Animals are especially well suited to modern anti-counterfeiting design
In a quiet but telling act of national reimagination, the Bank of England has invited the British public to choose which native creatures — puffins, dolphins, bumblebees, foxes among them — will replace the historical figures long enshrined on the nation's currency. The redesign is, at its practical core, a security measure, yet it carries the deeper suggestion that a society's money reveals what it chooses to honour. That the announcement stirred political controversy before the shortlist was even published speaks to how charged the question of national symbols remains, even when the subject is a hedgehog.
- Before the Bank had said a word publicly, politicians were already denouncing a redesign built largely on rumour — Nigel Farage warned of beavers replacing Churchill, a species that never made the shortlist.
- Eighteen native British species now compete for four spots on the £5, £10, £20, and £50 notes, displacing Jane Austen, Winston Churchill, and Alan Turing in the process.
- The RSPCA pushed back from the opposite direction, arguing the Bank should use its platform to rehabilitate unloved creatures — pigeons, rats, seagulls — rather than crowd-pleasers.
- Public voting runs until July 3, but popularity is not the only arbiter — the Bank will reject any combination of animals too visually similar to distinguish at a glance.
- New notes remain years away, as the design and anti-counterfeiting testing process is long and deliberate, leaving the shortlist for now as an open question about what Britain wants to see in its wallet.
The Bank of England has unveiled eighteen native species — puffins, bottlenose dolphins, bumblebees, red foxes, hedgehogs, white-tailed eagles, Atlantic salmon, and more — as candidates for the next generation of British banknotes. If chosen, they will replace the historical figures currently occupying the notes: Jane Austen, Winston Churchill, Alan Turing.
The announcement arrived already trailing controversy. Before the Bank had published anything, Nigel Farage claimed Churchill was to be replaced by a beaver, and Kemi Badenoch called the whole exercise "a silly thing to do." The beaver, as it turned out, was never under consideration. The political noise had outrun the facts.
The Bank was clear that the redesign is fundamentally a security measure — banknotes are periodically updated to incorporate new anti-counterfeiting technology — and that wildlife imagery serves both the technical demands of modern currency design and an opportunity to reflect British biodiversity. Several shortlisted species, including the Atlantic salmon and the marsh fritillary butterfly, are endangered, lending the exercise a quiet conservationist undertone. The RSPCA, meanwhile, urged the Bank to go further and champion overlooked animals — pigeons, rats, seagulls — creatures that rarely inspire affection.
The public may vote until July 3, selecting up to two species from each of three categories. The Bank will then choose four animals for the four denominations, with the firm condition that the chosen creatures must look sufficiently distinct from one another to keep the notes easy to tell apart. Sheer popularity will not be enough if two similar-looking species top the polls. New notes, whenever the winners are decided, remain several years from circulation.
The Bank of England has chosen eighteen native species to compete for a place on the nation's next generation of banknotes. Puffins, bottlenose dolphins, bumblebees, and red foxes are among the candidates. If selected, they will displace the historical figures who have long occupied these notes—Jane Austen, Winston Churchill, and Alan Turing among them. The shortlist arrived wrapped in political controversy that, in hindsight, seems to have been built on rumor.
Before the Bank even announced its choices, critics had begun circling. Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, claimed the institution wanted to replace Churchill with a beaver. Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative Party leader, called the entire enterprise "a silly thing to do." Farage himself declared it "absolutely crackers." The beaver, it turned out, never made the shortlist at all. The mammals under consideration include dolphins, foxes, hedgehogs, hares, seals, and pine martens. The birds range from puffins to white-tailed eagles. The third category—amphibians, insects, and fish—encompasses everything from Atlantic salmon to marsh fritillary butterflies, creatures far less recognizable to most people than the politicians they would replace.
The RSPCA weighed in with its own critique, though from a different angle. The organization suggested the Bank should champion less beloved animals: pigeons, rats, seagulls. The implication was clear—if you're going to use banknotes as a platform for wildlife, use it to shift public affection toward creatures people typically ignore or despise.
But the redesign is not primarily about celebration. The Bank of England framed it as a security measure. Banknotes are updated periodically to incorporate the latest anti-counterfeiting technology and accessibility features. The wildlife imagery, the Bank explained, provides an opportunity to showcase another important dimension of British identity. Animals, it turns out, are especially well suited to the technical demands of modern currency design. A panel of wildlife experts assembled the shortlist. All species included are native to Britain. Several are endangered—the Atlantic salmon, the marsh fritillary butterfly—which adds a layer of purpose beyond aesthetics.
The public now has until July 3 to vote. The rules are specific: voters can select up to two examples from each of the three categories. The Bank will use these votes to choose four distinct animals for the four denominations—£5, £10, £20, and £50. But popularity alone will not determine the outcome. The Bank has made clear that animals selected must look sufficiently different from one another so that the notes remain easy to distinguish at a glance. Two similar-looking species, no matter how many votes they receive, cannot both be chosen. The designs will also incorporate different elements of the natural world to complement whichever animals win through.
Victoria Cleland, the Bank's chief cashier, expressed hope that the public would engage with the consultation. She emphasized the "rich variety of wildlife" the UK has to celebrate. The Bank acknowledged that several years will pass before any new notes enter circulation. The design and testing process is lengthy, methodical, and cannot be rushed. For now, the shortlist stands as an invitation—a chance for the public to choose which creatures will become the face of British currency, and which historical figures will, at last, step aside.
Notable Quotes
The shortlisted animals demonstrate the rich variety of wildlife we have to celebrate in the UK.— Victoria Cleland, Bank of England chief cashier
A silly thing to do— Kemi Badenoch, Conservative Party leader, on the redesign
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did the Bank of England decide to put animals on banknotes instead of keeping historical figures?
The primary reason is security. Banknotes need updating every so often to stay ahead of counterfeiters, and animals turn out to be technically better suited to modern anti-counterfeiting features than portraits. But the Bank also saw an opportunity—a way to celebrate British wildlife while they were redesigning anyway.
So the political backlash about replacing Churchill with a beaver—was that based on anything real?
No. The beaver never made the shortlist. It seems the criticism arrived before anyone had actually seen what the Bank was proposing. Once the real shortlist came out, it was clear the Bank had been more cautious than the rumors suggested.
Why would the RSPCA criticize the choice if it's meant to celebrate wildlife?
Because they saw a missed opportunity. The animals on the shortlist—puffins, dolphins, foxes—are already well-liked. The RSPCA wanted the Bank to use its platform to shift public affection toward animals people usually dislike or ignore. Pigeons, rats, seagulls. The creatures we step over.
How will the Bank actually choose which four animals make it onto the notes?
Public voting matters, but it's not a simple majority rule. The Bank needs four animals that look visually distinct from each other—you can't have two similar-looking birds on different notes because people need to tell the denominations apart at a glance. So popularity gets filtered through practicality.
When will people actually see these new notes in their wallets?
Years from now. The design and testing process is slow. The Bank isn't rushing. Right now, this is just the consultation phase. The public votes, the Bank decides, then the real work of turning those choices into currency begins.