Yehudis Fletcher’s recent article for Jewish News, “Charedi Leaders Don’t Believe Their Own Rhetoric and Neither Should You”, epitomises the very misconceptions and prejudices that lie at the heart of any meaningful discussion on the Schools Bill 2025. Being part of the Orthodox Jewish community and a passionate advocate for authentic Torah education, I am compelled to address the inaccuracies and hurtful rhetoric advanced.
The first is Ms. Fletcher’s assertion that the Bill’s unique identifier for children is little more than an administrative tool to safeguard. The analogy she dismisses, comparing it to the tattooing of numbers during the Holocaust, is by no means made lightly.
Deep fears reflect a state of surveillance, desire, and control—assuming historical precedence, where only ‘administrative measures’ have been fostered. Reducing such notions to extremist rhetoric discredits all the legitimate community angst grounded within lived historical trauma.
The thought here being that “religiously particular” is the single card Charedi leaders have will be reductive and dismissive. This argument completely discounts the substantive model of education that has served this community well quite literally for generations. Charedi education tends to turn out citizens who are ethical, respect the law, and contribute much to wider society.
These claims of massive-scale educational neglect are unfounded and empirically unsupported. For example, large-scale reports by Hackney Council and Ofsted often report the good achievement of schools in promoting academic progress, exemplary behaviour, and strong community values.
Rabbi Asher Gratt
Ms. Fletcher’s critique that “yeshivas run on schedules that do not plausibly allow for adequate home education” demonstrates a basic misrepresentation of our educational framework.
Charedi education is not some sort of workaround for statutory obligations; it is a holistic system that marries rigorous Torah study with practical life skills. Students emerge multilingual, often well-spoken in English, Hebrew, Aramaic and Yiddish, with analytical abilities honed through intensive textual study. These skills are not only transferable but have enabled many graduates to succeed in business and professional sectors.
The claim that the Bill is “urgent” and “does what it says on the tin” is misleading. This legislation does not protect children; it punishes parents for acting within their legal rights and educating their children in a way consistent with their religious beliefs. Contrary to what Ms. Fletcher has said, the provisions of the Bill, such as mandatory registration and surveillance of home-educated children, directly violate Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, protecting the right of everybody to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, and Article 2 of Protocol 1, guaranteeing the parental rights to educate children according to their own convictions.
Charedi education is not some sort of workaround for statutory obligations; it is a holistic system that marries rigorous Torah study with practical life skills
Furthermore, Ms. Fletcher’s reliance on anecdotal evidence, such as unnamed Charedi parents allegedly seeking secular education, is neither compelling nor representative. While no community is monolithic, the overwhelming majority of Charedi parents actively choose Torah education for their children. The significant growth in Charedi school enrolment over the past decades – documented by institutions such as the Institute for Jewish Policy Research – reflects deep parental satisfaction with this educational model.
It is a misleading caricature to say, as the article does, that Charedi leaders are afraid that some of their number may be lost to wider society. This preservation of religious and cultural values is not born out of fear but from commitment to a way of life that has kept our community intact for millennia. An accusation that “ordinary Charedi parents” are silenced or controlled is patronising and without foundation. In fact, parents in our community are deeply involved in their children’s education many times at great personal sacrifice because they realise its unequalled worth.
The accusation that “ordinary Charedi parents” are silenced or controlled is patronising and without foundation
Ms. Fletcher’s piece also sidesteps the broader implications of the Schools Bill. By forcing state standards onto faith-based education, the Bill sets a perilous precedent for all religious communities. Today, it targets yeshivas; tomorrow, it may undermine the autonomy of other faith schools. This is not a “Charedi issue”-it is a fundamental challenge to religious freedom and parental rights in the United Kingdom.
The real question is whether we, as a society, value diversity and pluralism or seek to homogenise under the guise of safeguarding. The Charedi community’s resistance to the Schools Bill is not an attempt to evade scrutiny but to protect an educational heritage that has produced generations of responsible, contributing citizens. To dismiss this as “religious exceptionalism” is to ignore the broader principles of liberty and autonomy at stake.
Rather than demonising an entire community, we must foster constructive dialogue grounded in mutual respect for shared values.
While our collective goal should be the success of every child, the path to achieving it must preserve the freedoms and rights that form the cornerstone of our democracy.
