I have written previously about the prevalence of woke ideology in schools, notably the promotion of intersectionality via the teaching and promotion of Critical Race Theory. Over the last year, I have been monitoring a peculiar element to this ideological trend that is gaining traction: a pro-refugee movement called Schools of Sanctuary, which is effectively the education wing of the City of Sanctuary movement and whose overall objective is political and cultural change to facilitate pro-refugee policies and legislation. Aside from GB News’s coverage in October 2023, which involved Nigel Farage reporting on it, and Toby Young’s commentary in episode 59 of the Weekly Sceptic, there has been limited scrutiny of it. There is evidence that this organisation, either directly or indirectly, politicises education under the facade of charity. In doing so, it places schools in breach of existing legislation and guidance and undermines political impartiality.
The requirements and obligations of schools when dealing with political issues are quite clear. Section 406 of the Education Act 1996 forbids the “pursuit of partisan political activities” and the “promotion of partisan political views”. However, according to section 407 of the Education Act 1996, controversial political topics can be taught provided they are done so in a balanced way. The Department of Education’s guidance on political impartality in schools published 2022 recognises that pupils should have “an understanding and respect for legitimate differences of opinion”. It reaffirms the Education Act 1996 by stating schools “must prohibit the promotion of partisan political views” and insists pupils be given a “balanced presentation of opposing views on political issues”.
The 2022 guidance also draws on the definition of “partisan” as established by Dimmock v Secretary of State for Education and Skills (2007) and defines partisan activities as “one-sided” with the intent to “further the interests of a particular partisan group, change the law or change government policy”. Rather importantly within the context of this article, the 2022 guidance also recognises that charitable organisations can be politically partisan. Schools of Sanctuary tries to justify some of its political activism by invoking the Equality Act 2010. While that legislation means it is unlawful for a school to discriminate against its staff or pupils on the basis of their “protected characteristics”, it does not oblige schools to actively campaign for a political cause. And some of the aims, ideological foundations and resources of Schools of Sanctuary, and the behaviour of those schools that have engaged with the organisation, appear to be in breach of the Education Act 1996 and the 2022 guidance.
The background of some of City of Sanctuary and Schools of Sanctuary’s trustees and the content of its materials and resources suggest a political objective and an adherence to identity politics. The trustees of City of Sanctuary include the chair, Yusuf Ciftci, who completed a PhD on immigration policy and the ways to influence changes in said policy. Much of this appears to have influenced the general strategy of City of Sanctuary. One of the trustees, Alice Mpofu-Coles, has been a Labour councillor for Whitley Ward, Reading, since 2021. She describes herself as “a passionate advocate for social justice” and a “tireless activist”. She is also a trustee of Alliance for Cohesion and Racial Equality Ltd, a charity that aims to address “imbalances in power and bring about change founded on social justice, equality and inclusion”.
According to its trustees’ report of 2022, City of Sanctuary is seeking “big political change” and intends to build a “strong and widespread movement” that will “translate into public support for changes in policy and practice”. With a General Election just a few weeks away, there is an opportunity for City of Sanctuary and Schools of Sanctuary to pursue that objective. The Illegal Migration Act 2023, in particular, is being targeted by City of Sanctuary and Schools of Sanctuary, as demonstrated by School of Sanctuary’s “useful” General Election door hanger, which urges people to repeal the Act. These aims clearly point to a political objective and thereby run counter to the Department of Education’s 2022 guidance.
An ideological imbalance in Schools of Sanctuary is implicit elsewhere in its literature and resources. A resource pack from Schools of Sanctuary suggests as much as it says there is an “increasingly hostile environment for people seeking sanctuary in the U.K., feeding anti-immigrant sentiment, racism”. Elsewhere on its website, Schools of Sanctuary claims there is “widespread hostile – and often inaccurate – rhetoric in the public and in the media driving increasingly cruel immigration policies and encouraging attitudes of distrust and hate”. It asserts “the challenges that people who are seeking sanctuary experience often intersect with racism”. This organisation seems to think immigration can only ever be positive and beneficial. Any concerns, criticism, challenge or opposition to immigration are by implication racist and unjustified.
Such beliefs inevitably necessitate a filtering of factual evidence. With the upcoming General Election, Schools of Sanctuary has issued guidance on having “courageous conversations” as part of its push to get people to “step up” This guidance states it “isn’t about debating the other person” and instead emphasises the strategy of emotional persuasion, of encouraging individuals to “speak from the heart” rather than relying on facts. This is a convenient strategy to use with many children, since it dispenses with the need to find, analyse and evaluate tangible evidence. This is essentially derived from the concept of “lived experience” and avoids the troublesome problem of contending with data which does not fit an established narrative.
And where Schools of Sanctuary does stoop to mentioning facts, it does so selectively. Take, for example, the assertion that asylum seekers only receive £49.18 per week which “must cover all food, transport, hygiene items, phone data and clothing”. To be sure, this specific figure is not incorrect. But it certainly lacks context and overlooks a considerable number of other facts, such as the ability of refugees to access Universal Credit, Child Benefit (both of which can be backdated to the date of an asylum claim) and NHS services with free prescriptions and dental care. None of this is mentioned by Schools of Sanctuary and it is not surprising since recognising such facts would undermine the organisation’s agenda. Besides not being objective and impartial, this filtering of information is not exactly consistent with City of Sanctuary’s self-proclaimed belief in “high standards of honesty and behaviour” either.
This intellectually myopic approach is reinforced through the accreditation process which the organisation has developed. Schools of Sanctuary recognises that schools can be used as training camps for producing generations of social justice activists. To that end, it takes a leaf out of Stonewall and the Carbon Literacy Project’s book by accrediting schools which comply with its criteria and objectives. One of the stages of this process is an audit tool, which is a self-assessment document containing a long list of criteria and demands which a school must meet to gain accreditation. Staff must log evidence in this document and compile a portfolio ahead of an inspection from a representative from Schools of Sanctuary. During an inspection, Schools of Sanctuary evaluate this evidence and interview staff and pupils. If a school is deemed compliant, then accreditation is awarded and it can then officially advertise itself as a “School of Sanctuary”.
This audit tool, as indicated in criterion 1.5, draws on some of the core concepts of critical social justice ideology, such as “anti-racism” and “unconscious bias”. The influence of Critical Race Theory is evidenced elsewhere in Schools of Sanctuary materials; its website, for example, says “white people who are privileged can safely stand up to racism”. A resource pack asserts it has never “been more apparent that every school should work towards becoming actively anti-racist” and says schools managers should be “ensuring staff and students engage with anti-racist learning and activities”. Complying with these diktats is required if a school is to be accredited as a “School of Sanctuary”.
So far, this article has primarily looked at the intentions of Schools of Sanctuary and suggested it has clear political and ideological objectives, contravening key impartiality rules, as set out in legislation and official guidance. The question remains, however, whether any of this has succeeded in embedding itself in schools and whether teachers have begun to serve Schools of Sanctuary’s political interests, and in doing so violated the law.
Within my own school, which has ambitions of gaining Schools of Sanctuary accreditation, pressure has been exerted on pupils to support the charity’s political objectives. This has, for now, principally been done by getting them to write messages of support on large paper orange hearts, which are then pinned up around the school. These messages typically demand “action for refugees”. There are, however, plans to use PSHE and morning registration to promote ideas from Schools of Sanctuary. The school email system has been used to encourage staff to attend pro-refugee protests, and managers have begun to demand heads of department produce evidence showing they are compliant with Schools of Sanctuary’s requirements. I have raised concerns about the breaching of political impartiality rules at the highest level but so far have been ignored.
There are signs that other schools are embracing the political activism of Schools of Sanctuary. Evidence from a newsletter produced by Birmingham Schools and Colleges of Sanctuary in March this year indicates some teachers are providing pupils with a decidedly unbalanced treatment of the issue of immigration and asylum. In one school, “pupils studied the shocking findings in a recent report from Asylum Matters and used their maths skills to present the information”. They also “heard about the Lift The Ban campaign”, which aims to make it legally possible for asylum applicants to work while waiting for those applications to be processed. In the same region, schools were running “days of action” in which academic subjects were being set aside so pupils and staff could engage in activism for refugees. One school was reported to have “embarked on a journey of activism” which involved pupils writing to various public figures. In the process, pupils “gained a deeper understanding of social justice issues”. Similar activism has emerged elsewhere, such as a primary school where “pupils were so outraged when they learned how little money asylum-seekers received”. Other schools have made a point of taking to social media to post videos calling on MPs to “oppose the anti-refugee bill”. All this ties in with Schools of Sanctuary’s suggestion in its resource pack that schools should establish lunch time clubs to “campaign for refuges and asylum seekers’ rights” and encourage pupils to work with activist groups like Right to Remain. Besides the fact that academic subjects are potentially being set aside, this all suggests some schools are not providing a balanced treatment of a controversial political issue.
How much of a problem is this? According to the Schools of Sanctuary website, the total number of schools involved is approximately 400. There are some 32,163 schools in the U.K., which would mean Schools of Sanctuary has infiltrated just 1.24% of all schools. Hardly a majority, but still a concern as the organisation is gaining momentum, with 2023 seeing 140 schools signing up. That’s a 55% increase compared to 2022 and there’s obviously time for the organisation to spread its influence across our schools.
However, the problem is more significant than the statistical evidence suggest. Thomas Sowell noted that modern teaching practice increasingly emphasises the venting of emotions over conventional intellectual methods and guides students to “prepackaged conclusions”. In other words, children are not taught essential critical thinking skills and are not encouraged to think independently; they are in effect indoctrinated. Following GB News’s report, Schools of Sanctuary issued a response in which it stated it was “proud” of those schools that had already signed up for the initiative. In its response, Schools of Sanctuary claimed it does “not promote a political perspective”. Quite how this sits with the desire for “big political change” referred to in the trustees’ report is unclear.
With the influence of Schools of Sanctuary, schools are potentially overstepping legal and ethical boundaries by facilitating pupils’ conversion into political activists who perhaps do not appreciate that alternative, equally legitimate points of view exist. This is concerning, irrespective of whether the intention is to build a “culture of kindness and compassion”. The question remains as to whether Schools of Sanctuary will try to further use the education system to promote its political cause. School governors, senior managers, the Charity Commission and the Department for Education ought to be scrutinising organisations like Schools of Sanctuary more closely if schools are to comply with their legal obligation to be politically impartial. And those who are running schools and choosing to overlook this significant issue should be held accountable.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It is hard to admit to a lack of courage especially when the lack of courage persists. Far easier to pretend that sefetyism is the creed that makes you feel all warm and snug. Safely watched over by benevolent philosopher kings.
The hiding behind the sofa denying the by now blindingly obvious carries on to this day in the blob like shape of the Hallett covid inquiry.
Once the medical establishment performs a volte face in the U.S., as it shortly will when Jay Bhattacharya takes over its leadership, how will Britain’s NHS ‘experts’ respond?
None of them, nor the inquiry, have a shred of credibility. Jay Bhattacharya made it perfectly clear exactly what a complete nonsense had been perpetrated as far back as 2021.
https://www.hoover.org/research/what-happened-dr-jay-bhattacharya-19-months-covid-1
Professor John Nicholls of the University of Hong Kong had already made that perfectly clear in February 2020.
Very soon now, there will be nowhere left for Britain’s incompetent health charlatans to hide.
You are quite right. But you know what? Nothing will happen.
£200 million will be spent, money laundered.
The inquiry will conclude that the Corona plandemic ‘response’ was not fascistic enough. It will recommend camps and gassing for dissenters based on ‘Science’.
80% of the population will rejoice and clap.
You may very well be correct.
But the political landscape has now shifted, bigly.
In the U.S., the perception of covid as just another common cold coronavirus is about to become mainstream.
The Trump administration will use that as best they can (despite their own less than stellar record in office on that score) to belabour the bejasus out of the Democrats, not least because of the massive waste of funds.
All that noise will make its way over here where it offers a massive opportunity for Reform, relatively untarnished re covid/lockdowns, to give all the three major parties, and Lady Hallett’s inquiry, a massive kicking.
Funded by Mr Musk, that is a PR and political open goal that Mr Farage/Reform are unlikely to miss
Not just the health charlatans. Virtually every single f***ing person in the country, in the rich world, every single f***ing celebrity, institution, media firm, “scientist”, “journalist”, society, association, “charity”, big business, judge, lawyer, politician, political party, senior police officer, etc ad infinitum and nauseam. The “incompetent” charlatans will not need to “hide” because NOBODY APART FROM A FEW NUTTERS LIKE US is interested in raking over the coals on this one. You were either evil or you were a fool. Either way, no-one is interested.
Three cheers for NUTTERS LIKE US.
Again, you may very well be correct……but this is a major political opportunity for A. The Republican Party and B. Reform.
With the funding now available, from a ‘pandemic’/lockdown sceptic in Mr Musk, ‘pandemic’/lockdown scepticism could very easily become a massive political football this year.
It will be a big missed political opportunity for Reform if it does not.
Up to a limited point only IMO.
The picture is fuzzy in the US. It’s certainly true that almost all the opposition to the scamdemic came from the Republican side (voters and politicians). But that opposition was by no means universal and unequivocal. Most states had some kind of covid restrictions, including lots of Republican run states. They were lifted earlier, on average, but they still happened. Trump & “Operation Warp Speed”, ’nuff said. We don’t know what Trump would have done if the states had all just ignored covid – would he have imposed a Federal emergency? Probably not – he’s a “go with the flow” guy. Trump was obviously sceptical about covid but he didn’t denounce the whole thing very clearly and consistently either. The recent campaign at least for the Presidency didn’t seem to focus much on covid other than the wonderful vaccines…
Reform were not really a thing during covid. Farage said Tony Blair should be in charge of the vaccine rollout and Tice called for mandatory vaccination. I don’t recall their recent election campaign calling for medical freedom. I would love Reform to push this big-time, but they won’t, and doing so would probably cost them more votes than it gained them. Nobody wants to be reminded of what happened, except us nutters.
Tice said surely the jab is mandatory for care workers, that is bad enough but not an all out fascist. The way he treated Mr Bridgen pissed a lot of sceptics off.
Yes. I am not sure what his position was on NHS workers – I can’t see how you could be FOR vaxxing care home workers but not force people working in hospitals to get vaxxed. The main reason they didn’t make it mandatory for NHS workers was that so many of them refused to comply and the govt backed down. Yes, treatment of Bridgen was poor.
It is a cult of ignorance. You can see this clearly because many who should’ve known better fell for it. They know on some level that they are holding their hands over their ears in fear and yet they are too timid to approach this reality. A pretty squalid aspect of the human condition perhaps. To be fair to MIchael Gove he admiited that he was a bed-wetter. He never said if he got over this problem. You will never get someone to admit they are a bed-wetter because it discredits everything else about them.
He also mentioned the Lab but was briskly moved on in the enquiry.
And consider that many have got in line to have the latest jab and that is in the case of a friend of mine despite having been diagnosed as having mild pericarditus.
Anyone supporting the lockdowns, anti-social distancing and all the other authoritarian Covid nonsense should look long and hard at the photo at the head of this article. And hang their head in shame.
Crimes of Lockdown
We Need Justice
“Petty tyranny” and of course, those of us who went into shops were the villains. I didn’t get much trouble, but that might ne because I look like a bit of a thug, not getting younger but still a handful! Had someone not serving me Tea that I mentioned before and also in a Garage the shop assistant complaining to the manager that ended up with them arguing with each other. I was disappointed since I was spoiling for a fight (verbal) but willing to go further.
You can’t let yourself get angry at the ignorant masses. It has always been thus. They are victims one way or another. No one would choose to be a coward over a warrior. It is just the burden that you have to carry. But is is hard when mass compliance threatens the survival of all of us.
Let’s face it, 95% of the population are, and were, sheep, unquestioning and basically stupid. The covid reality was staring them in the face, but they couldn’t, wouldn’t see it for what it was – one huge con by people paid to know better, but basically sheep too.
Well to be brutally honest it was obvious after the diamond princess episode that covid was not a big deal, and and that was what, feb/March 2020?
Anybody who continued after that to believe this was what the govt said it was… well I’ve got a bridge sell you.
I mean, ffs, get a f’kin’ grip. Have people no curiosity about what is really happening?
I’m no genius, and I am sure I misunderstand or don’t know lots of important stuff, but I do at least give it a go.
Covid was eye opening in that respect – just how pathetic a lot of people are.
Same here
Long time = once everyone involved is dead or senile.
Almost every single f***ing person I know supported lockdowns and got jabbed. Several of them stopped talking to me, compared me to Hitler, called me a conspiracy theorist, many treated me like a mad uncle and refused to engage. Not a single one has apologised or recognised I was right. They can all go and do one.
“Errors” – pah! These bastards were busy partying and taking the piss out of us.
I have always held a weird fascination about how the Germans descended to the levels they did ninety-odd years ago. I’d sometimes idly speculated that they weren’t particularly unique and that any population could have succumbed.
Lockdown and the rest of that nonsense provided me with confirmation. Not quite as extreme perhaps, but it was visible.
Sorry to have invoked Godwin’s Law but I can’t avoid making the connection.
“If you ever wondered how and why millions of ordinary decent citizens just stood and watched as Germany descended into Fascism – you know now”.-
Probably my favourite poster/slogan/sticker regarding Clown World – which we are still very much in.
If we don’t stop them – they’ll do it to us again
I too have wondered about the Germans and come to the conclusion that as they had one of the best “education” systems in Europe the deciding point is that “education” takes place in schools and schools are the places where the damage is done. In the film the “Blue Angel” the school master berates the pupils to be patriotic and join up, ditto the school master in “All Quiet on the Western Front”. Fast forward to the article above and the school teacher friend cannot be bothered to do any research, does not know how to and just wants to be told what to do and then turn around and “tell” their pupils what to do.
One should be very wary of schools and teachers. My East West political lecturer back in the 1980s said to be very careful of letting the state educate our children. I now understand exactly what he meant.
GP letters are still being sent offering a Covid & Flu jab at the same time ! The Blob is still engaged, ready & waiting for the next excuse to go to warp speed .
This ad pisses me off.
What is so sad about all this is that the husbands, parents, relatives of the elderly had no choice. Together with the fact that those in authority banned them from visiting, sending their children to school etc. The ‘people’ didn’t let their relatives die alone…the hospitals refused them entry. Individuals rebelled…but, like Joanna was banned from a shop for ignoring the one way system, people had no option. No one is going to accept they were fools, particularly not those in authority.
So what did James Kirkup and The Times do about it at the time?
Oh yes, that’s right. They propagandised for the Government as it set about destroying the lives of millions ….. as did the rest of the MSM.
The Government and the entire Establishment attempted to generate a WW2 “war spirit” against a virus.
Most of the people … the unthinking, go-with-the-herd, sheeple …. didn’t work out that the “war” was against them and their families.
I have no time for those who complain now ….. including most of those who lined up to participate in a mass, gene therapy, medical experiment and died or were severely injured as a result.
Engaging your brain, in order to protect yourself from harm, is a form of natural selection.
I DO feel sorry for the children whose whole lives have been harmed by the evil barstewards in the Establishment and the cowardly adults who participated in the destruction.
They had people deluded, like a Supermarket lorry I was following and some lady waving at them like a liberating army.
Above all, when will those who broke the Nuremberg Code be held to account?
This was an experimental medication is ever there was. Emergency authorisation, and the date of completion for first phase clinical testing 2023.
Yet many were coerced, on threat of losing their livelihoods, to take the experimental gene therapy shots.
We hanged people for this very egregious crime after the war.
We did ! The over lords of Convid are just as bad as Mr Hilters mob !!
I’d be more than happy to flip the trapdoors open…
Three cheers for Lord Toby Young! Patron saint of nutters like us. I bit my tongue so many times that I’m surprised I still have one. Frankly it was often easier to keep quiet… I got to hate the glazed eyes look of friends when I kept pointing out inconvenient facts or just laughing. Many thought they would die if they didn’t follow the rules..
And the sad thing they’d do it all over again.
I was barred from two vets surgeries for questioning their petty rules (people that should have known better). In one case they wouldn’t let me inside to have my dog “put down” because I refused a PCR test. We went home he died three days later.
I also had an interesting discussion in the pros shop at my local golf course. He questioned my lack of a mask saying I had to wear one. When I told him I didn’t he backtracked and told me I needed to wear something to indicate that I was “exempt” which of course I also had to correct him on.
Basically petty tyranny in both cases.
It’s not the petty tin pot tyrants that need to be brought to justice but the professional public health officials and politicians abusing emergency powers who should. Most did know the risk was extremely low similar to a seasonal flu and actively censured and silenced the many experts who disagreed. They extended this travesty for 2 years after the risks were well known causing unimaginable damages to society and people’s lives. These are the one’s that need to be brought to justice. The scam continues to this day.
I sent a lengthy email (2ft’s worth) to my Tory MP on 24th March 2020 laying out why the Lockdown was wrong and what the consequences would be. My wife would confirm that everything I set out happened eg. the elderly would die sooner and especially if the hospitals discharged un-tested elderly patients back to care homes. I am not a Doctor just an ex dairy farmer,and it was obvious from the outset that this was a flu virus which particularly affected older people.
The average age of death by Covid was 82.4 years so why were younger persons especially children harmed so badly by closing schools and imposing ridiculous Lockdown procedures.
I also said that no politician would admit they had panicked and got it wrong so they had to continue the nonsense worldwide.
The three main scientists behind the Barrington Declaration had it right from the start about building immunity among the public but they were ridiculed by non medical political fools like Tory MP Neil O’Brien who should have been imprisoned for hate speech.
I refused to wear a mask as did my wife, who is deaf, and when challenged, refused to back down and tried to explain that the whole affair was driven by fear by the Government and that the precautions were overplayed.
The ‘nudge unit’ did a good job of frightening the public into compliance and it was clear to me that the unit would be retained and rolled out for all sorts of other issues. I continuously entreat people I meet to be quietly cynical and question everything and use their basic common sense about public directives..
The day the lockdown was announced I decided to re locate to the countryside where I grew up. I didn’t want to be locked down in London. I was fortunate to be able to do that unlike so many others. I too could foresee all the problems you identified. I wrote to my MP. I wrote to BJ. And now looking back at all the emails and letters I wrote trying to convince people that fear was their greatest enemy it all seems even more tragic now that lessons are being learned, but at the same time being forgotten, because no one has the courage to acknowledge their part in this human tragedy. The biggest failure of the human condition is the inability to recognise ones own failures, particularly if one is a politician or some authority figure in public health or pharma corporation. The one thing the elites seem to forget when creating their AI generated, transhumanist dystopia is the Common Sense factor – it can’t be digitised or replicated by a computer brain.
“Tory MP Neil O’Brien who should have been imprisoned for hate speech.”
What did he say. I’m not in favour of closing down free speech, even what some call hate speech. Much better is daylight where speech is out in the open.
Nor am I and I am one of the early members of the Free Speech Union but this MP set up a website to castigate anyone who he saw as a ‘denier’ and he rubbished Professor Sunetra Gupta – a world leading epidemiologist in the most appalling way when she was one of the original three who set up the Barrington Declaration and had been invited to talk to Boris. Unfortunately Boris listened to the uninformed.
I was really disappointed with the Church of Scotland’s response. For all the “be bold and brave”, and Jesus helping lepers the first sign of a potential illness and they happily closed the churches. Their charity for children and vulnerable people said nothing at the time, and now campaigns for money to help repair the damage done during lockdown.
Good point. I forgot to mention religious leaders in my list of the guilty.
Hell will freeze over before people will confront their inhumane behaviour, it takes courage, humility, and bravery to admit fault and to confront the horror an individual allowed itself to become.
The majority are afraid to do this instead they will sweeper the carpet, and comfort themselves with tropes such as everyone else was doing it. and I was obeying the rules.
These same people would have burned the “witches”, the ,”heretics”, and they will do similar again if told to do so.