Do we need to know?

Privacy and super-injunctions again.  A member of the House of Lords used parliamentary privilege to reveal that Sir Fred Goodwin ("Fred the Shred") had obtained a super injunction to prevent details of an alleged affair he had had with "a senior colleague" being published.  Difficult to understand the logic.  It seemed to be based on the idea that as the taxpayer - you and me - have a substantial financial stake in the Royal Bank of Scotland, we are thereby entitled to know about the private life of the man who was its boss when it collapsed.  Can't see it myself.  If the suggestion is that this alleged affair in some way led to that collapse, then there might be some merit in making it public, but as far as I am aware, no such suggestion has been made.  So once again we seem to have a situation where the media want to publish a salacious story about someone in the news purely to sell more papers or garner more viewers.  I think people's consensual activities behind closed doors should be off limits.