Reader comments · Details of Brian Souter knighthood ‘not in public interest’ · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Details of Brian Souter knighthood ‘not in public interest’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Do any other countries issue out knighthoods etc? What’s the point of any of them, I think if we have to start calling someone Sir, Lady, Lord or whatever then we need to know exactly why we have to …I’d prefer all pompous titles to be got ridden of and if we do have to have them then a proper explanation needs to be given why someone is give it…..

    1. I think it should atleast be an unofficial thing so that you call someone sir if you really respect what they have done. There would be alot less people I would be calling sir or lord etc if it was my list.

    2. Most other countries have some honours or awards systems. Most also have public scrutiny of them

    3. The only one I know of, of which Her Majesty is not the Head of State, is the Vatican!!!!!!!!!

      1. Kenya, France, the USA and other non Commonwealth countries all have honours

        1. apologies, I know Kenya is a Commonwealth country – but its President is head of state

        2. Wrong.
          In the US it is illegal for the government to bestow any titles of nobility like you have in your country. Even though you foolishly call them “honors.”
          We are a republic not a monarchy that is ruled by one queen.

          1. @ pepa: I think it’s fairly obvious Stu was referring to homours like the Presidential Medal of Freedom or the Congressional Gold Medal. As you will know, a knighthood is not a title of nobility and is not heriditary.

          2. typo: ‘honours’ (ahem)

          3. Thanks, Rehan


            Wrong Pepa
            A knighthood or OBE of Damehood is not a title of nobiility. You know that, it has been explained to you previously on these threads yet you continue to postulate falsehoods on these threads.

            In terms of awards, medals and honours that can be awarded by the USA, I was indeed referring to awards such as those Rehan mentions (which was clearly obvious to others!). I also would suggest others such as:
            Distinguished Intelligence Cross, Meritorious Service Medal, Department of Commerce Gold Medal, Medal for the Defence of Freedom, FBI Star etc etc

          4. Jock S. Trap 12 Jul 2011, 11:44am

            My god pepa you don’t alf talk some right sh!t!

      2. @AndyAS: oh? What do you think, looking close to home, chevalier de la légion d’honneur means?

    4. It is to show that they are in and you are out. You are “unequal” to them. Even though STU believes in “equality” he is a liar. He believes in inequality as he like most others, worship the ruling/celebrity class and give power to those who do not deserve it.
      Awards are different, it is when you actually accomplish something, versus demand a title of nobility, class, and special treatment.

      1. Pepa

        You have no idea what I believe in relating to honours or awards – so please do not presume.
        Why does my name have to be shouted? It seems you have taken to putting my name in capitals recently?
        It makes you appear even more deranged than normal.
        As for honours, I think the UK system needs updating and making more for fit for purpose for the modern world – but I do think there is a place (as most nations including the US have) for nations to recognises bravery, contribution to society, meritorious conduct, charitable acts etc etc not for distinction apart and seperate from society but out of recognition of doing something special. I don’t personally think nobility is a good thing. I do support the current Royal family but only because they have served this country well and the alternative is horrific – rather Queen Elizabeth than President Bush any day!
        Now, if you think that is wrong – thats your opinion, but your opinion speaks loud and clear about your views on equality.

      2. Final comment to you (possibly for now), Pepa

        You seem keen to complain about people calling people names. Yet on this thread you had not been present, I had not referred to you and I hadnt even given you a thought, yet you shout my name and call me a liar on the basis of something I havent mentioned. Now thats a strong response that doesnt upset me – because you’re wrong, but couple that with your name called – rapist, paedophile, gay sex activists etc etc – oh and some sort of soft drink fetish wasnt there? – makes it clear that you are either deliberately trying to poison these threads or very confused …

      3. Jock S. Trap 12 Jul 2011, 11:49am

        That is where you are wrong pepa.

        The majority of knighthood, OBE’s, CBE’s, MBE’s etc go to the public for the work they do not by any means the well off or powered people.

        These awards go to people that have done a lot for charity or helping others, for example.
        Very often those with little or no money because their charity is their life.

        If your going to slate a system, at least know your facts not your misguided assumptions.

  2. This would be fishy even without the homophobic angle. The honours system should be entirely transparent. Citizens should know why people have been honoured in their name. Otherwise the only possible conclusion is that “honours” are being handed out in return for political favours (which we know to have been a feature of the “honours” system since its inception).

  3. Alf N. Spit 11 Jul 2011, 12:33pm

    Since the honours are a public reward by our representatives for services to the country or community, i.e. the public, what exactly are the circumstances in which it would not be in the public interest to know the reasons for the honour? It makes no sense at all.

  4. Hopefully he will get his honour soon. Well deserved

    1. hardlyas he has no honour or integrity

  5. Could we find a friendly MP to put down a question in parliament to the minister in charge of the cabinet office, which is (I assume) responsible for advising Her Majesty on the award of honours?

    1. This looks like a very good idea. Appealing to the ICO doesn’t always yield results in my experience.

    2. @Harry57

      I think its a tremendous idea to find a friendly MP to put down a question in parliament. Raises the profile of this issue.

  6. Obviously, they have something embarrassing to hide. So much for government transparency. What a joke!

    1. Eddy - from 2007 11 Jul 2011, 8:35pm

      And we mustn’t stand for it, Robert! Let’s kick up stink! This refusal to comply with the Freedom of Information Act is outrageous.

  7. “We consider that it is in the public interest to maintain the integrity of the honours system … ”


  8. It’s always the ugly ones.

    Look at the state of it.

    1. You couldn’t mark her with an axe.

  9. The Honours system is an utter joke in this country.

    It needs to be scrapped (along with the House of Lords) and replaced with a transparent, and democratic system.

    As it stands Souter deserves his award. He is bigotted scum, therefore exactly the type of reprobate that our pathetic honours system rewards.

    1. In Brian Souter’s case, I think ‘Sir’ is spelled ‘Cur’ !!!!!

  10. This is very disheartening to say the least. I really can’t think of a good reason as to why this is not in the public interest. I can’t make any other conclusion from it other than they don’t want the general public knowing just how corrupt a system it is. All the political parties clearly have a vested interest in keeping it quiet. Perhaps if we knew the truth it would be just one more British institution that we would lose faith in. Leaves me very depressed about whether or not the ‘establishment’ gives a damn about gay people.

    1. Alf N. Spit 11 Jul 2011, 5:13pm

      Maybe News of the World could have helped find out !

  11. God, this country is truly gone to the dogs.

    Such a shame.

    1. I know. We should also knight Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. What a lovely man. And Stephen Green. He’s not mad. The dogs, I tells ya!

  12. Stuart should pursue this with Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as it’s clearly not in the public interest to withhold.

  13. Alex McKenna 11 Jul 2011, 4:57pm

    I’d like to know what he’s done for the country, apart from his buses and trains sucking up as much public money as they can, and destroying competitors to make sure his trough is full enough.
    Party donations I suspect.

    1. Alf N. Spit 11 Jul 2011, 5:16pm

      Well as a way of raising cash for the Crown it goes back many centuries. We’re always told tradition is a good thing.

  14. Why hasn’t PN picked up the ditching of gay equality by the Equalities Commission in favour of religious extremists?
    “Judges have interpreted the law too narrowly in religion or belief discrimination claims, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has said in its application to intervene in four cases at the European Court of Human Rights involving religious discrimination in the workplace.
    If given leave to intervene the Commission will argue that the way existing human rights and equality law has been interpreted by judges is insufficient to protect freedom of religion or belief.” Guardian report on C of E Synod. Angela Mason is our commissioner, she should tell us what’s going on.

    1. Alf, this is extremely serious if true. Could you find a cite please?

      1. I have now found it. I will b taking this up wth the NSS.

        1. Good. They should be intervening on our behalf, not those who want to discriminate against us! What if they set a precedent for the religious countries in Eastern Europe? Gay people there will not be entitled to any services at all!

  15. Eddy - from 2007 11 Jul 2011, 8:34pm

    We mustn’t forget this! And we need to blow this issue up. Either we have a “Freedom of Information” law or we don’t. The cabinet can’t choose in a matter like this, where a person has been given an honour. The reasons for an honour MUST be transparent. The citizens want to know! The government must answer the citizens!

    1. Absolutely. The did not have to reveal the name of the nominees but could have identified if a particular political party were involved etc – they also should have made more comment regarding the tacit approval of homophobia relating to this particular honour.

      1. Staircase2 12 Jul 2011, 1:57am

        I’m sure he could press them on FOI grounds.
        The idea that this is a Data Protection Act issue is clearly nonsense – something tells me FOI requests are probably routinely rejected with only the persistent applications being given due and proper consideration.

  16. I don’t agree with giving our titles of nobility or anything like that, but I do agree with section 28, and should not have ever been repealed.
    Section 28 was a noble reaction the gay sex radicals who want to sexualize children under the pretense of “tolerance” and “equality.” If that is the case why not allow an evangelical homophobe to preach about the “evils” of homosexuality to these kids? Of course you don’t want that, if that is the case you are not for “fairness” nor for “equality” you have an agenda, and that agenda is to get pre-pubescent children sexualized.

    1. Oh for goodness’ sake, you and your “gay sex radicals” – give it a rest! You seem as obsessed with sex as the most extreme evangelist – and you know how they usually turn out.

      1. “and that agenda is to get pre-pubescent children sexualized.”

        Oh, here we go again – Pepa and his disturbed obsession with sex with children. Some should put that creep on the sexual offenders register, he spends too much time thinking about it.

        1. Jock S. Trap 12 Jul 2011, 11:53am

          Indeed he does.

          It is Very disturbing.

      2. Jock S. Trap 12 Jul 2011, 11:52am

        Me thinks pepa is nothing more than a very angry little man.
        (I use the term ‘man’ loosely)

    2. Pepa

      You talk garbage and offensive garbage at that. I know of no person who wants to sexualise people. You seem unable to see that homosexuality is not just about sex, its about people loving each other in relationships and ensuring that homosexuality can not even be mentioned in schools denies children the opportunity to discuss relevant cultural information.

      Now I suspect (and its no more than that) you are spending your weekends at a gay sex activist in denial (whatever one of those is) and horrifying yourself at your actions so project your guilt on the easiest locations a (non US) website where you can condemn others you havent met.

      Go and get some help

    3. Jock S. Trap 12 Jul 2011, 11:50am

      Ah Bless, look everyone, pepa being all controversial….ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

      What a bore.

  17. “Not in the public interest” What a load of manure! if some one in the UK is given a knighthood one would hope that there is outstanding exemplary character and justification to back it up. Building a business? becoming a millionaire, many people do it and many people employ others… but is this alone a justification for a “Knighthood”? when you work objectively and donate over 1 million pounds to vilify a whole segment of British People and deny them rights and entitlements I think it is in the “Public Interest” to justify why they deserve recognition or at least be accountable and substantiate why they are still considered deserving despite the protest and objections to the award.

  18. For we “the Public” – how is the decision made about what we can and can not Know ?

  19. Jock S. Trap 12 Jul 2011, 11:42am

    If it wasn’t in the public interest then why did they give him a knighthood at all?

    1. Exactly. This weasellish excuse really isn’t good enough.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.