Select Committee on Public Administration Written Evidence


Memorandum by Mike Parr (HON 46)

Should recommendations for honours be more open?

  Yes. Why have any secrecy at all. To what end does it serve.

What is the honours system for—to reward service or pre-eminence, or to encourage high national values?

  This raises the more general question: to whom are honours awarded, and why. As it stands the honours system appears devalued. Quite why it is necessary to give awards to television/film/media/sporting personalities is difficult to understand. Success in any of these fields should be an end in itself. By contrast, I knew a chap that received an OBE, for services rendered to the local lifeboat organisation plus a long time contribution to local youth clubs. Perhaps a greater focus on such individuals and an elimination of the "usual class of suspects" will restore some dignity to the system. Furthermore, such a refocusing could encourage higher national values. Pictures and articles in national newspapers about people that have provided unstinting service to the community (either as public servants or ordinary citizens) is likely to do more to public attitudes (by providing appropriate role models) than watching yet another A/B/C grade celeb receive an OBE or whatever at Buck Palace. I would add, that although many sporting personalities are wholly admirable people and make excellent role models, the more successful already have considerable media exposure—I would suggest that they don't need more. Perhaps the focus of the honours system needs to be more on the "ordinary people" that provide the glue which holds society together.

Does the honours system really motivate public servants?

  Different things motivate different people. To be motivated by the idea that you will/may be given an honour suggests a person that is unbalanced. The honours system with respect to public servants should be used to make awards to those "public servants" that in the view of their peers have provided outstanding service—to the public. The impression at the moment is that it is used to improve the status of the "Humphrey Applebys" of this world. People lower down "the scale" but who none the less provide wonderful services at the "public coal face"if such a thing could be imagined, should be given greater prominence.

Is there any need for an honours system at all in the UK?

  The list of honours available is amazing (I'll take two MBEs and a KGB please plus a topping of OBE). The echoes of Empire are, in the 21st Century laughable. I believe that there should be a simple set of awards for public servants. There should be another set of awards for the public for either extraordinary service in extraordinary circumstances or for life time service in a voluntary capacity. Perhaps the government should give some consideration to either the French or German systems of awards. Frankly, at the moment, I'd rather have a Legion D'Honeur that any of the awards being offered by HMG/HM.

  I have noticed that many of the honours are in the gift of the queen. It should be made clear that this is the case and the government should separate itself from these, thus achieving the clarity (and integrity) which is now missing.

February 2004





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 13 July 2004