While this week’s demonstration in Westminster against plans to register yeshivot might have been organised by Charedi radicals, there is no doubt that it reflects far wider dismay.

For many in Stamford Hill, the provisions of the Schools Bill appear to be the latest assault on their education system by the “muscular liberalism” they believe is being championed by Ofsted.

Treating yeshivot as schools, as the Bill proposes to do, would subject them to requirements to discuss LGBT issues with pupils. These have previously been set out in guidance from the Department for Education and continue to be resisted by existing Charedi schools. The DfE would compel them to offer lessons in secular subjects and force them to open their doors to Ofsted inspectors.

“Compromise” is not one of the most popular words in the Stamford Hill lexicon and certainly not openly on anyone’s lips when it comes to the defence of yeshivot.

Some believe the Government may have to climb down eventually, if only because of the practical implications of trying to enforce the current proposals. Suppose the yeshivot are all registered. What happens when they refuse point-blank to implement Ofsted’s demands? The Secretary of State for Education would be entitled to suspend or close them down (and one of the Bill’s more controversial proposals is to give him more powers). This would leave some 1,500 boys from the age of 13 to 16 educationally homeless, however. The local council is not going to be able to accommodate them in its schools, and their parents would refuse to allow them to go there anyway.

One option would be to stop short of classifying yeshivot as schools, but instead to introduce lighter-touch regulation, which would require them to have external inspection for safeguarding but leave their curriculum intact. At the same time, secular tuition would be covered by home-schooling or some sort of after-school clubs beyond the yeshivah walls.

But whether either side is currently open to suggestions is another matter.