You will be disappointed to learn that applications to become a Freeman (or woman, presumably) of the City of York are now closed, according to the city council’s website. So, if you have an association with that historic and noble and graceful city, and are eager to play a role in the stewardship of “City Strays” (800 acres of green space within its boundaries) and administering “the rights to pasture”, I’m afraid you’re going to be out of luck.
But wait. There may be a vacancy very soon. A week today, a vote is taking place in the council chambers of this ancient, historically significant city to strip the erstwhile Duchess of York, now plain old Sarah Ferguson, of her honorific right to Freedom of the City of York. This is an extraordinary meeting of councillors, in more than one respect. The sole agenda item is whether to revoke Ferguson’s symbolic title, a question that might appear to be little more than a performative piece of virtue-signalling from publicity-seeking civic officials.
There was no good reason to give her Freedom of the City in the first place – it was awarded in 1987 merely as an extra reward for marrying Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor – and there seems no good reason to take it away from her now, other than the time-honoured sport of kicking someone when they’re down.
Ferguson has made many misjudgements in her private and business life; she may not have been the best role model for her daughters, and, of course, she is tainted by association with her ex-husband and her subsequent friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. I can understand why the elders of York might find her dishonourable and not want her associated with their city, but, in the end, her biggest crime may turn out to be her Budgie the Little Helicopter books.
Indeed, you could make a case that she has already paid the price for her various indiscretions; not in a court of law, but in the court of public opinion, a much less merciful arena. She has been defenestrated, dispossessed, derided and disgraced. So you have to wonder what the councillors of York feel they are achieving by stripping her of a title that we never knew she had. Do they really think they are giving moral leadership? I know we live in an age of outrage and censoriousness, but I can’t help feeling that Ferguson is an easy target.
She has never held public office. She has not shaped policy or wielded institutional power. She has not been found guilty of corruption. She has been foolish and toe-curlingly indecorous and irresponsible and has clearly, for much of her life, had a keen eye on the main chance. But look at all the people (almost exclusively men) whose offences are much more serious and have kept their knighthoods or their places on the benches of the House of Lords, or even, maybe, the Freedoms of cities.
Another public censure for Ferguson, the removal of an outdated and ceremonial title, feels disproportionate, and maybe even opportunistic.
York’s councillors have enough to worry about – the £28.5m overspend on the still unfinished Station Gateway project, or finding an equitable solution to city centre congestion, for example – without having to assemble next week to debate an issue that is of no consequence to the good people of York, or indeed to anyone else, and possibly also to Ferguson.
I never thought it was possible to feel even a modicum of pity for Ferguson. But this act of small-minded and meaningless retribution has done the trick.
Hence then, the article about no one wants to say it but i pity fergie was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( No one wants to say it, but I pity Fergie )
Also on site :