I’m seeing a lot of international messages getting this wrong, so this is how you refer to the Prime Minister of the UK.

First, we normally refer to the PM just by name, like anyone else. So, “Keir Starmer” or “Mr Starmer”.

“Prime Minister” is not used as a title like “President” is. He’s not “Prime Minister Starmer”. He’s just “the Prime Minister” or “the Prime Minister, Keir Starmer”.

Unusually, this new PM is also a knight. Of course, this has its own rules.

If you want to use this title, it’s not quite as simple as replacing “Mr” with "Sir’. The first name is more important than the surname here. He’s not “Sir Starmer”. He’s “Sir Keir Starmer” or “Sir Keir”.

Hope it helps!

  • Iheartcheese@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    I figured this was going to be somebody wanting to talk about his politics or something like that but no it’s just a pedantic Englishman pissed that people are using the wrong title

  • The Right Honourable Member of Parliament Sir Keir Rodney Starmer, Knight of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath, King’s Council to His Royal Majesty Charles the Third, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories, King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, Lord of Mann, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

    Anything less is offensive and requires a licence.

  • Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    5 months ago

    He’s “Sir Keir Starmer” or “Sir Keir”.

    Oh, so when you say it it’s alright, but when we say it “it’s called football”. Double standards much?

  • froggers@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    What? You mean to tell me that he is not called Sir Prime Minister Mr. Keir Rodney Starmer? Unbelievable.

    • 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      5 months ago

      He did a fairly good job as the head of criminal prosecutions in the UK for around 5 years, and he was knighted to recognise that when he stepped down

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s… it? You can get knighted for being “fairly good” at your job for half a decade, and then quitting?

        Heck, I’m “fairly good” as a software developer. I’m pretty darn good actually, and have been working for more than half a decade, and I don’t intend to quit. Where do I queue for one of them knightings? 😅🗡️

        • T156@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          That’s… it? You can get knighted for being “fairly good” at your job for half a decade, and then quitting?

          Yes. Knighthood is generally up to the whims of the monarch. Although to make it there, it’s generally expected you have an achievement significant enough to be befitting of one.

          But from what I recall, there’s little stopping his majesty from conferring a knighthood onto Chief Mouser Larry for his research into the napping suitability of 10 Downing Street’s furniture, if he wanted to do that.

        • 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          And how many millions of people are fairly good at being a software developer?

          I think “fairly good” was an understatement on my part… Tim Berners-Lee got a knighthood for being “fairly good” as a software developer, as he invented the worldwide web. Kier Starmer got a knighthood for being “fairly good” as a public procecutor for handling a number of cases of national importance extremely well. What have you done that has significantly changed the country for the better?

          You’ve got to consider the difficulty/seniority of the job, a general doing a “fairly good” job is more likely to get a medal than a private doing a “fairly good” job who’ll get fuck all

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            Sorry if it isn’t obvious – I’m facetiously joking in all of these comments. 😇 Just playing on the “fairly good” phrasing and memeing on it. 😉

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            No. 😞 But maybe I could be, if all it takes is to be fairly good? 🥹

  • morbidcactus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    5 months ago

    Canada’s Westminster system the PM also gets Right Honourable as an title, going to assume it’s similar based on some googling so you could totally use The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer, but I’ve very very rarely seen news media use full titles outside of reporting on ceremonial activities.

    • beforan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      I think he has that title too by virtue of being an MP, not the PM.

      other MPs (I assume all but could be wrong) are also Right Honourable.

        • beforan@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Aha, thanks.

          Yeah I noticed some of the cabinet (Angela Raynor, Ed Milliband) had right honourable, but not all, but I didn’t know the criteria.

    • Wanderer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      Hardly anyone used the Queens full title. I’m actually not sure if the King has fewer titles but I bet it’s still long.

      But the one that is absolutely wrong is Queen/King of England. There hasn’t been a King/Queen of England for hundreds of years.

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    In fairness, this only applies in formal communication with someone from England. Even then, not everyone will choose to recognize his title, despite recognizing his position as PM.

    It’s still good to know! Never hurts to have understanding of formalities like this, and it’s interesting. It’s just that the application of it isn’t going to come up often in places that aren’t part of the Commonwealth

      • Apepollo11@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Absolutely - if anything, there’s a reluctance to use formal titles in the UK in general.

        I used to teach at university - students and staff alike just use first names when addressing each other. When signing emails, we just use our first name, no letters, job title, anything.

        It’s even something specifically touched on in our orientation guide for foreign students.

        As for newspapers and Prime Ministers specifically, one of the biggest newspapers, The Guardian, has a cartoonist who has always drawn David Cameron with a condom covering his head. There’s absolutely no deference shown to Prime Ministers here.

  • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Agreed in general, but I think ‘Prime Minister Starmer’ is fine tbh, when used by non UK media and people generally.

  • Puttaneska@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    And titles (e.g., Miss, Ms, Mr, Mrs, Dr, Prof.) aren’t used with only the first name.

    (Though the BBC likes to do this with their ‘celebrity’ doctors).