England’s redesigned banknotes will reveal how the country sees itself

Written by Pavan Mano, Lecturer in Global Cultures, King's College London

The Bank of England has announced a redesign of its banknotes and invited the public to suggest new themes that might feature on them. Victoria Cleland, the Bank of England’s chief cashier, said this ^[1] was as “a symbolic representation of our collective national identity and an opportunity to celebrate the UK”.

Even though they can appear like the unifying symbols Cleland suggests, my research shows ^[2] that there are contradictions that surround many national symbols. They are not as unifying as they might seem. In fact, in many cases they also work to exclude people.

For a long time, there has been a persuasive argument about belonging and the nation. As one of the grand theorists of the nation, Benedict Anderson, once put it, the nation is an “imagined political community”^[3].

The idea here is that the nation is simply a collection of people who form a community together, something larger than themselves. And national symbols are supposed to represent this community. As such, national symbols are often taken as markers of belonging.

But what is often overlooked is the exclusionary element of the nation. In my book, Straight Nation ^[4], I show how for some people to belong to a nation, others must be portrayed as not belonging. It can be difficult to pinpoint exactly how one belongs to the nation; it is far easier to point at someone else and declare that they do not.

The invitation to contribute to the redesign will therefore show two things. It will tell us how the country sees itself. It will also demonstrate the contradictions around national symbols and the exclusions they can produce. The former perhaps more straightforward than the latter.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here ^[5]. How does England see itself? In theory, the banknote is a perfectly neat national symbol. It is an object that is only valid within the borders of the state it is issued in, so the images printed on it can be treated as representations of the nation. Current notes feature images of historically significant characters: former prime minister Sir Winston Churchill, author Jane Austen, painter J.M.W. Turner and scientist Alan Turing ^[6].

Jane Austen is one of only three women who have been on the banknote. Dudaeva/Shutterstock ^[7]

Indeed, the Bank of England has suggested that images should not be “divisive”^[8]. In other words, they need to be as inclusive as possible. But in the current political environment, far-right politics and division have become extremely commonplace both globally and closer to home.

In the US, the current administration has squarely taken aim at diversity, equity and inclusion programmes ^[9] and launched a massive wave of deportations ^[10]. Across much of western Europe, far-right parties are going from strength to strength ^[11].

In the UK, rightwing Reform has emerged as the party that would win the most seats ^[12] if a general election were held this year. The current prime minister, Keir Starmer, recently gave a speech where he warned the UK risked becoming an “island of strangers”^[13] without tougher immigration policies.

Amid these political currents, it will be interesting to see which themes and images are eventually chosen to adorn the new banknotes from the consultation which closes at the end of July. The designs will be instructive not least because they will show how how the current climate translates onto these notes as well as how the country sees itself.

For instance, there has never been a person of colour and only three women have previously featured on a banknote. It would be a a long time coming if this were to change.

The exclusions at the heart of national symbols

Perhaps more importantly, however, is the ironic contradiction around asking for the public’s views on banknotes when banknotes are disappearing from public view.

At the start of this year, Lloyds Banking Group announced it would be closing 136 ^[14] of its high street banks. This follows a broader trend. Since 2015, banks have closed more than 6,000 branches, and the number of cash machines has fallen by more than 7,000 ^[15] between June 2021 and June 2024.

Banking is becoming increasingly digital and carried out through a smartphone app. A growing number of establishments have gone entirely cashless ^[16].

A sign stating that only contactless and card payments are accepted.

More and more retailers are only accepting contactless and card payments. William Barton/Shutterstock ^[17]

Many people are affected by this, including those with disabilities, older people, those living in rural areas and small businesses ^[18]. Not only is cash no longer king, it is barely in the building.

When it is redesigned, the new banknote will be released into an environment where it is less used and, in a growing number of establishments that have gone entirely cashless, will be almost entirely unwelcome.

National belonging is often romanticised. There is a sense that nationalism and unity go hand in hand, and that the nation is simply a basin of belonging. National symbols are portrayed as a matter of pride.

We do not know yet what designs they will bear when the crisp new banknotes are issued. But we do know that they will be issued in decreasing quantities ^[19] and many people will find it harder to get their hands on them. That captures the contradictions of national symbols, and the exclusions they produce.