth lost his seat. Pic: AP
Turn around and face the B&M Home Store, and you’ll find the only place the Conservatives picked up at the last election.
This freak occurrence happened after the Labour vote was split by two independent candidates – both of whom also happened to be former MPs for the city.
Labour saw its vote share cut in half here, and then some.
The Tory vote dropped as well, but not by enough to stop the party coming through the middle and taking the seat by four thousand votes.
But walk to the south of this roundabout and you’ll get to where an independent candidate went one step further.
Local optician Shockat Adam won this seat last year, defeating frontbencher Jonathan Ashworth in a campaign focused mainly on Gaza and events in the Middle East.
Image: Labour have begun painting themselves as the “bulwark” to Nigel Farage. Pic: PA
What happened on this roundabout last July is no one-off. There’s plenty of evidence to suggest these phenomena could be on the rise around the country.
Since the election, Labour’s vote share has plunged, and its base has fractured as support for insurgent parties on the right and left surges.
A lot of the focus from this has been on Reform UK and how Labour can stop Nigel Farage in traditional ‘red wall’ seats in the midlands and the north.
And yes, Labour is leaking support to Reform on the right. But what’s often not talked about is the greater number of votes its losing on the left.
Image: If the Greens do well, it could split the left wing vote, clearing the way for another party to win in a roundabout way
A rejuvenated Green Party under Zack Polanski is chasing Labour close in some polls, while Your Party is attempting to form a separate fighting force straddling ex-Corbynites, independent pro-Gaza candidates and those from the more hard-left tradition.
Come the next election, this could all have far-reaching consequences.
Sky News has ranked all 404 Labour seats according to how at risk they are to these new forces on the left. We created this ‘vulnerability index’ using factors like voting history, population and demographic data.
It shows several cabinet ministers in the top 25 most vulnerable, including Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood in fourth place, Sir Keir Starmer in thirteenth place and Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy in twenty-third place.
All three of these Labour big beasts have seen their majorities cut in the last election by a Green candidate, an independent candidate or a mix of the two.
In Birmingham Ladywood, the total number of votes won by independent and green candidates exceed the number won by the Home Secretary.
That could trigger trouble, given the Greens and Your Party have indicated they may be open to the idea of local “progressive pacts”.
But in the neighbouring constituency of Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North, the result last year shows how an altogether different result could materialise.
Here, Labour’s vote was again split by a left-wing insurgent candidate – this time from George Galloway’s Workers Party.
But the conservative vote was also cut in half by Reform.
If Nigel Farage can unite the right in places like this, he could come through the middle – in much the same way the Tories did in Leicester.
Image: Keir Starmer’s constituency ranks thirteenth on Sky’s vunerability index. David Lammy’s is twenty third.
So how can the government fight back?
Part of the answer, according to senior figures, is attempting to tell a more appealing story about the more overly left-wing chunks of their policy platform – such as the workers rights reforms and rental overhaul.
The hope is these stories may be given more of a hearing in 2026 when (or perhaps more accurately, if) a corner starts to be turned on big domestic priorities like the economy, the NHS and migration.
If that doesn’t happen, the real saving grace for Labour could be tactical voting.
The Greens and Your Party have made it clear that they will plough on with their campaigns against the government, even if it ultimately benefits Reform.
Image: If Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage split the right wing vote, it may allow Labour, the Liberal Democrats, or another party to come through the middle
What’s less clear is whether left-wingers across the country will.
If they are faced with the prospect of Nigel Farage in Downing Street, could they hold their nose and stick with Labour?
It all begs the question – who is their great enemy: the government or Reform?
Ministers are already trying to emphasise a binary choice when they talk about Labour being the one single “bulwark” to Nigel Farage.
Expect more attempts to mobilise this anti-Reform vote in the years ahead.
But that’s made more difficult by what happened around Leicester’s Belgrave Circle. The same political fracturing that’s dogged the right in years past now being replicated on the left.
Labour’s ability to pick up the electoral pieces may prove decisive in whether what took place on a shabby East Midlands roundabout in July 2024 is recreated across the country in a few years’ time.
A group of 18 bipartisan US House lawmakers is pushing the country’s tax agency to review its rules on crypto staking taxes before the start of 2026.
In a letter sent to Internal Revenue Service acting commissioner Scott Bessent on Friday, the lawmakers, led by Republican Mike Carey, asked for a review and update guidance on “burdensome” crypto staking tax laws.
“This letter is simply requesting fair tax treatment for digital assets and ending the double taxation of staking rewards is a big step in the right direction,” Carey said.
The letter calls for taxes from staking rewards to be applied at the time of sale, so that “stakers are taxed based on a correct statement of their actual economic gain.”
Mike Carey is leading lawmakers to change crypto staking tax rules. Source: Mike Carey
The lawmakers argued that the current laws, which see stakers taxed upon receiving rewards and again when selling them, are hindering participation in the staking market, when the laws should be designed to support a fundamental part of certain blockchains.
“Millions of Americans own tokens on these networks. Network security — and American leadership — requires those taxpayers to stake those tokens, but today the administrative burden and prospect of over taxation discourages that participation,” the lawmakers wrote.
The letter concludes by asking if there are any administrative barriers to updating the guidance before the end of the year, and asserts that they should be changed to support the current administration’s goal of “strengthening US leadership in digital asset innovation.”
Not the only push for changes to crypto tax rules
On Saturday, House representatives Max Miller and Steven Horsford also introduced a discussion draft aiming to ease the tax obligations on crypto users by exempting small stablecoin transactions from capital gains taxes and offering a deferral option for staking and mining rewards.
In terms of staking, the reps went a slightly different route by opting for a referral option as opposed to a complete change in the current laws.
The proposal outlines that taxpayers would be allowed to elect to defer income recognition on staking or mining rewards for up to five years, rather than being taxed immediately after receiving them.
The US Federal Reserve is requesting public input on its proposed “payment account,” dubbed a “skinny master account” which fintechs and crypto firms are drawn to as it would allow access to the central bank without needing the typical approvals.
“These new payment accounts would support innovation while keeping the payments system safe,” Fed Governor Christopher Waller said on Friday. In October, Waller recommended that the Fed explore the idea of implementing payment accounts to clear and settle certain transaction activities of eligible financial institutions.
Waller added the Fed is introducing the payment accounts feature to reflect the “rapid developments” in the payments industry that have led to “innovative approaches to banking” and new changes in business models.
“This tailoring could result in lower risk to the payment system and, as a result, requests for payment accounts could generally receive a streamlined review.”
Not all Fed officials agreed with the decision to seek public input, with Governor Michael Barr arguing that it could pose risks if safeguards against money laundering and terrorist financing are not clearly defined, especially for institutions the Fed does not directly supervise.
Several payment-focused crypto firms could be in the running to connect to the Fed’s banking rails, potentially strengthening the bridge between crypto and traditional banking. Among the largest US-based crypto payments companies are Circle, Coinbase, Kraken and Block, Inc.
Inclusion of crypto firms into the Fed’s banking system would mark a significant turnaround for the industry. Crypto companies last year claimed the Biden administration worked to deliberately cut them off from banking services to stifle the industry with what crypto backers have dubbed Operation Chokepoint 2.0.
Waller noted that the Fed has already been experimenting with blockchain-based payment technologies to modernize the US payment system.
Crypto wouldn’t get the same privileges
Payment platforms granted payment accounts, however, won’t receive the same privileges as big banks and Wall Street institutions that currently have master accounts.
Unlike master accounts, the proposed payment accounts would not earn interest, have access to Fed credit, and would be subject to balance caps, among other restrictions.
The comment period to give feedback on the payments account plan will close 45 days after publication in the Federal Register. Waller said last month that the payment account feature is expected to be operational in the fourth quarter of 2026.