A plan for remove Winston Churchill from British banknotes has sparked an immediate political backlash, as the RSPCA urges designers to feature urban animals, including rats and pigeons. The debate focuses on who and what should represent national identity over species used in the UK, and why designs should change now.
Many elected officials say Churchill’s place on currency is part of how the country remembers World War II and the fight against fascism. Animal welfare advocates counter that modern ratings should reflect the way people live today, including shared spaces between humans and wildlife in cities.
“Politicians are furious that Churchill is being replaced on banknotes.”
Background: How Britain Picks Faces for Its Money
Bank of England notes typically pair the monarch on the front with a historical figure on the reverse. The current polymer £5 note, introduced in 2016, depicts Churchill. Past notes have highlighted writers, scientists and artists, such as Jane Austen and Alan Turing.
The Bank typically selects themes, calls for applications and consults with advisory groups before finalizing designs. The goal is to represent achievements across fields and eras. Any move to remove Churchill would fit into this established cycle of renewal, although the choice of a replacement often sparks debate.
Showcasing animals would mark a change. While British coins and notes have long represented national symbols and heritage, the use of specific urban wildlife as primary imagery would be new for the current series.
Animal rights activists push for urban wildlife
The RSPCA’s pro-rat and pigeon campaign reflects a wider campaign to change the way people think about animals that live alongside humans. Supporters say rats and pigeons are intelligent and adaptable, and that they play a role in the city’s ecosystem, even though they are often hated.
Proponents argue that putting this cash on bank notes could:
- Promote respect for wildlife in cities.
- Invite better public policy on humane control and sanitation.
- Promote education about coexistence with the animals that many people see every day.
They also note that several countries include native animals on their currency to celebrate biodiversity. They say introducing the idea to the UK would align designs with environmental values and modern living.
Political fury and fears of erasing history
Opponents in Parliament view Churchill as a symbol of national determination. They say his dismissal risks downplaying a leader linked to a defining moment of the 20th century. Some warn that the change could spark recurring struggles over which historical figures “deserve” a place on money, turning banknotes into cultural battlegrounds.
Critics also question whether rats and pigeons would divide public opinion. They argue that the notes should unite the country with figures who have gained lasting recognition in political, scientific, cultural or military fields.
What is at stake for the Bank of England
The Bank faces more than just a design question. Its choice will indicate which values Great Britain wishes to promote in daily life. It must balance tradition, education and public acceptance with the desire to refresh and expand representation.
Previous selection rounds have tested public opinion through nominations and shortlists. A similar approach could help here, ensuring that any decision is based on clear criteria. If the Bank is interested in animals, it could associate wildlife with a theme, for example urban ecology or public health, to provide context and avoid confusion.
Public opinion, practicalities and the way forward
The public reaction will be important. People manipulate notes daily and the images become a kind of shared story. Surveys, school programs and links with museums could strengthen support for any Bank decision.
Designers should also consider security features and how images are read on a small scale. Detailed portraits of people have long been successfully working on polymer notes. Animal portraits would require testing to ensure they are clear and difficult to forge.
The coming months will show whether the Churchill replacement project holds water and whether animal imagery gains ground. The central question is simple: should banknotes honor the heroes of the past, reflect life today, or both? A transparent process, clear criteria and public participation can decide the outcome. For now, the debate has opened up a broader discussion about identity, memory and the everyday objects that carry them.
