ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
Nick Clegg State Education and Hypocrisy?(66 Posts)
Is Nick Clegg a bit of a hypocritic when it comes to state schools
Lib Dem manifesto want to effectively eliminate faith schools - limit staff appointments on faith grounds and make faith schools adopt the same admissions criteria as community schools.
Yet his own children go to Catholic primary schools and he has himself said state secondary schools in London represent a fall off a 'cliff edge' in terms of standards so he hasn't ruled out sending his children private at secondary level.
If he thinks london state secondaries are not good enough for his children why does he want to make faith schools in the capital to same as non-faith alternatives.
I am surprised he hasn't been challenged on this (rather than the snide pieces about his Westminster schooling).
Thank you CecilyP for correcting. Ofcourse, G&L was and still is all girls school.
The article had extracts from Shirley's book. Reading wiki articles, it seems William family owned the house near G&L; but were not living there at that time and therefore, all that arrangement with friend's children etc.
I used to like Shirley a lot until we got into this grammar mania. Wish we still had all those 1300+ grammars for the bright children.
Yes, that bastion of accuracy, Wikipedia.
And the journalist does rather approach Williams from a rather slanted position - "comprehensive mistake". How droll.
I don't know the ins and outs of Williams. But to me there is a major difference between a policitian saying
A. "People should not send children to grammars/indies".
B. "Grammars should be abolished, and I am working towards it".
If A sends DC to grammar then yes, hypocrisy (^the postulation of moral standards to which one's own behavious does not confirm^ - OED). Saying one thing and doing another.
If B does it because they are doing the best for their child in the system that exists (but they rather would not exist), it is not "hypocrisy".
I don't think so! Godolphin was a all girls school!
What Sean O'Grady actually wrote was, 'it was only one of many fine state schools, including mine, to be lost forever,'. The article also said that Williams lived a short distance from the school but that she also took in lodgers - though it is not clear from the article if the lodger's daughter attended Godolphin. A factual inaccuracy, though I don't know if Williams or O'Grady was responsible, is that it was a direct grant school; it wasn't, it was a Voluntary Aided, totally non-feepaying school before it became independent.
The Independent's article is also by an ex-pupil.
However, the point I was making is that the politicians would put their children first, rather than their preachings to us.
There was no catchment area for Godolphin - if you passed the exam with a high enough mark you got in - I know as I was there at the same time ( although a few years below) - the school changed status in my first year there and Rebecca Williams left to go to a comprehensive
No offence meant to any one, but the point is politicians are parents too and when it comes to their own children, they would put their children first over the 'principles' which are for the 'people'.
Diane Abbott, Ruth Kelly are just few examples of being parent first. Neither would Harriet Harman send her son to the Comprehensive, rather than the grammar school, her party wants to abolish.
And this one is review of Shirley's own book. Extracts tells about the novel arrangements.
Really, then read this..... the section on controversies.
Really, then read this..... the section on controversies.
Sorry tiffin boys but you're talking rubbish about Shirley Williams - her daughter went to Godolphin & Latymer when it was a fully funded by ILEA voluntary aided school. When it changed its status to become independent again she removed her daughter and sent her to local comp
By all means get annoyed with politicians' hypocrisy but get your facts right first - and bear in mind that false allegations of fraud are libellous
Talking of hyprocrite politicians, I have not forgotten Shirley Williams either. As Labour's Sec. of Ed, chaired abolition of grammars and then had her own daughter admitted to a surviving grammar (Latymer) hoodwinking the admission criteria, some say fraudulently.
There is brand new catholic school opening in Richmond, short bus ride from -NC's house in Putney - no need to schlep across the river to the oratory
Yeah, but if his local Catholic school was dire, and the local non-denominational one was great, you know that they (or Blairs or anyone else for that matter) wouldn't be so keen to adhere to their religious principles.
There is a hypocrisy, I readily admit that, in that government ministers should be moving heaven and earth to make the state school system, used by the vast majority of British children, replete with good local schools.
The bizarre illusions of 'choice' upon which Gove appears fixated (and Labour secretaries of state like Kelly previously) is the hypocrisy that pisses me off the most.
The complexity and inefficiency of school governance means that it's easy for everyone to blame each other. See, even I'm doing it.
If his local Catholic school was dreadful and full of undesirables would he and his wife still insist on sending their dcs there? Like hell they would.
This same comment was made about the Blairs when they chose to send their first son across London to the Oratory, rather than a local comprehensive catholic school in Islington.
Part of the package that went with marrying a non-catholic was that the catholic partner had to endeavor to bring the children up as catholics.
Politicians like that can honestly say they dont know or cant see what s wrong with the state education. As they themselves wont want it for their own kids if they can afford private education.
How can people possibly defend Nick Clegg?
Can you imagine if David Cameron, or indeed any MNetter said that they had to go with a certain school because their spouse said so? They would be pilloried.
The Catholic argument is total crap. If his local Catholic school was dreadful and full of undesirables would he and his wife still insist on sending their dcs there? Like hell they would.
I wouldn't have a problem with Clegg sending his children to a catholic secondary because his wife is a committed catholic; it wasn't a case of conveniently finding religion when the children were born and then just as conveniently forgetting it when they are in the desired school.
I suspect he will be the same as the Blairs - there will be some weasily words about why the local catholic secondary isn't good enough, but fine for other people's children.
Ruth Kelly .... she came to a school where I live and a selection of parents were invited to meet her at a Q&A session. It was the time when she was saying that no new school built under Building Schools for the Future or any other scheme would be able to be a community school.
All the parents were going mad with her.
I said, 'I just want my local school to be good enough - I don't want to have to 'choose' to cart my kids half way across the NE to find some mythical utopian choice,' and she kind of crumpled.
I think her civil servants and Labour colleagues had totally set her up with a policy she couldn't defend in the Labour heartlands. But when she accepted Secretary of State she should have been prepared to be stronger.
nick clegg is a disgrace and a hypocrite. he makes a living trying to persuade us of his views, then does the opposite. i make a prediction - he will send his son to a, very difficult to get in, catholic secondary. otherwise, that will be the end for him. however, he will prob be given a euro job, then up in the house of lords, so wont give a toss anyway what everyone thinks! how can anyone ever take anything he takes seriously again. mind you, he has plenty of form..... twxt.
Could you elaborate more on the experience of meeting Ruth Kelly? Her spell as Education Secretary did seem to finish her political career, and yet she had been well thought of in the Treasury, I believe.
I always think politicians are naive of they are critical of any members of public for exercising any perfectly legal and legitimate choices.
In terms of state schools, I just want politicians to work to make every local school a good school. No gimmicks, no re-inventing the wheel, no games and no wasting time slagging off staff and LAs - just a huge drive to make every local school good enough by giving good Head Teachers the tools for the job.
I met Ruth Kelly once. That was an experience.
sorry muddled typing - what I mean is that they themselves castigate people for choosing independent education, then... choose it themselves. No-one would object if they hadn't been previously so rude about others choices.
The thing is that they are very self-righteous when they are are not in that position - ie before their DC are of school agge - ie being very vicious about people who decide on independent education if they showed more understanding at that point, it would not be hypocritical.
sorry appetite of the public for information
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.