It feels like every week there’s a new list of things we’re not supposed to say anymore.
The latest chatter from Westminster suggests that by 2027, the linguistic landscape could look even more different. While the government usually frames these moves as making society more inclusive or modern, a lot of people feel it’s just another step toward a culture where everyone is walking on eggshells.
Whether it’s about updating old-fashioned workplace terms or moving away from words with messy historical roots, the debate is heating up over whether we’re becoming more respectful or just far too sensitive for our own good. Here are 10 words and phrases that are being phased out of official and public use as we head toward 2027.
1. Manpower
This one has been on the hit list for a while, but the push to swap it for human resources or workforce is becoming much more formal. The argument is that it’s a bit of an outdated way to describe a group of people that’s roughly 50% female. You’ll likely see this disappear from government contracts and civil service documents entirely over the next year as part of a broader drive for gender-neutral language. It’s meant to reflect the reality of the modern office, though some see it as a pointless bit of tinkering with a term that everyone already understands.
2. Expatriate
There’s a growing movement to stop using expat for some people while using migrant for others. The idea is that the distinction is often based on wealth or where someone comes from, rather than any actual legal difference in their status. By phasing out expat in official reports, the goal is to treat everyone moving for work with the same terminology. While the government wants a single standard, many Brits living abroad are already pushing back on losing a label they feel describes their specific lifestyle.
3. BAME
The acronym for Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic has already been heavily criticised for being a lazy way to lump very different communities together. Official guidance is moving away from this entirely in policymaking, preferring to name specific ethnic groups instead. It’s a move toward more accurate data and respect for individual identities, rather than treating everyone who isn’t white as a single, homogenous block. It makes sense for health or education stats, but it’s a big shift for departments used to the old shorthand.
4. Invalid carriages
It sounds like something out of a Victorian novel, but “invalid carriage” is actually still the official legal term used in the UK to describe mobility scooters and powered wheelchairs. It’s a label that dates back decades, to a time when disability was seen as something to be hidden away rather than supported. Labour has launched a consultation in early 2026 to finally bin this term in favour of “mobility devices.” The move is about more than just words; it’s about treating the millions of people who rely on these tools with a bit of modern dignity. By 2027, the goal is to have the new terminology baked into the law, making sure our legal system finally catches up with how we actually talk in the real world.
5. Master and Slave
In technical and engineering circles, these terms have been used for decades to describe how different parts of a system interact. However, the historical weight of the words is finally catching up with them, and they’re being replaced with primary and secondary or controller and agent. You can expect to see these changes written into the new tech and manufacturing standards being rolled out across the country. It’s a huge job to update all the technical manuals, but the consensus in the industry is that the old terms are long overdue a change. However, many companies, including Apple and GitHub, are already replacing the terms with alternates like “main and secondary” or “primary and replica.”
6. Diabetic or Asthmatic
There’s a major shift toward person-first language in the NHS and public health sectors. This means someone is referred to as a person with diabetes, rather than just being defined by their condition. The idea is that a medical diagnosis shouldn’t be a person’s entire identity in the eyes of the state. By 2027, you’ll see this change reflected in all health leaflets and government-funded medical advice. It’s a more compassionate approach, though some patients find the new phrasing a bit clunky.
7. Hard-working families
This might come as a surprise since politicians love the phrase, but it’s being flagged as exclusionary to people who don’t fit the traditional family mould or those unable to work. It can make single people, carers, or the disabled feel like they aren’t part of the conversation. Moving toward terms like households or residents is seen as a way to make sure everyone feels included in economic promises. It’s a tricky one for the spin doctors, as they’ve relied on that phrase to win votes for decades.
8. Illegal immigrant
The shift here is toward using undocumented person or person in the asylum system to describe those without legal status. The logic used by proponents is that a person themselves cannot be illegal, only their actions or their status at a specific time. It’s a move that has sparked a lot of debate about whether it’s an important human rights distinction or just a way to soften the language around a serious issue. It’s a clear sign of the government trying to change the tone of the immigration debate.
9. Rule of thumb
This one is a bit more controversial because the actual origin of the phrase is heavily debated, with some linking it to an old, cruel law. Even if that’s a bit of a myth, the government wants to move toward clearer, less ambiguous language in official guidance. Phasing it out in favour of general principle or rough guide is meant to avoid any potential offence while making instructions easier for everyone to understand. It’s the kind of change that drives traditionalists mad, but it’s becoming the new standard in civil service training.
10. Normal or Regular
When used in a social context, these words can imply that anyone who doesn’t fit a certain standard is abnormal. For example, instead of talking about a regular person, government guidance will likely suggest using average or typical when referring to data. It’s a subtle change designed to stop the state from accidentally implying there’s one correct way for a British citizen to look or live. It’s about being as neutral as possible, even if it makes the language feel a bit more clinical.
11. Mankind
Much like manpower, this is seen as a relic of a time when the male experience was the default for everything. Government communications are being encouraged to use humanity or people instead to be more inclusive. While it seems like a small tweak, it’s part of a wider effort to ensure that the language used by the state reflects everyone living in the UK. Critics argue that mankind has always included everyone, but the new guidance is firm on moving toward more neutral territory.
