How does Prime Minister John Key justify allowing ‘Sir' Douglas Graham to retain his title? Surely this devalues the meaning of such an honour? It's a perfect example of the curate's egg adage.
But John maintains weakly Douglas' dishonesty refers to a specific situation. Presumably his nasty part has nothing to do with the 'rest” of his character? Then John compounds it by weakly adding ‘Sir' Douglas may choose not to use the title. And that is supposed to be reassuring.
D. Holm, Otumoetai.