Lucky badger or lucky grandpapa
For the first time since 1970, Britain is reconsidering what it chooses to honour in the everyday exchange of value. The Bank of England has opened a public vote on eighteen native species — from puffins to pine martens — to grace the reverse of future banknotes, retiring the faces of historical figures in favour of the natural world. The move has stirred genuine political controversy, touching old questions about whose legacy a nation carries in its pockets, while also quietly reminding us that even the most familiar objects of daily life are, eventually, redesigned by the living.
- A tradition stretching back to 1970 is being broken: historical portraits will no longer anchor the reverse of British banknotes, replaced instead by creatures of field, sky, and water.
- The removal of Winston Churchill from the five-pound note ignited a political firestorm, with Farage, Badenoch, and Davey each condemning the timing or the principle — though Churchill's own granddaughter responded with disarming wit.
- Eighteen shortlisted species — spanning mammals, birds, insects, amphibians, and fish — are now open to public vote, with anyone able to select up to two favourites per category through early July.
- The vote is real but advisory: Governor Andrew Bailey retains sole authority over the final selection, meaning public enthusiasm and institutional judgment may not perfectly align.
- Years of design, security testing, and printing lie ahead before any chosen animal reaches circulation, making this a decision whose consequences will be felt well into the future.
For the first time in more than fifty years, the Bank of England is preparing to remove historical figures from its banknotes, replacing them with British wildlife — and it is asking the public to help choose which animals make the cut.
Eighteen species have been shortlisted across three categories: mammals such as hedgehogs, red foxes, and bottlenose dolphins; birds including Atlantic puffins, barn owls, and white-tailed eagles; and a final group spanning insects, amphibians, and fish — among them buff-tailed bumblebees, common frogs, and basking sharks. Voting runs through early July, with the public invited to select up to two favourites per category. The Bank's chief cashier, Victoria Cleland, described it as a celebration of the diversity of British wildlife.
The announcement provoked a sharp political reaction, centred largely on the departure of Winston Churchill from the five-pound note. Nigel Farage objected loudly, Ed Davey called the timing insensitive given the war in Ukraine, and Kemi Badenoch dismissed the whole exercise. Yet Churchill's granddaughter, Emma Soames, offered a more graceful response — noting she never expected his image to last forever, and suggesting, with dry humour, that whatever animal replaced him ought at least to embody bravery and courage.
The Bank explained the change is partly driven by counterfeiting concerns, which require periodic redesigns for security. A panel of wildlife experts and filmmakers assembled the shortlist, though the final decision rests entirely with Governor Andrew Bailey, who is not bound by the public vote. The RSPCA had campaigned for rats, pigeons, and gulls — arguing for the underappreciated — but only the fox from that list survived to the ballot. New notes will retain the monarch's portrait and home nations imagery; it is the reverse side, long home to figures like Darwin and Turner, that will change. Whatever animals are chosen, they will not appear in circulation for several years yet.
For the first time in more than half a century, the Bank of England is preparing to remove the faces of historical figures from its banknotes. In their place will come animals—and now the public gets to choose which ones.
Eighteen species have made the cut. There are mammals: bottlenose dolphins, brown hares, European hedgehogs, grey seals, pine martens, and red foxes. Birds include Atlantic puffins, barn owls, kingfishers in their common variety, Eurasian curlews, great spotted woodpeckers, and white-tailed eagles. The final category spans amphibians, insects, and fish—Atlantic salmon, basking sharks, buff-tailed bumblebees, common frogs, Emperor dragonflies, and marsh fritillary butterflies. Starting now and running through early July, anyone can vote for up to two favorites in each category. The Bank of England's chief cashier, Victoria Cleland, framed it as a celebration of British wildlife's diversity, inviting the public to engage with a choice that will shape the currency in people's pockets for decades.
The decision to move away from historical portraiture triggered a political storm earlier this year, particularly around the removal of Winston Churchill from the five-pound note. Reform leader Nigel Farage objected sharply, suggesting the Bank wanted to replace wartime leaders with animals like beavers—which, notably, did not survive the selection process. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey called the timing tone-deaf given the war in Ukraine. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch dismissed it as misguided. Yet Churchill's own granddaughter, Emma Soames, offered a more measured perspective when asked about potential replacements. She said she never expected her grandfather's image to remain on currency forever, and when posed the hypothetical of a badger taking his place, she responded with dry wit: "Well, lucky badger or lucky grandpapa." She suggested the replacement should be an animal embodying bravery and courage—qualities the badger, like the beaver, ultimately failed to demonstrate in the selection committee's eyes.
The Bank of England explained that the shift stems partly from counterfeiting concerns; all images on banknotes need periodic replacement for security reasons. A panel of wildlife experts—filmmakers and presenters Gordon Buchanan, Miranda Krestovnikoff, and Nadeem Perera, alongside Ulster Wildlife's Katy Bell and academics Steve Ormerod and Dawn Scott—assembled the shortlist. But here is where public input ends and institutional authority reasserts itself: Governor Andrew Bailey will make the final decision independently. He is not bound by the vote totals. The public consultation is real, but it is advisory.
The animal charity RSPCA had lobbied for rats, pigeons, foxes, and gulls—creatures it described as intelligent and underappreciated. Only the fox from that list appears on the ballot. The process of designing, testing, and printing new banknotes takes years before they enter circulation, so the animals chosen now will not appear in wallets until well into the future. The new notes will retain a portrait of the reigning monarch and imagery representing the home nations, but the reverse side will abandon the tradition of featuring notable historical figures that has defined British currency since 1970. The public has one month to make their preferences known.
Citações Notáveis
The shortlisted animals demonstrate the rich variety of wildlife we have to celebrate in the UK.— Victoria Cleland, Bank of England chief cashier
I never thought the image of my grandfather on the fiver was going to go on forever.— Emma Soames, Winston Churchill's granddaughter
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why did the Bank decide to replace historical figures with animals now, after so long?
The official reason is security—counterfeiting concerns mean all images need to refresh periodically. But the timing and the choice to go with wildlife rather than other historical figures clearly signals a shift in how the Bank thinks about what deserves to be honored on currency.
The political reaction was fierce. Does that surprise you?
Not really. Churchill is sacred to a certain political tradition. Removing him felt like a statement, even if the Bank framed it as purely technical. That's why the granddaughter's response was so interesting—she was saying, essentially, this was always going to happen. Nothing lasts forever on money.
But the public doesn't actually decide, does it?
No. Andrew Bailey, the governor, makes the final call. The vote is real—people genuinely get to express a preference—but it's not binding. He could choose animals that came in fourth or fifth in the public tally.
Why allow the vote at all if he's going to decide anyway?
Legitimacy, probably. If he just announced four animals, it would feel arbitrary. The consultation process makes it feel democratic, even if the outcome isn't determined by majority rule. It's a way of saying the public had a voice, even if the institution retains final authority.
The RSPCA wanted rats and pigeons on the notes. Why did only the fox make it?
That tells you something about what the selection panel valued. Rats and pigeons are common, urban, sometimes seen as pests. The fox is clever and wild but still recognizable as noble. The shortlist skews toward animals people find beautiful or majestic—puffins, kingfishers, eagles. It's not really about celebrating underappreciated creatures. It's about celebrating creatures we already admire.