As I write, the House of Commons has recently voted unanimously that the businessman Sir Philip Green should be stripped of his knighthood. It is reported that this is the first time that MPs have ever held such a debate. It is not however for MPs to determine whether or not someone should be deprived of an honour. That decision rests with a committee known as the Honours Forfeiture Committee.
The cause of this furore is that Green allegedly enriched himself and his family at the expense of just about everyone else connected with his company.
My first comment is that at a time when the lives of millions of people in this country are blighted by crime and poverty, our MPs have apparently got nothing better to do than denigrate an old man with lots of money.
If Green has broken any law, then let him be prosecuted. If he has not broken any law, then maybe the House of Commons should debate whether or not the law on running limited companies should be revised.
For as long as I can remember, Britain has had a spiv economy, in which far too many company directors have been allowed to get rich without sufficient justification. Will that ever change?
Another comment is that the honours system in this country has over the years rewarded many people who make Green look saintly by comparison. For example the evil warmonger George Bush holds an honorary knighthood, and the evil warmonger John Major is a Knight of the Garter. Actually, these people were not really rewarded, because a knighthood is of course worthless.
Related previous posts include:
Who cares about the honours system?
No comments:
Post a Comment