The National Audit Office (NAO), Britain's publicly funded spending watchdog, launched a six-week diversity internship that explicitly bars middle-class white men from applying, according to a job advertisement that closed in February. Only applicants who are female, of black heritage, or from lower socio-economic backgrounds are eligible for the £25,089 pro-rated role in Newcastle. The scheme has drawn sharp criticism from politicians who label it 'blatant discrimination' and an example of 'anti-white ideology,' as the source reports.

The three criteria that closed the door to middle-class white men

The NAO's diversity internship for summer 2025 set three eligibility requirements: applicants must be female, of black heritage,or from a lower socio-economic background. The job advert explicitly stated that middle-class white men need not apply, as the source article notes. Successful interns receive a pro-rated salary of £25,089 to work in the Newcastle office, supporting audit projects and building professional networks. Applications closed in February after the NAO reported an 'exceptionally high number of submissions.'

A similar scheme ran in 2024, with the same three diversity criteria and a pro-rated salary of over £24,000 for Newcastle and over £27,000 for London. That eight-week internship also barred applicants who did not meet at least one of the diversity conditions, according to the source. The consistency suggests the NAO views this as a long-term positive-action initiative,not a one-off experiment.

Reform UK's Zia Yusuf and the 'anti-white' accusation

Reform UK's home affairs spokesman Zia Yusuf branded the NAO's criteria 'blatant discrimination' and said they represent 'anti-white, anti-merit ideology masquerading as diversity and inclusion ,' as quoted in the source. Conservative shadow equalities minister Claire Coutinho added that 'identity politics will only make us more divided' and that people 'should all be judged by the content of our character and not protected characteristics.' The source reports that Coutinho made similar comments last year when the civil service Fast Stream was revised to target working-class applicants.

The political backlash has been swift, with both politicians framing the internship as a direct violation of the principle of meritocracy. The source does not include any response from the NAO to these specific accusations beyond a general defense of the scheme.

The legal foundation: what the Equality Act 2010 actually says

Under the Equality Act 2010,companies and public authorities can take 'positive action' to address disadvantage or under-representation, as the source explains. The employer must demonstrate that the action is proportionate to the issue it seeks to address. The NAO's spokesman defended the internship as 'valuable work experience in the audit sector' that 'opens doors to people who are under-represented in the sector including anyone from less affluent backgrounds,' according to the source.

The key legal question — whether excluding an entire demographic group (middle-class white men) is proportionate — remains unaddressed in the public statements reported by the source. Without a detailed proportionality analysis, the scheme sits in a grey area that courts have not fully clarified for such targeted exclusion criteria.

A pattern beyond the NAO: MI5, MI6, GCHQ and the civil service Fast Stream

The NAO is not alone in using race- or class-based eligibility. As the source reports, Britain's intelligence services — MI5, MI6, and GCHQ — run paid summer internships that ban white participants, open only to applicants from black, Asian, mixed heritage or ethnic minority backgrounds and those from disadvantaged upbringings. shadow home secretary Chris Philp described those requirements as 'racist,' according to the source. Last year, the civil service revised its Fast Stream graduate programme to target working-class students, making children of plumbers, receptionists, and van drivers eligible, while excluding those from more affluent backgrounds.

What remains unanswered is whether any of these schemes, including the NAO's, have undergone independent legal review to confirm they meet the proportionality test under the Equality Act. The source does not provide that detail. Without it, the NAO internship — and its counterparts — risk remaining perpetual lightning rods for accusations of discrimination, regardless of legal justification.