Because the name is misleading - it represents the whole of the UK and not just England - and to help dispel the myth that Scotland, Wales and NI are somehow English colonies ...
You wouldn't change Scotch whiskey's name to Unionish Whisky because it's sold all over the UK, would you?
No but that's hardly the same thing. I'm all for England, Scotland, Wales and NI maintaining their strong and unique identities but UK institutions in which all parties are stakeholders should be appropriately named IMHO.
It doesn't, in principle. In Scotland notes are issued by private banks. These notes are then backed by the BoE. Abolishing private currency issued in Scotland and renaming the BoE the BoB or BotUK would not change much but could be poor symbolism.
Because the name is misleading - it represents the whole of the UK and not just England - and to help dispel the myth that Scotland, Wales and NI are somehow English colonies ...
it doesn't "represent" anyone
The name misleads no-one
If the purpose and actions of the bank would remain unchanged why do you feel a change of name would be worth the cost and effort
It would be a hollow gesture and no one would be convinced.
If that would be the only change maybe so, but if it were to form part of a wider package of changes/reforms I don't see why it should be perceived as hollow.
If that would be the only change maybe so, but if it were to form part of a wider package of changes/reforms I don't see why it should be perceived as hollow.
It doesn't, in principle. In Scotland notes are issued by private banks. These notes are then backed by the BoE. Abolishing private currency issued in Scotland and renaming the BoE the BoB or BotUK would not change much but could be poor symbolism.
The BoE would act as 'lender of last resort' to prop up any bank that got into difficulties in any part of the UK so in that respect it does serve the whole of the Union. It also is the bedrock of Sterling which is used by the whole of the UK.
I am not advocating stopping the practice of Scotland, Channel Islands etc. printing their own banknotes.
I suppose I was mainly referring to the whole topical issue of greater devolved powers.
However, if we are better together then why don't we more things together like having a UK football team for example? We might even win a tournament for a change or at least get out of the group stage. Then we could all celebrate something.
I suppose I was mainly referring to the whole topical issue of greater devolved powers.
However, if we are better together then why don't we more things together like having a UK football team for example? We might even win a tournament for a change or at least get out of the group stage. Then we could all celebrate something.
Why is it still called the Bank of England when it serves the whole of the UK?
For a start, it harks back to and records sterling being an English currency (Scotland adopted sterling and dropped its own currency when it entered the union).
We don't call Scotch mist British mist, or the English Channel the British Channel.
You'll be wanting to change the name of the language we use to British next.
I suppose I was mainly referring to the whole topical issue of greater devolved powers.
However, if we are better together then why don't we more things together like having a UK football team for example? We might even win a tournament for a change or at least get out of the group stage. Then we could all celebrate something.
Devolution or Centralisation - you seem to be arguing for both