Alan Bates Knighted

[Camberman]

It is excellent news that Alan Bates, who has tirelessly campaigned in respect of the Post Office scandal for decades, has been knighted in the King's birthday honours. I cannot think of a more deserving recipient. Far more deserving than those people that are given honours for their political "achievements" or their donations to political parties!!

Do people agree with Sir Alan receiving this award?

Edit:

Link to story here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511l0j4l2p

The new Sir Alan Bates famously took action after more than 900 Post Office colleagues were prosecuted for stealing because of incorrect accounting information from a computer system he had repeatedly complained about.

 

[AlterEgo]

I'm obviously pleased about Alan Bates and his hard work deserves recognition, but the award of a knighthood seems a bit strange to me.

The honours system is broadly a way of co-opting people into the Establishment, so when they give it to people who've been very difficult to the Establishment I'm rather sceptical.

 

[Hadlow Road]

Here I can only hope that the excellent news about Sir Alan Bates proves the exception to your rule.

 

[AlterEgo]

Here I can only hope that the excellent news about Sir Alan Bates proves the exception to your rule.

Likewise! I'm a cynic, but I do hope for the best.

 

[Gloster]

Although he is far more deserving of an honour than many (well, most) of those who get them, I am surprised that he did not refuse it as the matter is still far from settled. It does have the slight feeling of the government recommending him in the hope that a bit of the credit will wash back onto them, while Charles is going along with them in order to make this archaic system seem relevant. (I will concede that, once the recommendation has been made, Charles’s can’t really turn it down.)

 

[Purple Train]

Although he is far more deserving of an honour than many (well, most) of those who get them, I am surprised that he did not refuse it as the matter is still far from settled. It does have the slight feeling of the government recommending him in the hope that a bit of the credit will wash back onto them, while Charles is going along with them in order to make this archaic system seem relevant. (I will concede that, once the recommendation has been made, Charles can’t really turn it down.)

In the BBC report, I seem to remember Sir Alan said that, having turned down an OBE last year because Paula Vennells still had her CBE, he didn't want to turn his honour down this time because it would be "insulting [those who supported him] as much as anyone else".

(A link to the report can be found here.)

He had already rejected the offer of an OBE last year, telling the Honours Committee that it would be inappropriate to accept it whilst Ms Vennells kept hold of her CBE for services to the Post Office and many victims continued to suffer.

Ms Vennells handed back her CBE earlier this year amid mounting pressure in the aftermath of the ITV drama in January which sparked national outrage over the scandal.

“I went and had a confidential talk with somebody who knows what’s gone on over the years and they said to me, 'well you’ve done the heavy lifting, others are doing the rest now.' And on reflection, I knew so many people who were keen for me to actually receive something, I felt I would be insulting them as much as anyone else if I refused it at this time," Sir Alan said.

 

[Shrop]

In answer to the the starting point of the thread, I have no problem whatsoever with Sir Alan Bates receiving a knighthood, his tireless work defending victims of organised theft and cover-ups at the highest level for many years makes him a credit to every working person. However, that award should have indicated that the rights and wrongs of this case were all known and fully understood, but not much has been done and now I feel the need for a rant.

How is it that several months later, the Post Office is still holding on to money that it stole from innocent people? Like the 91 year old lady in the news today who, decades after being criminalised and forced to live without money she had earned through genuine hard work, is now still being told to fill in countless more forms in order to get her own money back.

Not only are those guilty of theft from innocent people in the first place, still roaming around unpunished and (I guess) still entitled to their pensions, but according to news stories today, it seems that the cover-ups are still continuing. We know that those Governing our country allowed this to go on for many years even when it was brought to their attention, yet even with a new Government it seems that little has changed. Should we just accept that this is how our country runs, ie where the ability to use weasel words all too often leads to success in management, and apparently also to an immunity from punishment even when caught for doing what "lesser" people would undoubtedly be jailed for?

 

[Gloster]

The b******ds have had years of being allowed to get away with it and perfecting their delaying tactics, so they haven’t fully realised that the tide has finally turned. At the same time they are holding on until they can retire with a nice fat bonus. Labour may, I say ‘may’, be doing its best, but they are up against long-standing (and lying) entrenched self-interest.

 

[Harpo]

When the dramatisation was broadcast, I was shocked by how few people seemed to be aware of the PO scandal. Politicians’ sudden rush to appear moved by it, suggested that they had taken advantage of that ignorance.

Bringing powerful people to account meaningfully seems to be a national weakness, as seen with Hillsborough, Grenfell, Covid procurement, etc..

 

[alex397]

Bringing powerful people to account meaningfully seems to be a national weakness, as seen with Hillsborough, Grenfell, Covid procurement, etc..

There will always (hopefully) be publications like Private Eye holding powerful people to account. However, PE doesn’t have the widespread reach like the mainstream media (often when I mention PE, people haven’t even heard of it). And the mainstream media, particularly the newspapers, are often far too biased to hold the powerful to account. The Daily Mail will certainly not report on the non-dom tax status of Lord Rothermere for example!
It does appear that in Britain, you can get away with a lot by being rich and powerful. Thats probably the case in many other countries too but I only really know about case studies from the UK, and hear things about London being the money laundering capital of the world.