---

Honours System (Reform)

: No. For example, the lord lieutenant for Greater London is Lord Imbert, the former Metropolitan Police Commissioner. He is a relatively unusual lord lieutenant in terms of background and pedigree, and is well respected throughout Greater London. By and large the lords lieutenant are not necessarily the people who would be most capable of knowing what was going on and who were the right people to be involved. I support the idea of an honours commission to which people can make nominations, including political parties and the rest. We can discuss how it will be formulated. I agree that it should not be a quango, so that we end up with all sorts of people who are already eminent. There is a truth in what the late Anthony Sampson said both in his original ““Anatomy of Britain”” and in his last book, written just before he died. If one looks for where the power lies in Britain, one discovers it in a small number of places with a small number of people, disproportionately concentrated on London and the south-east and among those who know the others who have power and influence. We have an opportunity to break out of that circle and to honour the people in our communities. The hon. Member for Dumfries and Galloway (Mr. Brown) is right. Honours are more valuable and important in local and regional communities for people who are respected from the bottom up, rather than those who are spotted as valuable from the top down. Such credit is given, on occasion. Gary Stannett, a guy in my constituency, got an MBE for his youth work integrating disaffected kids who are difficult with really good kids, and making sure that we have a much more effective way of dealing with antisocial behaviour. He is about 30, and has done valuable work. He would never have dreamt for a moment that he would have ended up with an honour for that, but just did that work from the time he left school. There are some difficult issues about how to get the balance right. I share the view about volunteers who carry out community service, as other hon. Members have mentioned. Some public servants should be honoured for going above and beyond their call of duty. Of course, people should not get an honour just for doing their job, but if they do their job particularly well or excel, that is justification—whether they are a teacher, a school keeper, a head teacher, a school governor or anybody else. The community beat police officer who had never wanted to be promoted would be another example. We should not bestow additional honours on those of us who are honoured by getting through the democratic political process. Councillors, Members of Parliament Members of the Scottish Parliament, and so on, are honoured by virtue of their posts. There should not be additional honours for having got there in the first place. Those people have plenty of rewards and I hope that we are clear about that. People in the public sector who perform over and above the call of duty should be honoured; so should many in the voluntary sector. Those in the private sector who do more than line their own pockets and make profits, but who contribute as innovative entrepreneurs should of course be honoured. People in the political sector who are not elected should also be honoured. I can think of people who have worked for political causes—cross-party, no party or party causes—who deserve to be honoured. They are the sort of people whom we all know, who have never sought elected office but have worked for no reward for political causes, voluntarily flying the flag—I am not trying to be partisan, but for the Tories, for instance—for years in an area where their party has been little represented. Many people ought to be rewarded for such contributions to public life and for ensuring that democracy works. They should not be excluded. I want to make one other plea. Team awards, such as the Queen's awards for industry, are often not recognised as being of the same merit. The Queen's awards are about the only recognition of that kind. I nominated a local charity, XLP in Southwark, for a Queen's award for the voluntary sector, which it got. XLP was hugely deserving of the award and was pleased. Such an award does not offer a financial benefit, but I hope that we might award corporate awards to sports teams, other teams, the voluntary sector and business, as well as personal awards. There seems to be scope for those. I have a clear view on the question of OBEs: we ought to make the proposed change. The Order of British Excellence seems a simple and easy way forward, and a comfortable transition. If we could unite around that, that would be helpful. I like the idea of extending the Companion of Honour and getting rid of all the knighthoods. It is a little like the middle ages still to be giving people knighthoods. Let us pause to think for a minute about knights and dames—it is like a cross between Robin Hood and the pantomime. I am not disparaging people who have those honours, as that was what was available at the time, but we ought to move on and have a more modern system. I made the point earlier that if somebody who is married is made a knight, their other half gets a handle. That does not work the other way around, which seems bizarre, ridiculous, sexist and old-fashioned. There ought to be more attention to diversity. It is getting better. The commission would need to be diverse, and it should be particularly attentive to diversity. I am talking about diversity in terms not only of gender, ethnicity and religion but of geography. That is important. There has to be an attempt to ensure that the honours system reflects the fantastic diversity of this country and its traditions, as well of all four countries of the United Kingdom and their traditions. The last point that the hon. Member for Dumfries and Galloway made is absolutely true. People nominate people, fill in forms and expend a lot of effort. Sometimes they approach MPs and ask whether we will nominate someone, and we do so. Nothing more is heard. As far as I know, that has not changed. Whichever system we use might say no, but somebody should get a courteous letter telling them that their nomination has been considered and that although the person might be very worthy nothing can be done with the nomination at the moment, as well as advising them to feel free to nominate somebody in future. At the moment, it is a sad end to an effort to recommend other people. Such changes would be worth while. I thank the Minister for listening. I hope that he will go away and talk to his colleagues and even to the Prime Minister. I hope that he will say, ““Prime Minister, as part of your legacy, you are going to do all these things. You are going to reform the House of Lords, reform party political funding and sort out the public services, which would be wonderful. But let's also get the honours system sorted. Be bold, be brave, be radical and we will end up with a good honours system that is robust and fit for the new century.””