Geoffrey boycott, knighthoods and criminal convictions
Does giving Geoffrey Boycott a knighthood for ‘services to sport’ send a ‘dangerous message’ because of his conviction 23 years ago?
There has been outcry to the news that Theresa May nominated Geoffrey Boycott for a knighthood. Amongst the critics, Labour’s Dawn Butler MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities, has called for Boris Johnson to rescind Geoffrey Boycott’s knighthood immediately, saying “Celebrating a man convicted of assaulting his partner by giving him a knighthood is an insult to victims and survivors of domestic violence and shows how out of touch and nepotistic the honours list is.”
Louise Haigh, Labour MP for Sheffield Heeley, called Boycott “an embarrassment to Yorkshire”
Is it now Labour policy to not give knighthoods to people with past criminal convictions?
Women’s Aid co-Acting Chief Executive Adina Claire said “Celebrating a man who was convicted for assaulting his partner sends a dangerous message — that domestic abuse is not taken seriously as a crime”.
So does giving Boycott a knighthood show that domestic abuse is not taken seriously as a crime”?
I don’t have any allegiances to Boycott — I don’t know him and I’m not a huge fan of cricket (although I am Yorkshire!) — and my thoughts on this issue don’t cover the broader concerns about the honours system itself — but I don’t see how giving him a knighthood reflects on how serious we as a society take domestic abuse.
If we were to follow that argument logically, then the same could be said for pretty much any criminal offence — that giving an honour (such as a knighthood) to someone with a criminal record somehow condones what they did to get a criminal record in the first place. Unless the circumstances behind both the offences and the actions that led to an honour were somehow connected, I simply don’t accept the link. And we should be careful in where that logic takes us — that somehow ‘offenders’ are a small minority of the population — let’s remind ourselves that there are many people, including those high up in politics, that have acknowledged their own criminal behaviour in their youth — drug-taking springs to mind. That shouldn’t stop them from going on to lead successful lives and be acknowledged accordingly.
What I am concerned about is this issue being presented as a question of whether people with criminal convictions should be able to receive honours like knighthoods.
The fact that Boycott appears to maintain his innocence from 23 years ago may be one of the things that has fuelled the outcry from women’s groups, alongside his “I don’t give a toss” comment on Radio 4’s Today programme earlier this week.
But setting that side, instead of reflecting how serious we as a society take domestic abuse, I think the outcry shows how, increasingly, we are becoming intolerant and are dragging up the past and using it to try and reflect who somebody is today.
If anything, I would say that the outcry to Boycott’s knighthood does itself send a dangerous message — that as a society we want to seek to punish somebody for the rest of their lives.
Charity Women’s Trust said “The honour for Geoffrey Boycott shows how much our attitude as a society needs to change”. I certainly agree that our attitude as a society towards domestic violence needs to change. But I also think the outcry towards Geoffrey Boycott’s knighthood shows how our attitude towards people with past criminal convictions also needs to change.
Written by Christopher Stacey, Co-director of Unlock
Let me know your thoughts on this. Leave a comment below.
