HMRC 'Guilt of Being British' Seminar Backlash

Charlotte Baroukh

Tax Expert @ Pie

4 min read

An internal HMRC seminar exploring British colonial history and cultural identity has triggered a political and public backlash, prompting the tax office to cancel the event. Intended as a diversity and inclusion exercise focused on the experiences of South Asian British staff, the hour-long virtual session promised to explore themes of "guilt, pride and dual identity."

But its timing, set against widespread criticism of HMRC’s customer service performance, sparked fierce responses from government figures and campaigners. Critics condemned the event as a misuse of taxpayer funded work hours, arguing that staff should be focused on improving call handling and response rates.

Others defended the intention behind the session, arguing that reflective spaces for minority staff play an important role in building an inclusive workplace. The debate reflects a broader culture clash within the civil service and wider society, where diversity initiatives, public trust, and operational efficiency increasingly intersect.

What Was the Seminar About?

The session was described internally as a “listening circle” exploring the emotional complexity of being both South Asian and British. It was part of HMRC’s Race Network initiative and was intended to reflect on “the emotional weight of colonial history” as well as “barriers, bias and expectations” faced by South Asian women.

Promoted on HMRC’s staff intranet, the event aimed to create space for reflection on identity, pride, and cultural heritage. It was to be held remotely, during work hours from 11 am to midday, and was attended by a very small number of employees, reportedly fewer than 0.1% of HMRC’s workforce.

Why Did It Spark Backlash?

The event drew immediate criticism for being scheduled during work time, especially while HMRC continues to face complaints over its customer service performance. Critics accused the department of focusing on so-called “woke” initiatives instead of resolving issues affecting taxpayers directly.

Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative Party leader, called the seminar “nonsense” and said: “Is it any wonder the public hate dealing with HMRC, now we learn the staff are being taught to feel guilty about being British?” She added that under a future Conservative government, “Public bodies will be proud of Britain, not ashamed of it. We’ll defend our history, not apologise for it.”

HMRC’s Response and Cancellation

After the event made national headlines, HMRC confirmed it had been cancelled and issued a statement saying the focus would now be entirely on “serving customers day in, day out.”

A spokesperson said: “This event has rightly been cancelled, with our full focus being on serving our customers. Lessons will be learnt.”

Despite the political pressure, HMRC clarified that the session was optional and did not affect service delivery, given its limited attendance.

Service Standards: A Mixed Picture

Critics of the event linked it directly to HMRC’s performance, particularly on the phones. In early 2024, the department was reportedly answering only 66.4% of calls, far below its target of 85%.

However, more recent data from late 2024 indicates that HMRC met its 85% call answering target for the final quarter, showing a marked improvement in performance. Still, the wider narrative of taxpayer frustration remains.

Many callers report waiting more than 22 minutes, with around 40,000 people disconnected after waiting over an hour in 2023–24. The Public Accounts Committee previously described HMRC's service levels as an “all-time low,” adding fuel to the argument that such departments should focus solely on frontline delivery.

What’s the Broader Issue Here?

While only a handful of employees took part in the event, its existence became a lightning rod for a wider debate around civil service culture, public accountability, and the place of inclusion focused training in the workplace.

Some argue that such seminars provide valuable space for minority staff to process their experiences and feel represented. Others see them as tone deaf or unnecessary, especially when public facing services are under strain.

This controversy mirrors tensions seen across various public institutions, where the balance between internal staff wellbeing and taxpayer service delivery continues to evolve in the spotlight.

Conclusion

The cancellation of HMRC’s 'Guilt of Being British' seminar is a potent reminder of how perception shapes public trust. While the event itself was minor in scale and internal in nature, it became a national talking point due to its timing, topic, and wider public frustration with HMRC’s service delivery.

More recent data shows HMRC has made strides to improve phone response times and customer service, but lingering public dissatisfaction left the department exposed to criticism. The seminar offered a case study in how diversity and inclusion efforts, however well-intentioned, can be portrayed as distractions when core service standards fall short.

As public institutions look to foster inclusive workplaces, they must walk a tightrope between internal morale and external service demands. For HMRC, the message from the public was clear: get the basics right first.