Britain's most influential people are more than five times more likely to have been to a private, fee-paying school than the general population, despite just 7% of UK people being privately educated. 1,300 private schools enjoy charitable status.
There are many reasons for this extraordinary dominance of private schools in our society, but one that is not well understood is how many of these schools – including the most prestigious such as #Eton – benefit from substantial tax advantages as a result of 'charitable' status.
It's not possible to state with certainty how much the UK’s charitable private schools save through tax exemptions, but it's thought to be around £3 billion a year. This equates to more than 6% of England’s total state school budget (£47.6 billion) in 2020-2021.
Meanwhile, the Public Accounts Committee reported in March that tight education budgets means many state schools in England are narrowing their curriculum offerings, dropping subjects, cutting staff & reducing support for pupils with special educational needs & disabilities.
Any attempts to effect change will inevitably be met with significant pushback.
Over at least two centuries, the UK’s private schools have successfully mobilised charity & tax law to their advantage. Yet this exercise of power is effectively invisible to wider public.
The complexity of legal linguistics & processes, the pseudo-objectivity of the law, & the failure of parliament to make public expenditure on private education a matter of regular debate & accountability means informed debate is largely absent, & all but impossible.
Given the intellectual, cultural & social advantages bestowed on the children of grotesquely wealthy parents, accruing to private school pupils through facilities, curriculum, & extracurricular activities, what kind of people do places like #Eton produce?
A coordinated political project is reshaping Britain in the image of Trump’s MAGA movement.
Reform UK—fuelled by wealthy donors, ideologically aligned think tanks, and a network of right-wing media—has ambitions unlike anything in modern UK politics.
The goal is clear: install Farage as PM, backed by policies and rhetoric that mirror America’s populist right.
Recent events, including JD Vance’s high-profile visit, reveal a deliberate and potentially transformational transatlantic political strategy.
Politicians, right-wing news media and far-right extremists opportunistically exploit public concern over asylum seekers in hotels, inciting protests and potential violence.
How did we get here? And why the gulf between public perception and reality?
The government spent nearly a third less on hotels to house asylum seekers between April 2024 and March 2025.
The Home Office's annual accounts show £2.1bn was spent on hotel accommodation - an average of about £5.77m per day, down from £3bn or £8.3m per day, the previous year.
GB "News", which employs 75% of Reform UK MPs, is not a news channel - it's Reform's propaganda wing, co-funded by billionaire Paul Marshall and Dubai-based investment firm Legatum, who see it as an investment opportunity to help protect their wealth and interests.
@Ofcom
In the UK, since 1990, 'due impartiality' and 'due accuracy' have been fundamental components of broadcasting - especially for news and current affairs - and imho are essential for a well-informed citizenry and a fair-minded functional democracy.
GB "News" appears to disagree.
The first broadcasting standards in the UK emerged with the BBC in 1922.
Formal standards took shape with the Royal Charter in 1927, which mandated that the BBC provide information, education, and entertainment while maintaining impartiality and serving the public interest.
Voters need to know how right-wing populist nationalist politicians and radical/far-right nativist extremists construct their divisive discourse and rhetoric to exploit the anti-elite climate and fuel violence and division - and what to do about it.
So what can be done to counter divisive narratives and framing and to help Britain to become a more open, inclusive, fairer, less polarised and better multicultural society?
I make several suggestions in the above article, but make more below,
Countering the extreme right’s narrative of feeling "attacked" and needing to "defend" national identity requires a strategic, multi-faceted approach that challenges their framing while addressing underlying concerns and emotions.
The shameless lie that "Britain is lawless" is categorically false, as it contradicts empirical data on crime trends, rule of law metrics, and the functioning of UK institutions. Reform UK often use fearmongering exaggeration and selective framing to create a sense of crisis.
Official data from the ONS and Home Office indicate that overall crime rates in England and Wales have fluctuated but do not support the notion of a "lawless" state. The ONS reported a 7% decrease in total recorded crime (excluding fraud) from 2023 to 24.
#OnThisDay, 21 July, 1969, the Chicago Daily News published: The ‘love it or leave it’ nonsense, by Sydney J. Harris.
It began: One of the most ignorant and hateful statements that a person can make is “If you don’t like it here, why don’t you leave?”
I reproduce it, below.
Harris was born in London in 1917, moving to the US in 1922. A formidable journalist who established a distinct voice integrating incisive social commentary with wit and humour, his weekday column, ‘Strictly Personal’, was syndicated in 200 US newspapers.
The ‘love it or leave it’ nonsense, by Sydney J. Harris.
One of the most ignorant and hateful statements that a person can make is “If you don’t like it here, why don’t you leave?”
That attitude is the main reason America was founded, in all its hope and energy and goodness.