Gayathri Kallukaran is a Junior Journalist with Eastern Eye. She has a Master’s degree in Journalism and Mass Communication from St. Paul’s College, Bengaluru, and brings over five years of experience in content creation, including two years in digital journalism. She covers stories across culture, lifestyle, travel, health, and technology, with a creative yet fact-driven approach to reporting. Known for her sensitivity towards human interest narratives, Gayathri’s storytelling often aims to inform, inspire, and empower. Her journey began as a layout designer and reporter for her college’s daily newsletter, where she also contributed short films and editorial features. Since then, she has worked with platforms like FWD Media, Pepper Content, and Petrons.com, where several of her interviews and features have gained spotlight recognition. Fluent in English, Malayalam, Tamil, and Hindi, she writes in English and Malayalam, continuing to explore inclusive, people-focused storytelling in the digital space.
School uniforms have long been a feature of British education, but recent developments have reignited national debate about their role, cost, and fairness. As the government announces new measures to tackle the rising expense of uniforms, parents, educators and policymakers are divided on the future of the tradition. Here are the top five reasons why school uniforms are once again at the centre of controversy in the UK.
1. Rising costs for families
One of the biggest concerns is the financial burden school uniforms place on families. According to recent surveys, the average cost of a complete uniform can reach several hundred pounds per child per year. Many parents argue that branded items, such as school-specific blazers and jumpers, unnecessarily inflate costs. Campaigners are calling for more affordable, non-branded alternatives to ease the strain, particularly during the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.
2. Limited supplier options
In many cases, parents are required to purchase uniforms from designated suppliers. These exclusive arrangements often limit competition, keeping prices high. The government’s Education (Guidance about Costs of School Uniforms) Act 2021 intended to tackle this issue by encouraging schools to offer greater flexibility, but critics say many schools have been slow to change, leaving parents with little choice.
3. Concerns about equality and inclusion
Uniforms are often defended as a means to promote equality, reducing visible signs of wealth differences among students. However, critics argue that the high costs actually reinforce inequalities, with some families struggling to meet school requirements. There is also growing discussion about how gendered uniform rules affect inclusion, with campaigners pushing for more flexible options for students of all gender identities.
4. Debate over educational benefits
Supporters of school uniforms claim that they encourage discipline, improve focus, and create a sense of school pride. However, others question whether these benefits are truly supported by evidence. Some studies suggest there is little direct link between wearing a uniform and academic achievement. This has led to calls for schools to reconsider whether mandatory uniforms are the best way to foster positive learning environments.
5. Environmental impact
An emerging concern is the environmental footprint of school uniforms. Fast production of cheap uniforms often results in low-quality garments that wear out quickly, leading to frequent replacements and textile waste. Campaigners are urging schools and manufacturers to adopt more sustainable practices, including offering uniforms made from recycled or ethically sourced materials.
The debate over school uniforms in the UK highlights broader issues around affordability, equality, and modernisation within the education system. While tradition and uniformity remain valued by many, increasing pressure from parents, campaigners, and politicians could drive significant changes in how school dress codes are implemented in the years ahead.
Keir Starmer speaks during a reception for public sector workers at 10 Downing Street in London on July 1, 2025. (Photo by CARL COURT/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
PRIME MINISTER Keir Starmer faced the most serious test of his leadership on Tuesday (1) as his government’s flagship welfare reforms came under fierce attack from within his own party.
The day was marked by emotional speeches, last-minute concessions, and a deep sense of division among Labour MPs, many of whom said the proposed changes would push vulnerable people into poverty
The atmosphere in the House of Commons as tense, with about 50 Labour MPs expected to vote against the bill, reported The Times.
The government, aware of the scale of the rebellion, was reportedly considering further concessions, including delaying the most controversial measures until after a full review of the welfare system.
One of the most contentious points was the introduction of a four-point threshold for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) eligibility, which critics said would deny help to those unable to wash or dress below the waist from November 2026
Marie Tidball, one of the only MPs with a visible physical disability, delivered a moving speech, saying, “It is with a broken heart that I will be voting against this bill today. As a matter of conscience, I need my constituents to know I cannot support the proposed changes to PIP as currently drafted. Low-level support like PIP helps disabled people, keeping us out of the dark corners of hospitals, prisons and social care settings.”
She warned that the changes could put about 150,000 people into poverty.
Apsana Begum, MP for Poplar and Limehouse, has announced she will vote against the bill, citing deep concerns about its impact on disabled people.
Apsana Begum
Begum said, “When it comes to people’s lives and wellbeing, there can be no compromise. Politics should serve people – not the other way around.” She criticised the planned £3.5 billion cuts to disability benefits, calling them unacceptable.
The MP expressed strong opposition to what she described as a “two-tier system” that would force disabled people into greater hardship.
Begum also pointed out the anxiety felt by disabled constituents in her area, who have already endured years of austerity and hardship. “I say to them: I am with you,” she declared.
She also condemned other welfare measures such as the two-child limit and the “poisonous narrative” that blames people for their poverty. “My constituents voted for an end to austerity. They want a welfare system that supports people, not one that pushes into poverty,” Begum said.
“That’s why I’m voting against this cruel Disability Benefit Cuts bill”
Rebecca Long Bailey, a former Labour leadership contender, echoed these concerns. She said the planned cuts “will still push hundreds of thousands of vulnerable sick and disabled people into poverty,” adding that “existing claimants will live in fear that if the situation changes and they are reassessed, they could lose everything under the new system.”
Long Bailey criticised the government for rushing the bill through without proper consultation, warning that it would worsen human rights violations already highlighted by the United Nations
Dame Meg Hillier, who had initially led efforts to block the bill, withdrew her amendment after the government agreed to a “staggered approach.”
She told the Commons, “Divided parties do not hold power or government. If we want to power our government, if we want to see our values in this country, we have to vote for this today.” Yet she admitted that “there is still a lot to be done” to protect disabled people and those seeking work
Meanwhile, the government’s climbdown last week was prompted by a major revolt from Labour MPs who argued the original proposals went too far. More than 120 MPs had signalled their willingness to rebel, forcing ministers to water down the changes.
The new plan means the stricter criteria for sickness and disability benefits will only apply to new claimants, not those already receiving support
Secretary of state for work and pensions, Liz Kendall, presented the revised bill to parliament, but newly released government data estimated that even the watered-down reforms could push an extra 150,000 people into poverty.
This left some Labour MPs still reluctant to back the bill, with backbenchers exposing “so many holes in the government’s plans,” as one put it
Business secretary Jonathan Reynolds told Times Radio, “We’re all trying to find a way to protect the most vulnerable people and get people back into work if they need it,” defending the government’s approach.
However, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch rejected the bill outright, calling it “a fudge” and saying, “A fundamental and serious programme to reform our welfare system is required, and this bill is not it."
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.
Letby, from Hereford in western England, was charged in 2020 after a series of deaths in the hospital's neo-natal unit.
POLICE on Tuesday said they had arrested three senior staff members at the hospital where nurse Lucy Letby was found guilty of murdering seven babies. The arrests were made on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.
The investigation was launched in 2023 at the Countess of Chester Hospital (CoCH) in northwest England, following Letby’s conviction and life sentence for killings that took place between 2015 and 2016.
Arrests part of wider criminal probe
Detective Superintendent Paul Hughes said the three individuals were "part of the senior leadership team at the CoCH in 2015-2016" and were arrested on Monday.
He confirmed they were held on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter and have been released on bail.
Hughes said the arrests were the first under the wider criminal investigation into the hospital’s handling of the baby deaths. He added that the arrests had no impact on Letby’s convictions.
Letby case and ongoing review
The case drew national attention during trials held in 2023 and 2024. Letby was convicted of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others.
Letby, from Hereford in western England, was charged in 2020 after a series of deaths in the hospital's neo-natal unit. She has maintained her innocence throughout.
According to the prosecution, she attacked the premature babies—usually during night shifts—by injecting air, overfeeding with milk, or using insulin.
In February, a panel of international experts said the evidence used to convict her was flawed. They suggested the babies may have died due to natural causes or poor medical care.
Letby’s legal team has submitted an application to the independent Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) to examine if there was a possible miscarriage of justice in her two trials.
(With inputs from AFP)
Keep ReadingShow less
Uber Eats and Deliveroo will tighten ID checks, including facial verification, to curb illegal migrant work after UK government pressure. (Photo: Getty Images)
FOOD delivery companies Deliveroo, Uber Eats and Just Eat have agreed to strengthen security measures, including facial verification checks, to prevent irregular migrants from working through their platforms, following criticism from the UK government.
The announcement came after the Labour government summoned the three firms for a meeting in response to a report by The Sun which exposed how some migrants were bypassing rules and working illegally in the gig economy sector.
Although the companies already have controls to verify workers’ legal right to work in the UK, the Home Office said "there continues to be abuse in the sector" through account sharing.
Facial verification checks to be expanded
According to the government, many asylum seekers who cross the Channel and await decisions on their asylum claims are using verified delivery driver accounts rented from others to work illegally. These individuals do not have the legal right to work while their claims are pending.
The Home Office said the delivery platforms have “agreed to increase the use of facial verification checks” to ensure “only registered account holders can work off their platforms.” The companies also committed to “combat illegal working”.
“We are taking a zero-tolerance approach to illegal working across the board,” said Border Security and Asylum minister Angela Eagle.
Immigration pressure and proposed legislation
Prime minister Keir Starmer has faced pressure from the anti-immigration Reform UK party led by Nigel Farage to reduce irregular migration. A new immigration bill currently before parliament seeks to expand police powers against smuggling networks and tighten work eligibility controls.
Since January, over 19,000 people have crossed the Channel in small boats to reach the UK from France, marking a record number for this point in the year despite efforts to deter such journeys.
French officials, including former interior minister Gerald Darmanin, have said that the availability of illegal work opportunities in the UK continues to act as a pull factor for migrants making the crossing.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
Joseph has chaired several BRIT Awards shows and was an executive producer of the Oscar and BAFTA-winning 2015 documentary Amy.
THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF ARTS (RSA) has announced the appointment of David Joseph CBE as its next chief executive officer. He will take over the role in September, succeeding Andy Haldane.
Joseph previously served as chairman and CEO of Universal Music UK for 17 years. During his time at the company, he oversaw its transformation into a global exporter of British music and worked with several major international artists.
He began his career in advertising before moving into music, where he held roles in artist development and label management. He became chairman and CEO of Universal Music UK in 2008.
Alongside his commercial career, Joseph has been involved in a number of social and cultural initiatives. In 2019, he launched Universal Music’s Creative Differences initiative, which produced the first industry handbook for supporting neurodiversity in the workplace. The handbook has been adopted by more than 200 organisations globally.
He is a founding board member of Julie’s Bicycle, a group focused on climate issues in the cultural sector, and served on the National Council of Arts Council England for eight years. In 2013, he collaborated with Baroness Doreen Lawrence to mark the 20th anniversary of Stephen Lawrence’s murder through the Unity project. He also serves as Chair of the Grenfell Foundation.
Joseph has chaired several BRIT Awards shows and was an executive producer of the Oscar and BAFTA-winning 2015 documentary Amy.
RSA Chair Sir Loyd Grossman said: “David’s commitment to effecting social change, his compassion and his commitment to nurturing people is exemplary.
“We are thrilled that David will join us in the autumn, knowing that he will foster a collaborative and caring culture that speaks to our fellows, partners, staff teams and the wider world. These qualities make David superbly placed to lead the RSA into its next vital phase, and we are thrilled to have him on board.”
Commenting on his appointment, Joseph said: “The RSA has a remarkable heritage and untapped potential. At a time when fresh thinking and collective action are urgently needed across the globe, the RSA is uniquely positioned to drive meaningful change - uniting its rich tradition of arts, creativity and policy influence with the energy of its global Fellowship to spark ideas that shape society. I’m excited to join such a talented organisation where we will build a bold new chapter together.”
Keep ReadingShow less
People take part in a protest against disability welfare cuts on June 30, 2025 in London. (Photo: Getty Images)
DOZENS of Labour MPs are expected to vote against the government’s welfare reforms despite recent concessions aimed at easing opposition.
The government had initially planned to tighten eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (Pip) but later said the stricter rules would only apply to new claimants from November 2025.
Ministers also promised a review of the Pip assessment process, in partnership with disability organisations, due to conclude by autumn 2026.
More than 120 Labour MPs had signed an amendment to block the legislation, though a revised amendment supported by 39 MPs and backed by disability charities remains active.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch told the BBC her party would oppose the bill, saying, “The benefits bill is too high. It was £40bn just before Covid. It is now projected to be a £100bn by 2030. And what Labour is doing is not making any savings at all.”
Labour MP Olivia Blake, who opposes the reforms, told BBC Newsnight, “I strongly believe that these kind of punitive measures of cutting welfare are not going to have the outcomes that we've been told they will.”
According to Department for Work and Pensions modelling, the revised proposals could push 150,000 people into poverty by 2030, down from an earlier estimate of 250,000.
Sir Stephen Timms, who will lead the review, told BBC Newsnight the government’s measures would help reduce poverty and make Pip more sustainable.