I actually have massive issues with the whole thing.
While I agree we need to be honest about our past, removing any reference to what we today consider racist material is, in my opinion, profoundly hypocritical.
The Tate Gallery admits its philanthropic founder, Henry Tate, is associated with slavery (even though not directly connected with it). Many of our institutions have more directly benefitted from the wealth of slavery. Let's face it, the UK is a weathy country in large part due to the wealth stolen from abroad in the British Empire on which the sun never set, and these people were moral based on the opinions of their time. Obviously, in the mindset of those people, the 'primitive' people or 'savages' had to be considered inferior, otherwise the unfairness of the system was too obvious. Some, for example Quakers, may have objected at the time, but they were a minority.
Problem is, are we going to pay massive financial reparations to the rest of the world for ripping them off and for the colonial wars (or murdering other people who so unreasonably refused to play by our rules in their own countries when we were illegal immigrants, basically)? Of course not, and I'm not quite sure it would even be reasonable to expect us to. A lot of it was a very long time ago.
The sensible thing would be to accept the past and understand how this happened - and then take a good hard look in the mirror and ask whether we are much better. Most people are ethical enough until they find something at a cheaper price and don't then want to know how it got that cheap. And, to be clear, I'm not ranting about those of us who bought something essential on Amazon because it cost more at John Lewis and they were skint, my criticism is of those who can afford to care - and don't.
Why was it so hard for [a famous computer and smartphone company], to check whether its products were being made from materials made by child labour in very dangerous working conditions abroad, when a documentary journalist found clear evidence of it? Probably because it made them more money not to check too hard if they wanted to be considered an ethical firm.
And what is our goverment , the one we elected in December, doing to stop us importing this kind of stuff? Very little because we all want a "strong economy "(i.e more stuff and less work). To genuinely care (and some people do care to this extent), we'd have to start living very differently in the name of fairness. Being humans, I'm not sure how many of us could really cope with what that might entail.