The disgraced former Chief Executive of the Royal Bank of Scotland, Sir Fred Goodwin, is to have his knighthood reviewed by the Forfeiture Committee according to Cabinet Secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell. 

The Pendle MP, Gordon Prentice, formally asked the Forfeiture Committee on 23 April to consider whether Sir Fred should retain the knighthood awarded to him in 2004 for services to banking. 

Speaking from his constituency earlier today, the MP said: “Sir Gus tells me forfeiture normally follows a finding of guilt by a regulatory, judicial or other competent authority on the basis of evidence put to it.”  

The MP continued: “Sir Fred was the central figure in the collapse of a major Scottish institution. It is clear that he behaved recklessly, disregarding the possible catastrophic consequences of his decisions. In these circumstances, retaining a knighthood awarded “for services to banking” strikes me as bizarre.”  

The MP added: “As we all now know, Sir Fred has no banking qualification so the intervention of a professional body is impossible.”  

“Sir Gus talks about relevant precedents. I fear, with Sir Fred Goodwin, we are breaking new ground.” 

Note to Editors: Sir Gus O’Donnell’s letter reads: 

Dear Gordon 

Thank you for your letter of 23 April requesting that the Forfeiture Committee should consider whether Sir Fred Goodwin should retain the knighthood awarded to him in 2004 for services to banking. 

As Denis Brennan explained at the meeting of the Select Committee on Public Administration on 23 march, the Forfeiture Committee does not have a role in supervising or monitoring the subsequent activities of all those who have been granted honours by the State. 

Its role is rather to consider cases for forfeiture in the light of evidence put to it and relevant precedents. The normal sources of such evidence are judgements by the Courts or by the appropriate regulatory or other professional bodies. Recent examples of cases where an honour has been forfeit include: 

• A Company Director forfeited his CBE after he had been disqualified from serving as a Director following an investigation by the Department of Trade and Industry.
• A doctor was struck off the Register after an Official Inquiry into a series of deaths at a major hospital. His OBE was forfeited.
• A Man pleaded guilty in Court to a forgery charge relating to the information on which his MBE was awarded. His MBE was forfeited.
• An individual was convicted by the Court of dangerous driving and sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment. His MBE was forfeited.

 As you will see, in all of these cases there was a clear determination of guilt by the appropriate Regulatory, Judicial or other competent authority on the basis of evidence put to it. The Forfeiture Committee then decided whether the individual’s honour should be forfeited. The Committee is not normally involved prior to any findings by the appropriate authorities. 

I will of course put the points you have made to the Forfeiture Committee, which will look at them against the background I have sketched out above and decide whether any action on its part is appropriate. 

In common with practice in the remainder of the honours system, the Committee does not comment on individual cases which are put to it. Any decisions on forfeiture are published in the London Gazette. 

Gus O’Donnell