Latest news with #minority
Russia Today
3 days ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
White British children are minority at one in four schools in England
White British children are currently a minority in one in four schools across England, The Telegraph has reported, citing government records. The report, published on Saturday, was based on the results of school census data collected from more than 21,500 educational institutions across the country in early 2025. According to the figures, in 72 English schools there are no white children at all, while in 454 schools they make up less than 2% of the pupils. At Rockwood Academy in Birmingham, none of the 1,084 students were recorded in the census as 'white British,' while there were only 12 out of 2,779 attending Loxford School in the London borough of Redbridge, The Telegraph reported. The 'demographic shift' is most visible in cities such as London, Birmingham, Manchester, Bradford, and Leicester, the paper said. In the capital, white British children are a minority in schools in all 32 boroughs, with the exception of Bromley, where they make up 50.3%. In Newham and Harrow, there are only 5% and 7% of white children, respectively, the report said. 'The school census data demonstrates that the white British share of the young population is in decline in many areas,' The Telegraph noted. Last week, a report came out forecasting that white British people will become a minority in the UK population in the early 2060s. According to the paper, which was based on analysis of migration, birth and death rates data, by the end of the century their share will drop from the current 73% to around 33.7%. The author of the study, Buckingham University Professor Matt Goodwin, said that his predictions raise 'profound questions about the capacity of the UK state to both absorb and manage this scale of demographic change.' Goodwin stressed that they are certain to provoke a 'considerable degree of anxiety, concern and political opposition' among many voters, which 'need to be… addressed if the UK is to avoid considerable political turbulence and polarization in the years and decades ahead.'
Western Telegraph
16-05-2025
- Health
- Western Telegraph
MP ‘will not be complicit' in approving assisted dying law in safeguards call
Labour's Naz Shah warned that the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is 'literally a matter of life and death' and said she would not be 'complicit' in approving a law without adequate protections. Her colleague Florence Eshalomi told the Commons that she too opposed the proposal to legislate for assisted dying, as a result of 'inadequate safeguards against the coercion of minority communities'. At Friday's debate about the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, Ms Shah tried to amend the proposal so that a person would not meet the requirements for an assisted death 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking'. Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP for Spen Valley who proposed the Bill, told MPs that people would not qualify for an assisted death solely on the basis of an eating disorder. But Ms Shah, the MP for Bradford West, said she had spoken to the parents of a girl who had 'diabetes and complexities of anorexia'. 'If the safeguards in this Bill fail, even once, it will be a young woman like Jessica who dies, it will be parents like Leslie and Neil who lose a child. That is a terrible tragedy no family should ever have to endure,' she said. 'No-one in this House will be able to say truthfully that we did not know or didn't see this coming. That is not compassion, that is abandonment. 'I will not be complicit in that and I hope this House will not be either.' Ms Shah said: 'This is literally a matter of life and death. If this Bill passes that it doesn't have the safeguards, there's no coming back from those decisions.' Conservative MP for Reigate Rebecca Paul said she supported Ms Shah's amendment, because it 'addresses a big risk'. She said: 'In the case of anorexia, there are physical manifestations of the illness, such as malnutrition and diabetes, that might mean the patient meets the definition of being terminally ill, and that is the nub of the problem here. 'The Bill doesn't adequately rule out physical manifestations caused by mental illness.' Ms Eshalomi said she had 'voted against this Bill at second reading on the grounds of inadequate safeguards against the coercion of minority communities', and added: 'I'm sad to say I'm even more worried now than I was then.' The Vauxhall and Camberwell Green MP also said: 'It is because we recognise that if this Bill passes, it may impact everyone, not just those who may wish to die. It is not wrong or scaremongering to consider the wider family life, relationships with feelings of burdens or coercion including vulnerable women and people from the BME (black and minority ethnic) community at the end of their life. 'It is not wrong or scaremongering for us as politicians as we continue to receive correspondence from our constituents about the broken state of our NHS and social care, and for us to think carefully about a Bill which may alter the very relationship between doctors and their patients. 'It is frankly insulting to disabled people, hardworking professionals up and down the country who have raised many valid concerns about this Bill, to have it dismissed as religious beliefs.' Addressing Ms Shah's amendment, Ms Leadbeater told the Commons she had previously 'worked with a number of people with eating disorders'. She said: 'Eating disorders cause huge distress for individuals and their families and loved ones, but with care and with the right treatments, it is possible for people to recover and to go back to leading a full and fulfilling life.' From the despatch box, health minister Stephen Kinnock said whether or not to approve Ms Shah's proposal was 'a policy choice for Parliament' but warned it 'risks introducing some uncertainty over a persons' eligibility for assistance under the Bill'. He added: 'Recognising the intent of this amendment, we do not believe it would render the Bill unworkable.'
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
MP ‘will not be complicit' in approving assisted dying law in safeguards call
Assisted dying safeguards to prevent coercion and 'terrible tragedy' are 'inadequate', MPs have argued as they debated a draft new law. Labour's Naz Shah warned that the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is 'literally a matter of life and death' and said she would not be 'complicit' in approving a law without adequate protections. Her colleague Florence Eshalomi told the Commons that she too opposed the proposal to legislate for assisted dying, as a result of 'inadequate safeguards against the coercion of minority communities'. At Friday's debate about the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, Ms Shah tried to amend the proposal so that a person would not meet the requirements for an assisted death 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking'. Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP for Spen Valley who proposed the Bill, told MPs that people would not qualify for an assisted death solely on the basis of an eating disorder. But Ms Shah, the MP for Bradford West, said she had spoken to the parents of a girl who had 'diabetes and complexities of anorexia'. 'If the safeguards in this Bill fail, even once, it will be a young woman like Jessica who dies, it will be parents like Leslie and Neil who lose a child. That is a terrible tragedy no family should ever have to endure,' she said. 'No-one in this House will be able to say truthfully that we did not know or didn't see this coming. That is not compassion, that is abandonment. 'I will not be complicit in that and I hope this House will not be either.' Ms Shah said: 'This is literally a matter of life and death. If this Bill passes that it doesn't have the safeguards, there's no coming back from those decisions.' Conservative MP for Reigate Rebecca Paul said she supported Ms Shah's amendment, because it 'addresses a big risk'. She said: 'In the case of anorexia, there are physical manifestations of the illness, such as malnutrition and diabetes, that might mean the patient meets the definition of being terminally ill, and that is the nub of the problem here. 'The Bill doesn't adequately rule out physical manifestations caused by mental illness.' Ms Eshalomi said she had 'voted against this Bill at second reading on the grounds of inadequate safeguards against the coercion of minority communities', and added: 'I'm sad to say I'm even more worried now than I was then.' The Vauxhall and Camberwell Green MP also said: 'It is because we recognise that if this Bill passes, it may impact everyone, not just those who may wish to die. It is not wrong or scaremongering to consider the wider family life, relationships with feelings of burdens or coercion including vulnerable women and people from the BME (black and minority ethnic) community at the end of their life. 'It is not wrong or scaremongering for us as politicians as we continue to receive correspondence from our constituents about the broken state of our NHS and social care, and for us to think carefully about a Bill which may alter the very relationship between doctors and their patients. 'It is frankly insulting to disabled people, hardworking professionals up and down the country who have raised many valid concerns about this Bill, to have it dismissed as religious beliefs.' Addressing Ms Shah's amendment, Ms Leadbeater told the Commons she had previously 'worked with a number of people with eating disorders'. She said: 'Eating disorders cause huge distress for individuals and their families and loved ones, but with care and with the right treatments, it is possible for people to recover and to go back to leading a full and fulfilling life.' From the despatch box, health minister Stephen Kinnock said whether or not to approve Ms Shah's proposal was 'a policy choice for Parliament' but warned it 'risks introducing some uncertainty over a persons' eligibility for assistance under the Bill'. He added: 'Recognising the intent of this amendment, we do not believe it would render the Bill unworkable.'
