Suella Braverman, the education spokesman for Reform UK, has proposed that all schools be required to fly the Union flag and sing the national anthem. Speaking at a party conference in Birmingham, Braverman also pledged to reduce public funding for specific university courses she deems low-value.
The Union flag and national anthem mandate for every school
During a speech at the Reform UK conference in Birmingham, Suella Braverman declared that a future Reform UK government would make it compulsory for every school to display the Union flag and lead students in singing the national anthem. According to the report, Braverman believes these measures are necessary to demonstrate to young people "what patriotism looks like" and to instill a sense of national pride in the next generation.
The proposal extends beyond the flag to include the singing of "great hymns" in classrooms. Braverman framed these requirements as a way to rescue the education system from what she describes as a culture of negativity, suggesting that the physical and auditory symbols of the state are essential tools for national cohesion.
A 20 per cent funding cut for 'Mickey Mouse' degrees
Suella Braverman has pledged to slash taxpayer funding for student loans and tuition fees by 20 per cent for courses she labels as "Mickey Mouse degrees." As reported, this funding cut would be implemented within the first 100 days of a Reform UK government. Braverman specifically singled out gender studies as a field that students should "pay for themselves" rather than relying on public subsidies.
The proposed policy aims to redirect these public funds toward vocational education. Braverman argued that the "bottom set of courses" currently offer poor teaching and zero job prospects, representing a failure of value for the British taxpayer. by shifting the financial incentive toward trade-based and technical skills, Reform UK intends to realign higher education with the needs of the labor market.
Braverman's battle against 'activist' lessons on white privilege
The education platform presented by Suella Braverman in Birmingham is rooted in a rejection of current pedagogical trends. Braverman claimed that British school curriculums have been "hijacked by activists," specifically criticizing the teaching of white privilege, the history of racism in Britain, and gender identity. She questioned why children are being taught that they can be "born in the wrong body," framing these topics as distractions from a patriotic education.
This rhetoric aligns with a broader international trend of "culture war" politics, where right-wing movements seek to purge critical race theory and gender studies from public institutions. By positioning herself against these "activist" influences, Braverman is attempting to frame Reform UK as the primary defender of traditional British values in the classroom.
From Tory Home Secretary to Reform UK's education lead
The shift in Suella Braverman's political alignment is a significant marker of the current volatility within the British right. Braverman, who previously served as the Home Secretary for the Conservative Party, defected to Reform UK in January. Her transition from a senior cabinet role in the establishment party to a spokesman role in a populist party signals a migration of hard-right policy goals from the Tory mainstream to the Reform UK fringe.
This migration suggests that the policy ideas Braverman is now championing—such as mandatory patriotism and the defunding of liberal arts—may have once been considered too radical for the Conservative Party but are now central to the Reform UK identity. Her presence gives the party a level of administrative experience and name recognition that bolsters its credibility as a potential government-in-waiting .
Which 'bottom set' courses face the funding axe?
Despite the specificity of the 20 per cent figure, several critical details remain unverified in the report. It is currently unclear how Reform UK would define a "Mickey Mouse" degree or what objective metrics would be used to identify the "bottom set" of courses. While gender studies was explicitly mentioned, the report does not provide a comprehensive list of other disciplines that would lose funding.
Furthermore, the report does not explain how the party would legally navigate existing tuition fee contracts or the potential backlash from universities whose budgets would be suddenly decimated. Whether these pledges are viable legislative goals or primarily rhetorical tools for the Birmingham conference remains an open question.
Comments 0