The Queen was identified on the first bank of England one-pound note as "Elizabeth R". Curiously, the 10-shilling note, which was identical in design to the one-pound note except for its colour, did not. It was issued one year after the one-pound note. Perhaps the Bank of England had received word that it wasn't necessary to identify Her Majesty, as was the ancient practice on coinage, as Dr Toporoski has explained.
(If I were a stranger to Canada, I might need an identifier to determine who graces the obverse of our coins, so unlike The Queen is Canada's current effigy.)
No other notes from the first Bank of England series carry any identifier of Her Majesty.
All further series carry the royal cypher E II R (without the crown). I don't know why. If you don't know who The Queen is from Her portrait, I doubt the royal cypher will give you much of a hint.
Like Dr Toporoski, I am aware of no other banknotes worldwide bearing Her Majesty's image that identify Her, even with the royal cypher.
And also like Dr Toporoski, I am very disappointed with this portrait of The Queen. While I indeed would have preferred to see Her more regal -- as on our Diamond Jubilee stamps -- perhaps the Bank of Canada could have found a casual portrait of Her wearing different attire and accessories. One gets the impression that The Queen has worn the same dress and triple-string of pearls since 1986.
And why does the portrait have to be contemporary? In honour of the Jubilee year, perhaps we could have gone a bit retro. Gibraltar's latest notes, issued in 2010-11, bear a portrait of Her Majesty that dates from the Silver Jubilee.
I guess we can at least be grateful that she's not wearing a hat.