Barnardo’s promote White Privilege narrative

In November 11th 2020, Barnardo’s posted a tweet directing their 191,000 followers to an article entitled White privilege – a guide for parents.

The article portrays Whites, including White children, as benefitting from the ‘oppression of non-Whites’ and promotes the idea that parents discuss “White privilege” with their kids.

In Autumn 2021 the Charity Commission announced that Barnardo’s tweet, and the website article did not break any charity rules.

This was reported by The Guardian who presented charities as the victim – “The commission’s decision will be welcomed by many in the voluntary sector concerned they are being unfairly targeted by politicians as “fodder for phoney culture wars” amid increasing hostility towards charities.”

The decision by the Charity Commission further embeds the idea, which comes directly from Critical Race Theory, that White Privilege actually exists and is detrimental to non-Whites.

Barnardo’s Anti-White Message

Barnardo’s acknowledges that four out of five of its service users are White and they say “they know only too well the inequality and disadvantage they face daily.” In the same article Barnardo’s tell us Black children are oppressed due to their skin colour and others, namely White children and adults, benefit from these oppressive systems.

Barnardo’s tells us that White people never need to fear hate crime because of their skin colour. This is a lie. A Guardian article from 2006 highlights that almost half the victims of racially motivated murders were White. The article is 14 years old. The message has been lost over time, because, as the article tells us MPs, MSM and the police strenuously avoid talking about the racially motivated murder of White people.

This denial of hate crime against Whites conveys two harmful messages. Firstly it undermines the confidence of White children in Barnardo’s ‘care’ to report race motivated hatred or even violence against them. Secondly it says Whites and only Whites are capable and motivated to hate other races and act on that hate.

Barnardo’s presents the arrest of a Black criminal by a White police officer as proof of ‘systemic racism’. Britain is a majority White country, so it is perfectly reasonable and to be expected that more criminals are arrested by White, than non-White, police officers. The only way Barnardo’s concerns can be addressed is for segregation to be adopted, with a Black police force being created to police Black people.

Barnardo’s states that as a White person you can generally assume you’ll be treated fairly when you apply for a job. As a large employer they know this is inaccurate. Under ‘positive action’ if White and non-White applicants are equally qualified, the job will go to the non-White in order to ‘increase diversity’. In these circumstances a non-White person has to be average to get the job, a White person has to be better. This is not the definition of fair.

Matthew Furlong, a White male won his case for racial discrimination after being denied a job when he applied to join Cheshire Police in 2017. “Had he not been such an exceptional candidate he may not even have suspected anything was wrong and this unlawful and unacceptable selection process may have been allowed to continue.” said Jennifer Ainscough, an employment specialist.

Not only are many of Barnardo’s statements false, their article is also duplicitous; cherry picking those areas where non-Whites fair less well while remaining silent on the myriad of situations where Whites are at a disadvantage in our society.

Schools teaching poor White pupils receive less funding. Cities, which now have a higher proportion of non-Whites than do rural or coastal towns and villages receive more money for education. Additional government funding to help schools depends of there being a certain proportion of non-Whites students.

The Times School funding unfair to poor white pupils

White students underperform compared to their peers. This has been known since 2008. If Barnardo’s is unaware of this, when 4 out of 5 of their service users are White children, then something is seriously wrong. Not only is it occurring but the chair of the government committee investigating the underperformance of poor White pupils has to defend itself from accusations of ‘racism’ for attempting to address it.

The Spectator Working-class boys and the myth of white privilege

Whites are the least likely group to go to university yet have no access to White scholarships. Although White students are the least likely, of all racial groups, to go to university, it is Black students who receive scholarships dedicated to Black people. There are no White only scholarships. Indeed when Sir Bryan Thwaites tried to donate money for poor White boys it was rejected on the grounds of ‘racism’.

Whites are under-represented on television and in commercials. Whites are under-represented in advertising; whilst being 12% of the British population, non-Whites feature in 37% of all adverts. On TV non-Whites make up 22% of actors .

Pay Gap for Young White Employees. Young non-Whites now earn more than their White counterparts. This is presented not as the ‘pay gap has been reversed’ but as ‘it has ended’. Non-Whites earning less than Whites is a ‘pay gap’ and ‘proof of systemic racism’. Whites earning less than non-Whites is not an issue.

Mail Online Pay gap

We are disappointed that the Charity Commission reported that Barnardo’s did not break any charity rules. We believe this campaign is in breach of the Charity Commission’s legal requirements as stated in its Campaigning and Political Activity Guidance for Charities 3; the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights 4; and the Equality Act 2010 5. In addition, it is encouraging activities deemed to be breaking the law for schools as explained in the House of Commons by MP Kemi Badenoch on 20th October 2020 6.  

a] Breaches Charity Commission’s Legal Requirements  

Barnardo’s website states “We believe in children regardless of their circumstances, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion and beliefs, disability, age and behaviour”, and “Respecting the unique worth of every person. We believe that every person is different but equal, and that everyone’s unique talent should be recognised and encouraged”. 7

Stated within the Charity Commission’s Campaigning and Political Activity Guidance for Charities (CC9), it is a legal requirement to ensure that “the campaign is likely to be an effective way of furthering or supporting the charity’s purposes.” 3

Barnardo’s ‘White privilege’ critical race theory campaign demonises children based on their White skin colour, a heritable and protected racial characteristic; teaches White children to accept guilt for this heritable characteristic; and erroneously assumes an elevated position of privilege in society based on their White skin colour. As such it runs contrary to Barnardo’s charitable purposes and core values and is detrimental to the well-being of White children and is therefore in breach of the Charity Commission’s legal requirements. 3 

Although not a legal requirement the Charity Commission’s Campaigning and Political Activity Guidance for Charities (CC9) states “a charity can campaign using emotive or controversial material, where this is lawful and justifiable in the context of the campaign. Such material must be factually accurate and have a legitimate evidence base.” 3

Barnardo’s recognises the emotive nature of the material. At the start of the article, it states “The subject evokes strong emotions from a range of people – some of whom disagree with the use of the term at all. 2 However, the material they publish in the article is not factually accurate. For instance, in the article they say White people do not experience hate crime. Evidence shows otherwise. An article written by The Guardian in 2006 reported that nearly half the victims of racially motivated murders are White. 8

b] Breaches EU Charter of Fundamental Rights 

Barnardo’s breaches the non-discrimination law set forth in The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, article 21, which the UK is presently bound by, which states: 

“Any discrimination based on any ground such as […], race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, […] birth, […] shall be prohibited.” 4

c] Breaches the Equality Act 2010  

Barnardo’s breaches the Equality Act 2010 of England, Wales and Scotland, Chapter 2, Prohibited conduct, Discrimination: 

13 – Direct discrimination: “(1) A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.” 

19 – Indirect discrimination: “(1) A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if A applies to B a provision, criterion or practice which is discriminatory in relation to a relevant protected characteristic of B’s.” 5

d] Encourages activities deemed to be breaking the law for schools 

By providing and promoting teaching material about ‘White Privilege’ critical race theory Barnardo’s is encouraging activities deemed to be breaking the law for schools as explained in the House of Commons by MP Kemi Badenoch on 20th October 2020: 

“We do not want to see teachers teaching their white pupils about white privilege & inherited racial guilt… any school that teaches these elements of critical race theory as fact… is breaking the law.” 6










Click here to return to start

Summary of the complaint as downloadable PDF

A PDF of a complaint made to the Charity Commission concerning Barnardo’s is posted below.

Complaint to Charity Commission regarding Barnardo’s

Click here to return to start

Campaigning and political activity guidance for charities, published 1 March 2008

Campaigning and political activity guidance for charities (CC9) Published 1 March 2008

Click here to return to start

Published 16 November 2020

Updated 17 September 2022