Joe Lycett has put his money where his mouth is, shredding £10,000 of his own cash after David Beckham failed to end his controversial multimillion-pound World Cup promotion deal with Qatar.
Wearing a rainbow-coloured ruffled top, and noise cancelling headphones to protect his ears, Lycett tossed in the cash in two goes, with the resulting shreds spewing out of the end of a wood-chipper.
Remaining expressionless throughout, the 34-year-old star then curtseyed to the camera, and exited left.
Image: David Beckham attended the Doha Forum in March
The Brummie comedian, who is known for his high-profile stunts, had posted an ultimatum on social media last week, warning the former England star that along with the cash, Beckham‘s “status as a gay icon will be shredded”.
Lycett had directed the message to Beckham personally and had said he would donate the money to LGBTQ+ charities if the sports star ended the sponsorship deal ahead of the tournament.
However, Beckham did not publicly acknowledge or respond to the ultimatum.
While it is illegal in the UK to deface a banknote in any way (through the Currency and Banknotes Act of 1928), it is not illegal to destroy a banknote altogether, for example through burning.
More on Qatar
Related Topics:
However, if Lycett had burned the equivalent number of dollars in the US, or destroyed £10,000 of coins, he could have faced prosecution for his actions, as burning or destroying money in America is illegal, as is destroying coins minted after 1969 in the UK (according to the Coinage Act of 1971).
Lycett, set up a dedicated website to livestream the shredding, which took place in a dingy, brick-walled building at midday on Sunday, just before the World Cup opening ceremony.
Advertisement
He later shared a video of the act on Twitter and wrote “A platform for progress”.
His original video issuing the ultimatum showed him sat at a desk with wads of cash, praising Beckham as a gay icon and joking that marrying a Spice Girl was “the gayest thing a human being can do”.
Going on to explain that Qatar was “voted as one of the worst places in the world to be gay”, he then appealed to Beckham to rethink his deal with the Middle East country.
It has been reported that Beckham signed a multi-million-pound deal with the FIFA World Cup hosts, which Lycett said was worth £10m – but other reports have put as high as £150m.
Image: Lycett dressed flamboyantly for the occasion. Pic: Joe Lycett
Qatar has faced an onslaught of criticism since being chosen as the host nation, with the country’s poor human rights record and ban on same-sex relationships proving particularly problematic.
In Qatar, participating in same-sex sexual activity can be punished with up to seven years in prison, or even the death penalty.
The safety of migrant workers and the logistics of holding a football tournament in desert heat has also attracted negative attention.
Three days before the shredding, Lycett shared a message he had sent to Beckham’s PR team asking: “Could you let me know if there’s any chance he might budge on his position, or am I to expect radio silence on this?”
Adding: “There’s still time for David and his team to do the right thing”. He also shared a picture of the £10k and the red woodchipper he would go on to use to shred it.
There had been a mixed response to the comedian’s pledge to destroy the money, with some praising him for raising awareness of Qatar’s poor human rights record and criminalisation of LGBTQ+ people, while others urged him to donate the money to a food bank rather than shredding it at a time when the cost of living is soaring.
Ahead of the shredding, fellow comedian Harry Hill wished Lycett luck, saying he would be “voting with my feet” and not watching any of the World Cup, or buying any products endorsed by Beckham.
Beckham had recently impressed the public with his distinctly un-starry approach to viewing the Queen laying in state, queuing for 13 hours to pay his respects. The negative press around his association with Qatar may now be sullying some of the good-will he has built up.
Image: Bill Drummond performing with The KLF in 1992. Pic: Richard Young/Shutterstock
It’s not the first-time stars have hit the headlines for burning money.
In 1994, electronic band The KLF burned £1m as a work of performance art. Bill Drummond and Jimmy Cauty torched the cash – which represented the bulk of the money they had previously earned from their music – in the back of a disused boathouse on the Ardfin Estate on the Scottish island of Jura.
Sky News’ royal commentator has explained why Prince Andrew has not given up being called a prince – while another expert has said “the decent thing” for him to do would be “go into exile” overseas.
Andrew announced on Friday that he would stop using his Duke of York title and relinquish all other honours, including his role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.
However, he will continue to be known as a prince.
Royal commentator Alastair Bruce said that while Andrew’s other honours and titles were conferred to him later in life, he became a prince when he was born to Elizabeth II while she was queen.
He told presenter Kamali Melbourne: “I think […] that style was quite special to the late Queen,” he said. “And perhaps the King, for the moment, thinks that can be left alone.
“It’s a matter really for the King, for the royal household, perhaps with the guidance and advice of government, which I’m sure they are taking.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Who pushed Andrew to drop his titles?
Since Andrew’s announcement, there has been speculation over whether any further measures will be taken – and one author has now called for him to “go into exile”.
More on Prince Andrew
Related Topics:
Andrew Lownie, author of The Rise And Fall Of The House Of York, said: “The only way the story will go away is if he leaves Royal Lodge, goes into exile abroad with his ex-wife, and is basically stripped of all his honours, including Prince Andrew.”
Royal Lodge is the Windsor mansion Andrew lives in with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, who has also lost her Duchess of York title.
Image: Andrew and his former wife continue to live on the Windsor estate. Pic: Reuters
Mr Lownie continued: “He makes out he’s an honourable man and he’s putting country and family first. Well, if he is, then the optics look terrible for the monarchy. A non-working royal in a 30-room Crown Estate property with a peppercorn rent.
“He should do the decent thing and go. And frankly, he should go into exile.”
Mr Lownie added if the Royal Family “genuinely want to cut links, they have to put pressure on him to voluntarily get out”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:11
Windsor’s take on Prince Andrew
Andrew’s decision to stop using his titles was announced amid renewed scrutiny of his relationship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, and fresh stories linked to the late Virginia Giuffre.
Ms Giuffre, who was trafficked by Epstein, alleged she was sexually assaulted by Andrew on three occasions – which he has always vigorously denied.
But what about his style ‘prince’? Some want that ditched too.
It’s a complicated but not impossible process. Andrew could, of course, just stop using it voluntarily.
Some want him to give up his home, too. For a non-working royal, the stately Royal Lodge, with its plum position on the Windsor Estate, is an uncomfortable optic.
With the reputation of the monarchy at risk, William does not want to appear weak. He’s putting loyalty to “the firm” firmly above his familial relationships.
Prince Andrew has always strongly denied the allegations, and restated on Friday: “I vigorously deny the accusations against me”. Sky News has approached him for comment on the fresh allegations set out in the Mail on Sunday.
But with Virginia Giuffre’s tragic death and posthumous memoir due out on Tuesday, Buckingham Palace will be braced for more scandal.
When Andrew gave up his titles, there was certainly a sense of relief.
There is now a sense of dread over what else could emerge.
Bereaved families whose loved ones took their own lives after buying the same poison online have written to the prime minister demanding urgent action.
Warning: This article contains references to suicide
The group claims there have been “multiple missed opportunities” to shut down online forums that promote suicide and dangerous substances.
They warn that over 100 people have died after purchasing a particular poison in the last 10 years.
Among those who have written to Downing Street is Pete Aitken, whose daughter Hannah was 22 when she took her own life after buying the poison from a website.
Hannah was autistic and had ADHD. She was treated in six different mental health hospitals over a four-year period.
He said: “Autistic people seem to be most vulnerable to this kind of sort of poison and, you know, wanting to take their lives.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:05
Pete Aitken speaking to Sky News
Sky News is not naming the poison, but Hannah was able to buy a kilogram of it online. Just one gram is potentially fatal.
“There’s this disparity between the concentration required for its legitimate use and that required for ending your life. And it seems quite clear you could make a distinction,” Mr Aitken said.
Analysis from the Molly Rose Foundation and the group Families and Survivors to Prevent Online Suicide Harms says at least 133 people have died because of the poison. It also says coroners have written warnings about the substance on 65 separate occasions.
The report accuses the Home Office of failing to strengthen the regulation of the poison and says not enough is being done to close dangerous suicide forums online.
Lawyers representing the group want a public inquiry into the deaths.
In a joint letter to the prime minister, the families said: “We write as families whose loved ones were let down by a state that was too slow to respond to the threat.
“This series of failings requires a statutory response, not just to understand why our loved ones died but also to prevent more lives being lost in a similar way.”
The group’s lawyer, Merry Varney, from Leigh Day, said: “The government is rightly committed to preventing deaths through suicide, yet despite repeated warnings of the risks posed by an easily accessible substance, fatal in small quantities and essentially advertised on online forums, no meaningful steps have been taken.”
Image: Hannah’s dad is one of the family members to have signed the letter
A government spokesperson said: “Suicide devastates families and we are unequivocal about the responsibilities online services have to keep people safe on their platforms.
“Under the Online Safety Act, services must take action to prevent users from accessing illegal suicide and self-harm content and ensure children are protected from harmful content that promotes it.
“If they fail to do so, they can expect to face robust enforcement, including substantial fines.”
They added that the position is “closely monitored and reportable under the Poisons Act, meaning retailers must alert authorities if they suspect it is being bought to cause harm”.
“We will continue to keep dangerous substances under review to ensure the right safeguards are in place,” they said.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.