Hate to draw attention to myself, but I would like to take several of the posters who have come on here to defend Cameron back to the original point I made.
Jesus made it very plain through his teachings "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." (Matthew 19:24) is certiainly not the only one of Jesus' teachings which deals with wealth. Jesus was wholly against the idea of personal wealth and he taught that particular lesson in the most straightforward way possible - he himself lived as a pauper and did everything he could to give to the poor. It was, for me, one of the most powerful and meaningful messages he offered.
Now, when Cameron was asked about sex before marriage and gay marriages, he, a proud Christian, quoted the bible as a reason for his beliefs. I would have much less of a problem with Cameron if he didn't pick and choose the bits of the bible he was prepared to live by. For me, it's not a supermarket, where you pick a little bit of this and a little bit of that. If you really believe that Jesus message is the correct one, then I'm sorry but NOBODY could argue that Jesus would want Cameron to give the £70K away to the needy, rather than spend it on a nice bathroom for his brother and a fast car for himself. So, whilst I might not have agreed with his views before, I had to respect that it was what he chose to believe. Now, however, his behaviour smacks of hypocrisy and that I despise.
He should tell us if he is going to give the money away because to do so he would be acting in the way that Jesus did. Jesus led by example - he didn't just tell other people how to live their lives he lived that life too. He sacrificed many things, the ultimate being his own life, for his fellow man. Cameron, on the other hand, is not prepared to demonstrate that what we can expect a good Christian to do is to care for those less well off than himself. No use doing it in private - and no, I simply don't accept that he would be criticised (and I would be the first to defend him if he was) if he did do the Christian thing and give this money to a more worthy cause than a fast car.
His behaviour is totally indefensible as far as Christianity is concerned, personal gain v helping the needy. No case in which the former wins I'm afraid.