Should we change or abolish the honours system?
Poll: Should we change or abolish the honours system?
Total Members Polled: 221
Discussion
Every year there is a lot of discussion about who got honours, who didn’t and which honours people received.
Like many things in the UK it is something I’ve grown up with without questioning too much but it does seem a bit strange, particularly with celebrities and politicians getting honoured for what seems to be their day jobs (or for just being famous/been famous a long time/know the right people).
For me I think that honours should be restricted to those people who have selflessly done something to help others/society without compensation or perhaps at cost to themselves. For me that would exclude almost all politicians as they get paid to do the job and also want to do the job. That wouldn’t exclude politicians if they did something outside of politics that was worthwhile.
Celebrities and sportspeople should generally be excluded. Most of them have become rich and/or famous for their skills so I am not sure why they should get honours for doing what they love. People who win gold medals are mainly doing it for themselves not the nation.
Similarly no civil servants and public officials that are in paid employment should be honoured for just doing their job, however well (or badly) they do it.
Personally I think that politicians should not be involved in the selection process. It is very hard to make things fair but we should at least try. If there is even a risk of awards being seen as connected to someone in power then they shouldn’t be granted.
Other people’s thoughts?
Like many things in the UK it is something I’ve grown up with without questioning too much but it does seem a bit strange, particularly with celebrities and politicians getting honoured for what seems to be their day jobs (or for just being famous/been famous a long time/know the right people).
For me I think that honours should be restricted to those people who have selflessly done something to help others/society without compensation or perhaps at cost to themselves. For me that would exclude almost all politicians as they get paid to do the job and also want to do the job. That wouldn’t exclude politicians if they did something outside of politics that was worthwhile.
Celebrities and sportspeople should generally be excluded. Most of them have become rich and/or famous for their skills so I am not sure why they should get honours for doing what they love. People who win gold medals are mainly doing it for themselves not the nation.
Similarly no civil servants and public officials that are in paid employment should be honoured for just doing their job, however well (or badly) they do it.
Personally I think that politicians should not be involved in the selection process. It is very hard to make things fair but we should at least try. If there is even a risk of awards being seen as connected to someone in power then they shouldn’t be granted.
Other people’s thoughts?
I voted for major reform. One point regarding your post is that lots of celebs/sportspeople get awards for things they do on top of their obvious stuff. eg charity work. OK - they use their celebrity in doing so but I still think they should be eligible for recognition.
For instance, I'm a big fan of Dame Penelope Keith. She didn't get made a dame for posh acting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penelope_Keith
For instance, I'm a big fan of Dame Penelope Keith. She didn't get made a dame for posh acting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penelope_Keith
Edited by Randy Winkman on Wednesday 1st January 10:38
I think it needs reform, but I'm not sure I agree with the exclusions. I think anyone should be able to gain an honour, even if as part of their work, but they must have made a significant and enduring positive benefit to society.
I think military personnel should be eligible, as should those in the scientific and medical research sectors. So too a politician who works tirelessly to rebuild his or her community and achieves great success should be eligible, likewise a public sector worker who goes above and beyond expectations and contributes to society.
It should be restricted in numbers, not related to someone's protected characteristics and not political. It should also be free from influence and corruption, especially religious or financial interference.
In my humble opinion of course.
I think military personnel should be eligible, as should those in the scientific and medical research sectors. So too a politician who works tirelessly to rebuild his or her community and achieves great success should be eligible, likewise a public sector worker who goes above and beyond expectations and contributes to society.
It should be restricted in numbers, not related to someone's protected characteristics and not political. It should also be free from influence and corruption, especially religious or financial interference.
In my humble opinion of course.
Why not just leave it as it is? There’s no gain (in any real terms) for a recipient, no loss if you don’t get one. It affords no privilege or cash rewards and, as with everything, would end up costing the tax payer an absolute f
kload of money to change, scrap or reform. To me, it’s no different to your teacher giving you a star to stick on your jumper at primary school when you got your spellings right. Leave it as it is, it affects no-one.
kload of money to change, scrap or reform. To me, it’s no different to your teacher giving you a star to stick on your jumper at primary school when you got your spellings right. Leave it as it is, it affects no-one.Yet again the luvvies, politicians, sports personalities etc. roll up for the annual gong show for which the VAST majority get well paid for.
Meanwhile Mrs Smith the local school lollipop lady who for 4 hrs a day, nearly everyday, in all weathers, is out there helping others and no cost.....for year after year.....The foodbank helpers.... the charity volunteers......days and nights.....putting in their own money to help others......
Its a joke.
Meanwhile Mrs Smith the local school lollipop lady who for 4 hrs a day, nearly everyday, in all weathers, is out there helping others and no cost.....for year after year.....The foodbank helpers.... the charity volunteers......days and nights.....putting in their own money to help others......
Its a joke.
Having recently tried to nominate someone at work for an honour, there are some quite strict criteria to follow.
Voluntary work adds a huge amount of weight to a nomination. However this can be hard to quantify in a nomination if you don't know the person that well outside of work as you're not allowed to discuss the nomination with the nominee or their family.
So it's almost of case of their voluntary work needing to be so well known publicly that you don't need to speak to other people to ask about it.
Voluntary work adds a huge amount of weight to a nomination. However this can be hard to quantify in a nomination if you don't know the person that well outside of work as you're not allowed to discuss the nomination with the nominee or their family.
So it's almost of case of their voluntary work needing to be so well known publicly that you don't need to speak to other people to ask about it.
Getragdogleg said:
Honours only for outstanding actions of public good.
Zero honours for paid civil service employees of all ranks for simply doing what they are paid to do.
I know that lots of people will groan since I'm open about the fact I've been a civil servant for 40 years but ........... all of the junior civil servants I know who have had an honour (MBE) have not got it just for doing their job. Even for 40+ years. Like the celebs I spoke of in an earlier post, they have got the honour for also doing charity stuff or related stuff like support for colleagues with health issues or disability. When it comes to senior civil servants it's another matter though. Always the way I guess, public or private sector. Zero honours for paid civil service employees of all ranks for simply doing what they are paid to do.
If you are handing them out to every Tom, Dick and Harry that have been in the public spotlight for a while, then I don't see the point, it lessens the point of the honour. I cannot understand how Saddiq Khan has popped up on the list!! That is just infuriating.
Like many have said, it should be for people that have gone over and above the call of duty and have directly benefitted those around them, without a need for doing so other than because they want to selflessly help people. Mr Khan does not tick any honours box in my book.
Like many have said, it should be for people that have gone over and above the call of duty and have directly benefitted those around them, without a need for doing so other than because they want to selflessly help people. Mr Khan does not tick any honours box in my book.
Skeptisk said:
For me I think that honours should be restricted to those people who have selflessly done something to help others/society without compensation or perhaps at cost to themselves. For me that would exclude almost all politicians as they get paid to do the job and also want to do the job. That wouldn’t exclude politicians if they did something outside of politics that was worthwhile.
You disagree with Winston Churchill being honoured then? romft123 said:
Yet again the luvvies, politicians, sports personalities etc. roll up for the annual gong show for which the VAST majority get well paid for.
Meanwhile Mrs Smith the local school lollipop lady who for 4 hrs a day, nearly everyday, in all weathers, is out there helping others and no cost.....for year after year.....The foodbank helpers.... the charity volunteers......days and nights.....putting in their own money to help others......
Its a joke.
Do you know how many “ordinary” members of the public receive honours each year? Meanwhile Mrs Smith the local school lollipop lady who for 4 hrs a day, nearly everyday, in all weathers, is out there helping others and no cost.....for year after year.....The foodbank helpers.... the charity volunteers......days and nights.....putting in their own money to help others......
Its a joke.
There’s hundreds just in this New Year list alone and they far, far outweigh the celebs in number.
Muzzer79 said:
Skeptisk said:
For me I think that honours should be restricted to those people who have selflessly done something to help others/society without compensation or perhaps at cost to themselves. For me that would exclude almost all politicians as they get paid to do the job and also want to do the job. That wouldn’t exclude politicians if they did something outside of politics that was worthwhile.
You disagree with Winston Churchill being honoured then? romft123 said:
Yet again the luvvies, politicians, sports personalities etc. roll up for the annual gong show for which the VAST majority get well paid for.
Meanwhile Mrs Smith the local school lollipop lady who for 4 hrs a day, nearly everyday, in all weathers, is out there helping others and no cost.....for year after year.....The foodbank helpers.... the charity volunteers......days and nights.....putting in their own money to help others......
Its a joke.
Do you know how many “ordinary” members of the public receive honours each year? Meanwhile Mrs Smith the local school lollipop lady who for 4 hrs a day, nearly everyday, in all weathers, is out there helping others and no cost.....for year after year.....The foodbank helpers.... the charity volunteers......days and nights.....putting in their own money to help others......
Its a joke.
There’s hundreds just in this New Year list alone and they far, far outweigh the celebs in number.
A relative of mine was awarded an MBE - he was also reaching the end of his career as a civil servant, running a department. (He's an old-school civil service guy, definitely sees it as his job to serve the public rather than appease the politicians of the day)
He got the MBE for his charity work - it was related to his day job but ultimately he was the main person who had established the charity in his area and spent an awful lot of his own time running it for years and it genuinely made a lot of difference to a lot of people's lives.
He's very proud of it of course, and he deserved to be recognised. It would be a terrible shame if the system was abolished as it means a lot to a lot of the people involved, including those who are nominating people for them.
Even if it does seem annoying that celebrities or frankly useless politicians get the same awards just for doing their jobs, badly
He got the MBE for his charity work - it was related to his day job but ultimately he was the main person who had established the charity in his area and spent an awful lot of his own time running it for years and it genuinely made a lot of difference to a lot of people's lives.
He's very proud of it of course, and he deserved to be recognised. It would be a terrible shame if the system was abolished as it means a lot to a lot of the people involved, including those who are nominating people for them.
Even if it does seem annoying that celebrities or frankly useless politicians get the same awards just for doing their jobs, badly
Randy, my statement still holds up in light of your post.
If the civil servant has done outstanding charity work then yes, they should be rewarded, just like anyone else.
MPs, politically connected people, sadiq Khan and friends and family of Boris don't qualify in my opinion. They have done nothing of merit.
If the civil servant has done outstanding charity work then yes, they should be rewarded, just like anyone else.
MPs, politically connected people, sadiq Khan and friends and family of Boris don't qualify in my opinion. They have done nothing of merit.
I don't mind the Honours system so much as the House of Lords.
As far as I'm aware the Honours system doesn't create a material cash burden on the taxpayer whereas each member of the HOL gets £300 per day plus expenses for usually doing sweet foxtrot alpha apart from turning up. It's the epitome of "Snouts in Troughs". It needs to be streamlined and the appointment process made more transparent.
As far as I'm aware the Honours system doesn't create a material cash burden on the taxpayer whereas each member of the HOL gets £300 per day plus expenses for usually doing sweet foxtrot alpha apart from turning up. It's the epitome of "Snouts in Troughs". It needs to be streamlined and the appointment process made more transparent.
Halmyre said:
Has this sudden call for change perhaps been triggered by London's Mayor getting a K?
I don't recall same levels of outrage and demands for change on PH when Boris Johnson's "aide" got elevated to the Lords.
Yeah, no surprise there. Or BJ's brother and father.I don't recall same levels of outrage and demands for change on PH when Boris Johnson's "aide" got elevated to the Lords.
Like it or not SK has been repeatedly re-elected and a lot of people think he's been a good thing. And now his team is in charge.
Getragdogleg said:
Randy, my statement still holds up in light of your post.
If the civil servant has done outstanding charity work then yes, they should be rewarded, just like anyone else.
MPs, politically connected people, sadiq Khan and friends and family of Boris don't qualify in my opinion. They have done nothing of merit.
Cheers. I dont want to suggest we are at odds with each other. I just wanted to stress that there is a risk in people thinking that because someone is a celebrity, sportsperson or does job X they have got an honour for simply doing that. It's just the way they are described/presented to paint a picture of who they are, including by the media. If the civil servant has done outstanding charity work then yes, they should be rewarded, just like anyone else.
MPs, politically connected people, sadiq Khan and friends and family of Boris don't qualify in my opinion. They have done nothing of merit.
Like Penelope Keith getting an honour and being described as an actress with a bit of film of her picking up a sack and knocking people over.
Countdown said:
I don't mind the Honours system so much as the House of Lords.
As far as I'm aware the Honours system doesn't create a material cash burden on the taxpayer whereas each member of the HOL gets £300 per day plus expenses for usually doing sweet foxtrot alpha apart from turning up. It's the epitome of "Snouts in Troughs". It needs to be streamlined and the appointment process made more transparent.
Absolutely this. Ludicrous.As far as I'm aware the Honours system doesn't create a material cash burden on the taxpayer whereas each member of the HOL gets £300 per day plus expenses for usually doing sweet foxtrot alpha apart from turning up. It's the epitome of "Snouts in Troughs". It needs to be streamlined and the appointment process made more transparent.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff