Mps To Vote On Stripping Sir Philip Green's Knighthood

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-3764772

Months after promising us that he would "sort out the BHS pension problems" and yet here, no further forward.

Lets hope this move is successful. After all, he only got his Knighthood for "shopping".

[youngmafbog]

I think this is a difficult one.

If we go round stripping knighthoods because we dont like people like Sir Shifty, whose business went down the pan, I think we are heading to a totalitarian State.

Now if he was prosecuted and found Guilty of a serious misdemeanor then yes strip the person of the title.

If I have my way there would be no Titles anyway so no problems either!

[mikey4444]

I agree with most of what you say YMB, but it sticks in my craw to see this supercilious man being dragged in front of Commons Select Committees, to explain the complete fiasco of thee collapse of BHS, promising to do something about the situation for the pensioners, and doing begger-all.

If anyone wanted a good reason to stop these daft awards, you need look no further that Green. He didn't get his award for being a Lifeboat volunteer, or raising huge sums for charity, but for "shopping"

He could solve the problems of the BHS pension schemes with some small change lying around on a drawer somewhere. He has just taken delivery of his new £100M yacht.

[andy-hughes]

YMB - //If we go round stripping knighthoods because we dont like people like Sir Shifty, whose business went down the pan, I think we are heading to a totalitarian State. //

The proposal to strip Sir Philip of his knighthood is not based on personal animosity - even though there is plenty of it about.

It is because of the loss of thousands of jobs over the sale of BHS which he seriously mis-handled.

Contrary to the perception that may be given, the decision is not made by Parliament, it goes to the Honours Committee, and depending on their ruling, a request to divest the knighthood goes to the Queen who has the final say.

[ToraToraTora]

strip it or don't but I don't see why the commons has to vote on it. The PM dishes these out so the PM should also take them back.

[andy-hughes]

TTT - //strip it or don't but I don't see why the commons has to vote on it. The PM dishes these out so the PM should also take them back. //

The PM doesn't dish them out - he or she recommends individuals seen as suitable to the Honours Committee. The Honours Committee makes it choices, and tells the PM who passes them on to the Queen, who then agrees, or not - obviously it is usually a rubber-stamp from her.

To remove an honour, the procedure has to be undertaken in reverse - and again, the Queen decides.

[ToraToraTora]

ok so let the honours committee do it.

[andy-hughes]

TTT - //ok so let the honours committee do it. //

They may well do so, but there is no guarantee with these things.

A committee doesn't like to have its judgement - in terms of sanctioning the gong - questioned and requests for it to be overturned, so it may not happen for that reason.

[jno]

if honours can be dished out for good things you've (supposedly) done, I don't see why they can't be taken away when you do bad things.

This goes double when the bad things are in the same field as the good things. It makes more sense than taking one off Savile, as if the charitable work for which he got it suddenly didn't exist.

If knights are in effect told that they only keep the honour if they behave properly - well, good.

[Gromit]

Green hasn't done anything illegal. He has not been prosecuted or found guilty of anything.
So on what basis are we to take his honour away?