King Charles banknotes.

[Workingman]

They have just been issued nearly two years after the Queen's death, but in order to save costs and limit climate change they will largely be swapped one-for-one when the old notes become unusable. Unfortunately we will have to go through this process once again when Charles dies and William takes over.

The thing is, why do we need the monarch on the notes at all? The BoE issues these notes on behalf of the UK. Why not have famous landmarks on the notes from all the countries of the UK: The White Cliffs of Dover; Snowdon; Edinburgh Castle and the Giant's Causeway or similar?

They could be churned out year on year regardless who was on the throne.

[Kaz]

I think the late Queen was the first, and only, monarch on our notes, so tend to agree. Not needed really

[Workingman]

During the Queen's reign the obverse (front) side, the promissory note with the Queen's image, was changed a number of times to reflect her age - nothing else. Old notes then became time-limited legal tender and during that time they were collected and destroyed either by pulping or incineration. This was a costly exercise for the Mint, Banks, Post Offices and us. Any notes not changed, such as those in Granny's teapot, just became bits of paper and their value was lost. The biggest change of the lot was when we moved from paper notes to polymer ones, but that was a necessity.

With constant images, such as those I suggested, the only notes needing to be changed are those that are damaged or worn out. We can still change the design of the reverse any time we want for new issues as it has no legal value, but all and any reverse designs can still remain in circulation until their natural demise.