'Bank of Wokeness' to ditch historical figures from banknotes in push to reflect modern diversity
It has launched a consultation seeking suggestions from the public that could mean the end of using images of significant characters – Sir Winston Churchill, Jane Austen, artist JMW Turner and code-breaker Alan Turing currently appear.
The Bank suggests that modern issues such as gender, ethnicity and disability could be taken into account when planning the designs, with chief cashier Victoria Cleland saying: 'It may be that we can get that real diversity through a different theme than historic figures.'
But the plans to change the traditional appearance of banknotes – which started in 1970 with William Shakespeare – drew an immediate backlash.
Former business secretary Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg said: 'The Bank of Wokeness wants to ignore our history and heroes to model itself on the unutterable banality of euro notes. It shows a lack of confidence in the nation and a supine kowtowing to the gods of political correctness.'
Kevin Hollinrake, a former business minister, said: 'This is wrongheaded wokery. We should be proud of our history, not sideline it.
'Replacing historical figures with abstract themes risks erasing the rich, complex story of how our country has evolved. Diversity is incredibly important, but we should achieve it by widening the range of historic figures we honour, not by abandoning them altogether.'
The month-long consultation, the Bank said, will give the public 'the opportunity to express their views on what theme they would like us to feature on the next series of our banknotes'.
The month-long consultation, the Bank said, will give the public 'the opportunity to express their views on what theme they would like us to feature on the next series of our banknotes'
The Bank has not said when the new set of notes will be issued, but it identified six 'potential themes', although people who are still alive – other than the monarch – would be excluded.
A mock-up series of designs published alongside the consultation launch feature images of the Angel of the North, windfarms and the DNA double helix.
The final decision will be for the governor, to rule out mischievous ideas such as 'Boaty McBoatface' which was chosen by the public as the name of a new UK polar research ship, which eventually became the Sir David Attenborough.
Ms Cleland said ideas for the designs needed to be 'representative of the UK' but also 'not to be divisive' or 'upset people'.
Campaigners had complained of a lack of women on notes prior to Jane Austen's addition in 2017.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
a minute ago
- Telegraph
Business confidence worse than during Covid
Business confidence has plunged to an all-time low to surpass the pandemic and Liz Truss's mini-Budget after Rachel Reeves unleashed record taxes on employers. Bosses said they were 'frustrated' that the Chancellor had hit businesses with a barrage of cost increases while failing to improve the economic backdrop. The survey published by the Institute of Directors (IoD) showed the share of business leaders reporting they were pessimistic about the economic outlook exceeded those who were optimistic by 72pc. It means bosses are at their most pessimistic since the monthly survey started running in 2016, to outstrip the Covid lockdowns, fraught Brexit negotiations and the aftermath of Ms Truss's disastrous mini-Budget. Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, accused the Government of 'attacking private enterprise with the zeal of a Left-wing student union'. He added: 'Instead of the cuts in spending which are urgently needed, this socialist Government hits businesses with higher taxes, raised energy costs and more trade-union inspired red tape. 'A year ago businesses faced a summer of uncertainty followed by massive tax hikes. Like a bad horror move franchise, the Chancellor seems determined to release a sequel.' Businesses are slashing investment plans and expect to cut back the number of staff they employ, amid falling revenues and soaring costs. Anna Leach, the IoD's chief economist, urged the Chancellor to 'urgently quash rumours of further tax rises for business this autumn, and accelerate planning reforms and de-regulation to restore confidence and drive growth'. She added: 'Companies continue to battle cost increases – particularly arising from the national minimum wage and National Insurance contribution changes – and many are frustrated that while the Government has been quick to raise costs for business, it has been much slower to deliver improvements to the wider business environment. 'Last year, damaging speculation around tax rises in the lead-up to the 2024 Budget caused many firms to pause investment and hiring decisions – contributing to six months of near-zero economic growth. 'We're now living with the economic consequences of those tax hikes, even as uncertainty around future costs once again builds. With ripple effects through the economy from tax changes and signs of consumer retrenchment, many firms report that they are struggling to plan amid a cacophony of risk.' Mel Stride, the shadow chancellor, urged Ms Reeves to 'heed the calls from the Institute of Directors and put to bed speculation about more damaging tax rises'. The economy shrank in April and May, while unemployment is rising and job vacancies are falling as companies cut back spending. October's £25bn raid on employers' National Insurance contributions shocked businesses. The tax rate was increased from 13.8pc to 15pc, and the earnings threshold at which it kicks in was reduced, taking in more part-time workers. The tax rise came into force in April, alongside a 6.7pc increase in the national living wage. Economists estimate that Ms Reeves will have to raise taxes or cut spending to the tune of £20bn or more in the Budget to maintain the buffer against her borrowing rules. But the Government has struggled to make even modest savings, performing about-turns on welfare reform and on the winter fuel payments to pensioners. Two thirds of businesses told the IoD they need action on taxes from the Government, with 64pc calling for help with the cost of employment. Half said they want less red tape, and 39pc said they need lower energy bills. An HM Treasury spokesman said: 'UK business confidence is the highest in 10 years, according to a Lloyds Bank survey published only this week. Since the election, we have struck three major trade deals with the EU, US and India, more than £1bn has been invested to fix our national infrastructure and the Bank of England has cut interest rates four times. 'And because of the tax decisions we took at the Budget last year, we have been able to deliver on the priorities of the British people, from investing in the NHS to cutting lists as we deliver on the Plan for Change.'
The Guardian
31 minutes ago
- The Guardian
China-backed centres at UK universities under threat from new free speech laws
Confucius Institutes at universities across England are under threat from new free speech rules, setting off urgent talks between ministers, vice-chancellors and regulators over the fate of the China-backed language and culture centres. Universities fear that the new regulations imposed by the Office for Students (OfS) this month will cause legal headaches with their Chinese partners, including the government in Beijing, and could lead to some being closed. University leaders claim they have been left in the dark by England's regulator over whether or not they are breaking the new rules, which bar foreign governments from vetting staff employed at the institutes. The 20 Confucius Institutes operating in England – including at the universities of Manchester, Coventry and Liverpool – are partnerships between each university, a Chinese university, and an arm of the Chinese state that provides funding. They offer Mandarin classes and promote cultural events but critics allege they also act as a Trojan horse within the education system. The Department for Education (DfE) said it 'welcomed a range of international partnerships with UK higher education' but that they had to comply with UK laws and regulations. 'It is for individual higher education providers to assess whether the criteria of existing arrangements would have the effect of restricting free speech and take steps to address that,' the DfE said. Jacqui Smith, the skills minister, said the government wanted to ensure that universities were 'places of rigorous debate' for all views. Smith said: 'Any attempt by a foreign state to intimidate, harass or harm individuals in the UK will not be tolerated. The government has robust measures in place to prevent this activity, including updated powers and offences through the National Security Act. 'We are also working directly with the Office for Students to support universities in safeguarding free speech and tackling any form of harassment on campus.' China's embassy in London did not respond to a request for comment. The new guidance is likely to force the universities to rewrite agreements with the institutes or face sanctions for breaching the OfS's free speech regulations in England, particularly new rules that punish universities involved with 'a foreign-funded institute [that] imposes an ideological test' as a condition of employment. One critical group, UK-China Transparency, says Chinese staff applying to work in the institutes have been asked to provide references to their 'political attitude' and be vetted by a committee of China's ruling Communist party. A spokesperson for the OfS said: 'Where universities or colleges enter into agreements with any country, they must ensure that they continue to uphold freedom of speech within the law and academic freedom. Where they cannot do this, they should immediately take all necessary steps to amend or terminate the agreement. 'Our guidance is clear, for example, that the imposition of any kind of ideological test as a condition of employment would be unacceptable.' Several universities contacted by the Guardian declined to comment publicly. But university leaders said they have asked the OfS for more time to investigate and negotiate with their partners. A spokesperson for the OfS said: 'Any institution not meeting their free speech obligations should take urgent action.' A spokesperson for Lancaster University said: 'Lancaster University is fully committed to upholding the right to freedom of speech for all staff and students. Along with our sector colleagues, we are carefully considering if there are any potential implications in the new guidance for our Confucius Institute, which plays an important role in our internationally diverse academic community.' One university said that the situation was complicated by the OfS refusing to indicate which arrangements would be allowed under the new regulations. A spokesperson for Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: 'UK universities are committed to upholding free speech and academic freedom. They work hard to protect these fundamental freedoms and meet significant legal duties in this area set out by the Office for Students. 'This commitment extends to the partnerships universities have with institutions around the world, which bring important economic and social benefits to the UK.'
Telegraph
31 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘A Palestinian state promises to be oppressive, corrupt and radicalised'
Sir Keir Starmer has announced his plan for the UK to officially recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel meets a number of conditions. The Prime Minister laid out these terms in a speech at Downing Street. They include Israel agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza and committing to a two-state solution. In a Telegraph poll, readers were overwhelmingly opposed to the decision, with 86 per cent of over 50,000 voters saying Palestine should not be recognised. Toby Roberts, a Telegraph reader, is stringently opposed to the idea of a Palestinian state, saying: 'There is no evidence the Palestinians are capable of establishing and running a viable state, and a great deal of evidence to suggest that they are not. 'A Palestinian state promises to be oppressive, corrupt, impoverished, aid-dependent, resentful, radicalised, and riven by vicious internal factionalism.' He concludes that it is 'a mystery to me how anyone can think that such an outcome would be in the interests of the neighbouring Arab states or the West'. Margaret Northey, another reader, says Hamas does not want a two-state solution and, as a result of Sir Keir's announcement, 'Hamas will now have even more reason not to agree to a ceasefire'. John Culley echoes this sentiment, expressing dismay that conditions have been imposed on Israel but not on Hamas: 'If we are going to recognise Palestine, surely the conditionality should be aimed at the Palestinians, what about releasing the hostages and Hamas surrendering and/or dissolving itself. 'The current conditional approach still gives the Israeli's a partial veto over the process and incentivises Hamas to try and provoke Israel. It is absolutely bonkers diplomacy.' Nancy Brooks remarks that she thought the report of Sir Keir's announcement must be 'incomplete' as no demand was made that the remaining hostages be released, adding: 'Clearly, a 'solution' is not what this is about, entirely a vote-gathering exercise. Shame on him.' Another reader agrees that the announcement was intended for a domestic as well as international audience: 'Starmer's focus on Gaza is an indication of where power and influence now lies in the Labour Party and the organs of government. 'His pronouncement had nothing to do with peace, justice, morality, or ending the war. It was a piece of theatre pandering to Labour's shrinking voter base; gesture politics of the most shameless kind.' 'The only solution is a two-state one' A minority of Telegraph readers sought to make the case in support of the Prime Minister's announcement, with one saluting Sir Keir for having 'the leadership to stand up to bullying and intimidation from Trump and Netanyahu'. Hedley Smith argues that the announcement did not reward Hamas and 'you either recognise a state out of principle or you don't', adding: 'The conditions of statehood are either met or they are not: it shouldn't be conditional and used like a bargaining chip. I think they should have been a state a long time ago and I don't believe that right can be bargained away.' Nik Hill and Jennifer Morris both take a historical view when it came to arguing in favour of recognising Palestinian statehood. Nik said: 'The UN called for an independent Palestine and Israel to be recognised back in 1947. It's about time it actually happened. 'That's not rewarding Hamas (no Hamas in the West Bank for example). It's simply accepting that the only solution is a two-state one.' Jennifer concurred and cited the Balfour Declaration of 1917 that expressed British support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine but also that the rights of the existing inhabitants would be protected. She says that no government 'stepped in as Israel took more land for their settlements' and that 'it is time to do the right thing' for the Palestinians. 'The Arab world gets it. Starmer doesn't' Many readers also compared and contrasted the reaction of the British state with that of the Arab world. Soon after Sir Keir's announcement, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt called for Hamas to surrender control of Gaza and disarm. Natalie Brooks writes that the Prime Minister's ultimatum to Israel 'has proven to be as ineffectual and meaningless as he is… even Arab nations are suggesting Hamas needs to come to the table'. Other readers weigh in: 'You couldn't make it up! Arab nations insist that Hamas surrenders, while the British Prime Minister (unintentionally, no doubt) offers it encouragement to continue! The Arab world gets it. Starmer doesn't.'
