Keep the Honours List meritocratic

The British author and journalist Michael De-la-Noy once wrote that “Britain has developed the most complex, class-ridden and - to all but a handful of civil servants, courtiers and snobs - the most baffling honours system in the world.” This is the critique that inevitably follows the publication of any Honours List, and this New Year’s one is no different.

Since De-la-Noy wrote this the British political establishment, particularly under John Major, have pushed for an overhaul of the Honours system. However, the multiplicity of archaic orders, and the strict hierarchy of levels make it vulnerable to criticism. More specifically, it is criticised for failing to adhere to what is now socially viewed as its role: to honour anyone regardless of rank or social status for their exceptional contribution to British society.

Although some wish to fault the current prime minister for what seems like an attempt to politicise the list by saying it reflects the aims of his Big Society concept, he is right in some sense. For recognising the contributions of ordinary people, who make up 73 per cent of the recipients of Officerships of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, for philanthropy, volunteering and social action, this year’s honours have a certain touch of the Big Society doctrine.

However that does not excuse the fact that a large number of recipients are the civil servants and courtiers of which De-la-Noy speaks of. The mandatory honours for civil servants, political elites and diplomats undermine the premise of the state giving the highest honour possible for exceptional contribution.

If it is argued that some people do not merit this approbation (only a very small minority do not), it is crucial that we find a way to define what would qualify a recipient more stringently, and to possibly create a single scale on which to measure the contribution that receivers of these high accolades make.

It feels only right to recognise those people who take up the role of bettering our society, but if this praise is to become free at last from the perennial criticism that the honours system receives, it must be reformed in a way that makes it as meritocratic as we wish our society to be.