Appendix A
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFORM
1. A NEW GENERAL
PURPOSE AWARD
SHOULD BE
CREATED
The new award could be called the National Service
Order (or Medal) to mark outstanding service connected with special
events. The order would be similar to bravery awards and only
conferred as the need arose, and so the bi-annual lists would
be phased out and smaller lists issued as required.
The trigger for the award might include special
events such as the foot and mouth outbreak, or a major civil incident
or emergency.
If the option was to create an order then the
degrees would probably use existing names such as commander, lieutenant
and member, while the medal could be granted in bronze, silver
and gold, with provision for the addition of bars for further
service, just as happens today with decorations for gallantry
and many long service medals.
2. THE GARTER
AND THE
THISTLE SHOULD
BE MODIFIED
The Garter (and the Thistle) should be retained,
but with no further home awards, apart from members of the royal
family, and with future grants confined to foreign heads of state.
The orders were effectively distributed by the
prime minister from the 18th century through to 1946, when Attlee
surrendered the right. The KGs named after the Attlee agreement
varied little to those appointed before 1946, and the orders continued
to be dominated by peers, such as the Duke of Buccleuch, where
successive generations have joined the Thistle since Queen Anne's
reign. This all undermines a meritocratic system, as dukes secure
the highest places, and perhaps with no more effort than would
secure a CBE were merit rather than birth the guiding principle.
A reform along the lines suggested was adopted
in Sweden, in the case of its senior order, the Order of the Seraphim,
and this would bring the Garter into line with other European
precedents, including Denmark.
3. THE ROYAL
VICTORIAN ORDER
SHOULD BE
MODIFIED
The Royal Victorian Order would be retained
for overseas purposes.
4. ALL OTHER
HONOURS SHOULD
BE ABOLISHED
In the light of the main recommendations at
1 to 3 above, the Orders of the Bath, St Michael and St George,
the British Empire, the Companions of Honour, the Imperial Service
Order, and the degrees of baronet and knight bachelor would become
redundant, and no further appointments would be made.
The Royal Victorian Chain would no longer be
relevant because of the extension of the Garter to all foreign
heads of state, while the continued existence of the Royal Victorian
Medal is not consistent with class structures of the kind that
were generally dismantled in the 1990s, including the ending of
home recommendations for the British Empire Medal.
Existing members of the orders could retain
their badges and stars, and rather than waste the effort that
has gone into preparing the current lists of recipients-in-waiting
and stocks of insignia, it might be that the old honours would
be discontinued from a date in say 2008, to allow for time to
disengage from the old system and set up the new arrangements.
The current system allows UK orders to be used
by various Commonwealth governments, including Papua New Guinea
and some of the Caribbean islands, which should be asked to make
local arrangements for honours after say 2008.
5. ALL HONOURS
SHOULD BE
PLACED ON
A STATUTORY
BASIS
The orders were mainly created by royal warrant
or letters patent, and are not subject to any act of parliament.
Those honours that are retained, and any new honours, should be
placed on a statutory basis, free from the royal prerogative.
A brief general act might set out the structure of the honours
system, with detailed provision for each honour perhaps by way
of schedules to the principal act or the subject of subordinate
legislation.
The current regulations for the orders are introduced
by instruments under the royal sign manual, and are not normally
published in The London Gazette or elsewhere. This means that
they are not subject to public scrutiny, and for many years the
Central Chancery denied public access to these documents (and
may still do so), and this should be ended, with open access to
information.
6. THE NAMES
OF ALL
RECIPIENTS SHOULD
BE PUBLISHED
The current system involves the publication
of appointments to the orders, and awards of decorations and medals,
but excludes honorary or foreign awards. The honorary awards should
be brought into line with the rest of the honours, as this would
lead to greater public accountability, as the present system is
not open to scrutiny and could well conceal matters affecting
political influence.
The same objective could also be achieved by
removing the artificial divide that exists between the ordinary
and honorary members of the orders.
7. THE RELIGIOUS
DIMENSION SHOULD
BE ENDED
The current orders, and the honour of knight
bachelor (through the activities of the Imperial Society), include
religious elements that may deny membership to well deserving
citizens who do not belong to the Church of England, or profess
the Christian faith, or any faith.
In the Order of the British Empire, for example,
the dedication services are conducted in St Paul's Cathedral by
the Bishop of London, while the Garter requires members to take
various Christian oaths. There is a strong case for removing all
religious dimension from the orders, and for avoiding any church
activity or oaths in the new honours.
8. PROCESSES
SHOULD BE
RATIONALISED AND
MODERNISED
The current orders are served by more than 40
officers, whose duties are mainly connected with the religious
and other ceremonies. This is a drain on national resource and
the offices should be abolished and the responsibilities of the
Central Chancery of the Orders of Knighthood transferred to the
Department of Constitutional Affairs, with say two or three executive
officers and a dedicated support staff.
The insignia of any retained orders would be
modified to reflect their 21st century role, and would for example
end the issue of collars and mantles, as that insignia is irrelevant
and is virtually never worn.
The orders have a rich and interesting past,
and provision should be made for their records and other tangible
assets, such as the seals, insignia and registers, to be placed
in a public place in London.
9. INTANGIBLE
RIGHTS SHOULD
BE WITHDRAWN
There should be a general abolition of prefixes
and titles associated with honours, or at the very least the withdrawal
of titles and precedence for the wives and children of the holders
of certain honours. The defects in the current system can be demonstrated
by comparing the treatment of a holder of the Victoria Cross,
with a duke: the first gets his bronze cross but no addition to
his name or social precedence, for himself or his wife; while
the second enjoys the prefix His Grace and The Most Noble and
his wife becomes Her Grace and they enjoy high social rank.
The grant of various honours carries armorial
privileges, such as the right to bear supporters, and the right
to other armorial additions. These rights are anomalous, and should
be discontinued.
| 
