Is Britains DEI Dodgy?

Britain's £50 Million Diversity Question

The UK has been coughing up over £50 million a year on diversity, equity and inclusion programs (DEI). Here's an uncomfortable question: Are they actually working or are we throwing bundles of cash at a fire only to make flames?

This isn't about whether DEI principles matter—of course they do. I'm just asking if it's wise to splash out on morally prestigious awards when other options exist. 

5 min read

The Financial Investment

The numbers are getting harder to ignore:

Local councils: Research from the TaxPayers' Alliance show the cost of DEI roles almost doubled from just over £12 million in 2020/21 to almost £23 million in 2022/23!

Government: Diversity managers often earn in excess of £40k, while the rest of us are expected to accept austerity! UK LinkedIn data from 2020 shows almost twice as many diversity and inclusion workers as many other countries.

What is the Research Saying? 

This is more than just a political talking point for weddings and funerals, the government's own research is sounding the alarm. The official Inclusion at Work Panel report (2024), concluded that many DEI programs are being implemented without any proof that they work, this shows they can be counter-productive! Not good, especially who lost disability benefits. 

Even though employers might want to ‘do the right thing,’ they are ‘resorting to ineffective practices that can be polarising.’ Our own governments research says diversity and inclusion isn't even working. Yet evidently the spending keeps sky rocketting! 

On The Other Hand

The supporters of these programs will say that they tackle hidden prejudices, that change requires sustained investment. Fair enough, if that's how best intentions appear where's the evidence to show how it works?

If we go on research from the likes of the London School of Economics (LSE) we can get some clear facts. In a 2024 study they found that having a diverse workforce is associated with stronger long-term market performance!

The analysis from McKinsey & Company conclude that companies with plenty of women and ethnic minorities will likely bring employers above-average profitability. 

These are valid points. However the question remains: are current DEI methods benefitting the public? Is it doing what it says on the tin? 

Don't be an Appalled Paul

What People Actually Experience:

•  At Work: Despite all the money spent, an Ipsos poll in 2025 uncovered deep divisions in public opinion. While there is widespread support for specific things like flexible working, 36% of Britons believe DEI efforts have ‘gone too far.’ To be fair the view is particularly strong among men (43%), those over 55 (47%), and people from white backgrounds (38%). 

• At University: The anecdotes of ‘walking on eggshells’ and feeling more divided after diversity training are common. 

The focus on demographic differences increases segregation rather than foster genuine integration. Imagine the separate ceremonies and support groups for people of different backgrounds! 

The Bigger Picture

These numbers often fail to show real progress. For example, while the Civil Service has increased its number of ethnic minority workers, the number of those workers in the most senior leadership roles still lag behind the overall population. We might argue it demonstrates how programs and higher costs do not always equal better results.

The Self-Perpetuating Problem

Diversity consultation is a big business today. Consultants profit when they find inclusion, diversity and equity problems, and of course, their departments will grow when they document inequality. 

There is financial incentive for peoples problems to continue, not for them to be solved. NHS Individual Placement and Support (IPS) workers are incentivised to find sustainable jobs for the unemployed who may not even be ready for employment!

What Actually Works: A Path Forward

Why should the path to genuine progress be about abandoning the goal of equality? We should shift resources from the more bureaucratic roles to tangible solutions, ones with a proven track record:

•  Address real barriers: For instance, rather than having DEI services, committees and so on, why not pay for a young person from a low-income family to train as a firefighter or a welder? That will attract more diverse individuals from various backgrounds.

• Build shared purpose: Make common goals and shared values count, don't emphasise demographic differences.

•  Measure results: Track real outcomes, promotion rates and pay gap closures.

•  Let relationships develop naturally: When we force interactions they backfire.

The Bottom Line

We've been presented with a system that increases racial and social class awareness while claiming to reduce these things when they don’t. If we want effective DEI support someone should reform it. The stakes are too high for virtue signalling culture.

After years of division, our towns and cities need something that is genuinely effective. Repeating the same thing while expecting different results isn't progressive—it's just expensive madness.

Conclusion

The demand for these DEI services is driven by both corporate and public pressure, but not the proven results we need to drive this forward. DEI is circulating the problems they hope to end, it has created wealthy people another profitable market! 

It's a ‘badge of virtue’ that every company wants to wear. DEI is a strong moral imperative, however, charging money for a training award without knowing whether or not the programs actually work isn't ethical.  

The irony is that DEI services widen inequality gaps, which is classism caught red handed: Professional-class solutions for working-class problems. They entrench the hierarchy further as professional administrators who oversee inequality instead of ending it.