Post Office scandal: Hero Alan Bates should refuse a ‘tainted’ honour

Published

1 year ago

January 14, 2024

admin

The TV drama series Mr Bates vs The Post Office has had such impact because it suddenly humanised a widespread miscarriage of justice which had been reported on with seemingly little public outcry for at least a decade.

Instead of dry court reports, documentaries and articles, millions of viewers could see, acted out, how the devastating and false charges of dishonesty destroyed the lives and livelihoods of the sub-postmasters and mistresses.

Hundreds of people were directly affected but the drama offered up a hero and a villain: Alan Bates, who has doggedly fought for his colleagues over two decades and Paula Vennells, chief executive of the Post Office from 2009 to 2019, when the abuses were at their worst.

Any drama needs lead characters but it is perhaps a uniquely British trait that popular reaction to the shocking revelations has concentrated on what titles they should and should not receive from the honours system.

Well over a million people signed a petition demanding that Ms Vennells should lose her CBE.

In the face of unbearable pressure, including from the prime minister, and facing an investigation by the Forfeiture Committee, she gave it up voluntarily last week.

A rather smaller number, in the tens of thousands, backed the “Honour Alan Bates” petition by the weekend.

But the pressure is on him in the other direction, to accept one.

Once again Downing Street weighed in saying it would be “common sense” he should be recognised.

Mr Bates previously turned down an OBE, a lower rank in the British Empire Order, so long as Ms Vennells had the higher Commander of the British Empire.

Now he says “if anyone chooses to offer me one, then come back and ask me”.

Honours – from the humble MBE, Member of the British Empire, all the way up to Knights and Dames – are in the sole gift of the monarch, known as the “Fount of Honour” in this context.

They are usually only awarded on the recommendation of the prime minister after various sub-committees have considered nominations and requests.

Since 1997, peerages conferring seats in the House of Lords for life have been formally separate from the system.

Apart from automatic appointments for some Church of England bishops and judges, they are political appointments in the gift of the prime minister and party leaders, even when those accepting peerages opt to be non-aligned.

These appointments are the greatest pieces of patronage open to the prime minister and the only honours with a potential cash value.

Peers get a vote in a law-making chamber and can claim a basic £342 for every day they attend parliament, plus some travel and accommodation expenses.

Honours are intended to give people recognition “for their valuable service and contribution, perhaps to charity, to the emergency services, or to their industry or profession”.

Some recipients or the organisations they work for eagerly seek nomination for awards.

John Major told a parliamentary committee that dealing with such requests was one of the most unpleasant aspects of being prime minister.

Others rule themselves out.

Those who have rejected honours include Rudyard Kipling, Graham Greene, David Bowie, Nigella Lawson, Jon Snow, LS Lowry, John Le Carré, Claire Tomalin, Michael Frayn, John Cole and David Dimbleby.

Reasons vary. Some, including French and Saunders, say they see no reason why they should be honoured for doing what they enjoy.

Others, especially journalists, have qualms about being rewarded by the establishment they are supposed to be holding to account.

The author Graham Greene, like some others of the most distinguished in British society, held out until tempted by the most exclusive honours.

Greene accepted membership of the orders in the gift of the monarch alone: the Companionship of Honour (65 members) and the Order of Merit (25 members).

Honours lists have increasingly become celebrity hit parades, sprinkled with actors, pop stars, and TV personalities for the amusement of the masses.

The system and the recipients have also been embarrassed by subsequent revelations – as the Conservative Baroness Michelle Mone is discovering.

It is hit and miss whether those caught up in controversy lose their honours – unless, like Ms Vennells, they surrender them.

Most at risk are pillars of their profession who are subsequently disbarred or businesspeople caught up in financial scandal.

Lord Kagan and Jack Lyons had their knighthoods “annulled”. So did Fred “the Shred” Goodwin of RBS and James Crosby of HBOS, at his request, after the credit crunch.

But, in spite of a vote to remove it by MPs, it seems that, technically, Sir Philip Green of the Arcadia group still holds his.

Honours expire with death so it remains moot whether the late Sir Jimmy Savile has been de-knighted.

Until 2014, it was impossible to kick out members of the House of Lords. A reform act now means that they can be expelled if they receive a prison sentence of a year or more. It is also permitted to resign altogether from the Lords, although this is not the same as taking “leave of absence”, as Lady Mone is now doing.

Most countries have honours systems such as France’s Legion D’Honneur and the congressional and presidential medals of honour in the US.

The difficulty with the British system is that it is so extensive and contains so many different gradations.

In his evidence to MPs, Graham Smith of the Republic Campaign argued: “Rather than simply recognising people, you are elevating them and implying there is a structure within society in which some people have a higher status than others.

“I do not think that is appropriate in a democratic society where we are all supposed to be recognised as equal citizens with political equality, if not other forms of equality.”

Politicians and judges who are still serving are banned from receiving the Order of Canada. But British honours are also dished out by political leaders to others who are still politically active; in the case of Lords, until they die.

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown chose not to have a resignation honours list. David Cameron revived the practice and put 15 aides into the House of Lords.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Boris Johnson got to install 30-year-old Charlotte Owens and 31-year-old Ross Kempsell into the upper chamber for life. Even Liz Truss, prime minister for 49 days, made her own appointments.

It is well established that major donors to political parties buy themselves a golden ticket to elevation. To those who say the UK is not as corrupt as other countries, my reply is: “What about the Lords?”

Defenders of the UK system say it is valuable because of the hundreds of unsung heroes and heroines who receive recognition. They tend to get the lower honours, while the top gongs – CBEs, peerages etc – go to the already powerful. They are receiving crumbs from a tainted table.

Alan Bates deserves all the respect and praise we can give him, for his defiance of corporate, judicial and political indifference, his decency and his honourable determination to clear the name of so many and obtain compensation for them. My advice to the people’s hero, however, is do not “Arise Sir Alan”.

UK

‘It was a storm… now it’s a hurricane’: Has the cost of living crisis been forgotten?

Published

17 mins ago

April 11, 2025

admin

'It was a storm... now it's a hurricane': Has the cost of living crisis been forgotten?

With £99 a month to live off Aida has turned to a food bank.

“It’s very difficult. Extremely difficult. But I have to live,” says Aida Mascarenhas. The 75-year-old tells us £99 is all she has left after paying her bills. Aida’s accommodation is provided by the local authority.

“Ninety-nine pounds in a month – even for bedding, pillows or something. So many things for a house.”

At the food bank, Aida is called forward to collect handouts to get her through the week.

It’s three years since we last visited this food bank at the Marks Gate Community Hub in Romford, Essex, when the cost of living crisis was being described as the worst in a generation.

After three grinding years of making ends meet, the food bank organiser – and her clients – tell us things aren’t improving. In fact, they feel things have got even worse.

Cost of living calculator: How much are your bills rising?

“Overall the cost of living crisis has gone up considerably since three years ago. It’s worse,” says Asma Haq, founder of the Marks Gate Relief Project.

“For charities like us it was a storm anyway and now it’s a hurricane. We are busy non-stop.”

Asma is running around calling people forward – offering them basics like potatoes, pasta and spices.

She tells us some always come early, anxious the supplies will run out.

Next in line at the food bank is a woman dragging a large suitcase – pulling the zip back to shove in a large bottle of cooking oil and anything else the food bank will give her.

Asma describes almost all the people who come to the hub as non-white British, first-generation migrants.

She says most have broken or no English with little to no computer skills and want help to access a changing benefits system.

“It’s also about so many other barriers they face. A lot aren’t tech-savvy. They used to get a lot of council tax support which has been reduced considerably.

We’ve had people literally put their phones in our faces and say ‘do it for us’.”

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

The threads of why people say they’re struggling weave through all communities. Across the road from the community centre we talk to people who again and again tell us they feel the cost of living has been forgotten about.

One woman tells us: “I don’t know how people are going to live. They keep putting it up and up and up. It’s everything. You’re worrying about the gas bill, the electric bill, the council bill.

“And I know people that’s desperate and they cannot pay their bills and they’re worried about ending up in court.”

Continuing to retrace our steps from three years ago, we head back to Barking in east London and revisit a launderette where we meet a familiar face – Myriam Sinon who has worked in the business for the last 10 years.

I ask her if she imagined we would be standing here three years after we last met and things wouldn’t have improved.

“I didn’t expect that it would be worse,” she says.

Myriam says electricity prices have quadrupled in the past three years – but the launderette has not increased prices, fearing it would drive customers away.

Everyone needs to wash things and she says people are finding ways to share the cost – gathering up washing from people they know to create a maximum load for the machines.

People are hoping to see an end in sight. But Myriam has a stark prediction if things don’t improve.

“There will be crime every time,” she says. “When people don’t get enough money they start stealing. They might kill you for a watch or phone.”

UK

Starmer says government will fund further local grooming gangs inquiries if ‘needed’

Published

17 mins ago

April 11, 2025

admin

Starmer says government will fund further local grooming gangs inquiries if 'needed'

The government will fund any further local inquiries into the grooming gangs scandal that are deemed necessary, Sir Keir Starmer has said.

However, the prime minister said it is his “strong belief” that the focus must be on implementing recommendations from the Alexis Jay national review before more investigations go ahead.

Politics latest: ‘Our position hasn’t changed’ on tariffs, says minister

It follows a row over whether Labour is still committed to the five local inquiries it promised in January, after safeguarding minister Jess Phillips failed to provide an update on them in a statement to parliament hours before it closed for recess on Tuesday.

Instead, Ms Phillips told MPs that local authorities will be able to access a £5m fund to support locally-led work on grooming gangs.

On Thursday morning, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper insisted the “victim-centred, locally-led inquiries” will still go ahead, while a Home Office source told Sky News more could take place in addition to the five.

Speaking to Sky News’ Rob Powell later on Thursday, Sir Keir confirmed that there could be more inquiries than those five but said the government must also “get on and implement the recommendations we’ve already got”.

The prime minister said: “Of course, if there’s further local inquiries that are needed then we will put some funding behind that, and they should happen.

“But I don’t think that simply saying we need more inquiries when we haven’t even acted on the ones that we’ve had is necessarily the only way forward.”

Ms Phillips’s earlier comments led to accusations that the government was diluting the importance of the local inquiries by giving councils choice over how to use the funds.

Sky News understands she was due to host a briefing with MPs this afternoon at 5pm – the second she had held in 24 hours – in an attempt to calm concern amongst her colleagues.

Review recommendations ‘sat on a shelf’

Sir Keir insisted he is not watering down his commitment for the five local enquiries, but said the Jay recommendations were “sitting on a shelf under the last government” and he is “equally committed” to them.

He added: “At the most important level, if there is evidence of grooming that is coming to light now, we need a criminal investigation. I want the police investigation because I want perpetrators in the dock and I want justice delivered.”

In October 2022, Professor Alexis Jay finished a seven-year national inquiry into the many ways children in England and Wales had been sexually abused, including grooming gangs.

Girls as young as 11 were groomed and raped across a number of towns and cities in England over a decade ago.

Prof Jay made 20 recommendations which haven’t been implemented yet, with Sir Keir saying on Thursday he will bring 17 of them forward.

However, the Tories and Reform UK want the government to fund a new national inquiry specifically into grooming gangs, demands for which first started last year after interventions by tech billionaire Elon Musk on his social media platform X.

‘Fuelling confusion’

Reform leader Nigel Farage said the statement made by Ms Phillips “was one of the most cowardly things I have ever seen” as he repeated calls for a fresh inquiry.

Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, also told Sky News that ministers were “fuelling confusion” and that the “mess.. could have been avoided if the government backed a full national inquiry – not this piecemeal alternative”.

Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said the government needed to look at “state failings” and she would try and force a fresh vote on holding another national inquiry, which MPs voted down in January.

‘Political mess’

As well as facing criticism from the Opposition, there are signs of a backlash within Labour over how the issue has been handled.

Labour MPs angry with government decision grooming gangs

Mhari Aurora

Political correspondent

@MhariAurora

With about an hour until the House of Commons rose for Easter recess, the government announced it was taking a more “flexible” approach to the local grooming gang inquiries.

Safeguarding minister Jess Philips argued this was based on experience from certain affected areas, and that the government is funding new police investigations to re-open historic cases.

Speaking on Times Radio, former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission Sir Trevor Phillips called the move “utterly shameful” and claimed it was a political decision.

One Labour MP told Sky News: “Some people are very angry. I despair. I don’t disagree with many of our decisions but we just play to Reform – someone somewhere needs sacking.”

The government has insisted party political misinformation was fanning the flames of frustration in Labour.

The government also said it was not watering down the inquiries and was actually increasing the action being taken.

But while many Labour MPs have one eye on Reform in the rearview mirror, any accusations of being soft on grooming gangs only provides political ammunition to their adversaries.

One Labour MP told Sky News the issue had turned into a “political mess” and that they were being called “grooming sympathisers”.

On the update from Ms Phillips on Tuesday, they said it might have been the “right thing to do” but that it was “horrible politically”.

“We are all getting so much abuse. It’s just political naivety in the extreme.”

‘We will leave no stone unturned’

Ms Phillips later defended her decision, saying there was “far too much party political misinformation about the action that is being taken when everyone should be trying to support victims and survivors”.

“We are funding new police investigations to re-open historical cases, providing national support for locally led inquiries and action, and Louise Casey… is currently reviewing the nature, scale and ethnicity of grooming gangs offending across the country,” she said.

“We will not hesitate to go further, unlike the previous government, who showed no interest in this issue over 14 years and did nothing to progress the recommendations from the seven-year national inquiry when they had the chance.

“We will leave no stone unturned in pursuit of justice for victims and will be unrelenting in our crackdown on sick predators and perpetrators who prey on vulnerable children.”

UK

Prince Harry visits war victims in Ukraine

Published

6 hours ago

April 10, 2025

admin

Prince Harry visits war victims in Ukraine

Prince Harry has visited war victims in Ukraine as part of his work with wounded veterans, a spokesperson has said.

The Duke of Sussex was in central London this week for a Court of Appeal hearing over his security arrangements in the UK.

The visit on Thursday to Lviv in western Ukraine, which has frequently been targeted with Russian missiles, was not announced until after he was out of the country.

Harry, who served 10 years in the British Army, visited the Superhumans Center, an orthopaedic clinic in Lviv that treats and rehabilitates wounded military personnel and civilians.

The prince, 40, was accompanied by a contingent from his Invictus Games Foundation, including four veterans who have been through similar rehabilitation experiences.

A spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex said Harry had been invited by the centre’s CEO, Olga Rudneva, a year ago, and at the Invictus Games Vancouver Whistler 2025, which took place in February.

Harry travelled to the centre, which offers prosthetics, reconstructive surgery and psychological help free of charge, to see first-hand the support they provide at an active time of war.

The duke, who served two tours in Afghanistan, met patients and medical professionals while touring the centre, the spokesperson said.

During his trip to Ukraine, he also met members of the Ukrainian Invictus community, as well as Ukraine’s minister of veterans affairs, Natalia Kalmykova.

Helping wounded soldiers has been one of Harry’s most prominent causes, as he founded the Invictus Games in 2014 to offer wounded veterans the challenge of competing in sports events similar to the Paralympics.

Harry is the second member of the royal family to visit Ukraine since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of its smaller neighbour in February 2022.

His aunt, Sophie, the Duchess of Edinburgh, made an unannounced visit to Ukraine’s capital of Kyiv last year.