December Update

The Charity Commission has confirmed, albeit in a low key manner, they will be investigating Barnardo’s antiwhite activity following complaints received from us and others. They explain they will not inform us of updates on the live case but it is hoped there will be a press announcement on the outcome, and removal of Barnardo’s harmful antiwhite post, in due course.

In the meantime we can keep the pressure on by reminding the Charity Commission how damaging Barnardos’ actions are to White children and to the reputation of UK charities in general.


This is how Barnardo’s presents itself “We work to improve the lives of every vulnerable child and young person in the UK. We run over 1,000 services across the UK, working to build stronger families, safer childhoods and positive futures. We do this through counselling and long term support for children who have been abused, supported lodgings for care leavers, vocational training for young people, and many other vital services. Every Barnardo’s service is different but each believes in the potential in every child and young person, no matter who they are, what they have done or what they have been through.”

Yet on November 11th 2020, Barnardo’s posted a tweet directing their 191,000 followers to an article on their website entitled White privilege – a guide for parents. The article portrays Whites as uniquely bad people who benefit from the ‘oppression of non-Whites’. It reveals the anti-White culture and values of Barnardo’s and demonstrates that White children are not safe in their ‘care’. We document the lies and duplicitousness embedded in Barnardo’s antiwhite message in this article.

Many people have already written to Barnardo’s and various regulatory bodies. We need to keep this momentum going until the authorities take action against this charity. For those who wish to make their voices heard but have not yet had the opportunity to do so, we provide a step-by-step guide to submitting a complaint to the Charity Commission.

A Small Measure of Success – watch this space

We’ve posted a screenshot of Barnado’s tweet together with a link to their post on Twitter. The removal of Barnardo’s tweet will be a small but significant success, we must use every law and every legal avenue we can to make that happen.

Click here to return to start

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.” Yet 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 is pushing the message White children benefit from Black oppression, what better way to incite hatred against White kids.

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 to White children in their ‘care’ it says – if you are the victim of racially motivated hatred or even violence do not tell us, because we will not believe you. 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. That is as it should be, just as the continent of Africa should be majority Black and Asia majority Asian. The only way Barnardo’s concerns can be addressed is for Britain to become a majority Black country or 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’. So 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 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 . In the screenshots posted below it’s impossible to miss the message that non-Whites being over-represented is somehow a stab in the back for them, not for White people.

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

Click here to return to start

Barnardo’s wrote a statement on Twitter regarding the publication of ‘White Privilege’ teaching material: “Talking about white privilege means looking at how our own actions maintain and support racist systems and structures – regardless of our intent. We’re sharing some actions that parents can take to help create a fairer society. #WednesdayWisdom” 1. The teaching material “White privilege – a guide for parents is accessible via their tweet. 2

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 the complaint is posted below. If you feel this accurately represents your view of Barnardo’s action please feel free to download, amend as required, and use as part of your complaint to the Charity Commission.

PDF of the complaint

Complaint to Charity Commission regarding Barnardo’s

We will also post other complaints submitted to the Charity Commission or direct to Barnardo’s here, to build up a database of information and approaches for pro-Whites to use in this and other situations. If you are happy to share your submission please send to us on Twitter or via Telegram. Thank you.

Click here to return to start

Step by Step Guide to Submitting a Complaint

STEP 1 To complain to the Charity Commission about Barnardo’s ‘White privilege’ post and article click here.

STEP 2 This is the first page you will see.

Options are detailed for complaining to other authorities, but given the seriousness of Barnardo’s actions, the size and influence of the charity, and the vulnerability of White children in its care, we felt the best option was submitting a serious complaint directly to the Charity Commission. Click on that link if this is your choice.

STEP 3 You will then be taken to a page which provides information about submitting a complaint and what happens next. While it suggests you must complain directly to the charity first, this can be bypassed. Given the nature of the complaint this is what we chose to do. If this is your choice, simply read through the page on their website and the click next to take you to next step.

STEP 4 On this page you will be able to choose one, and only one, option for why you are raising concerns about the charity. We consider those marked with a red circle to be applicable, though it could be argued ‘Criminality within or involving a charity’ is also relevant as we believe Barnardo’s is breaching its legal requirements.

STEP 5 This is where the detail of your complaint is attached. Every person may take a different approach, but here is what we did:

Step 5 Part 1 – we said YES to ‘Do you have evidence?’. As the text box has a very restricted word count we simple used it to refer to the PDF we attached. You need to write something in this box to be able to move onto the next stage.

Step 5 Part 2 – we attached a PDF file of our complaint which provides details of our concerns and the evidence. Note it is only possible to attach PDFs. Attaching Word files or JPGs will prevent you moving onto the next stage. Also for reasons not understood, two PDFs need to be added. We added the same PDF twice simply to get over this hurdle.

Part 1
Part 2

Step 5 Part 3 – is about whether the Charity is registered, its number and name. You will also need to give your name, email address and, if you wish, your telephone number.

Step 5 Part 4 – simply identifies your relationship with the charity.

Part 3
Part 4

Step 5 Part 5 – Lets you choose whether you give consent for your identity to be disclosed to Barnardo’s.

Part 5

STEP 6 This is the last but one page. You are asked if you have attempted to get the charity to address your concern first. We said ‘No’ and gave our reasons. Some of you may choose to say ‘Yes’ as many of us replied to their Twitter post (and were ignored). If you choose ‘No’ you need to provide your reasons. Ours are detailed below.

The remaining questions are:

STEP 7 This is the final stage where you confirm the information you have provide is correct and complete and submit.

Click here to return to start

Responses from Charity Commission and Barnardo’s

It’s early days yet, but in this section we will document responses we receive. As with the complaints we will also post responses received by others here. If you are happy to share replies you have received please send to us on Twitter or via Telegram. Thank you.

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 22 December 2020