AIBU to think it's outrageous...

[JoniRules]

That some catholic parents receive a travel subsidy so that they can send their children to catholic school.

I was listening to radio 4 this morning and they happened to have a piece on this. Apparently some councils are going to be making cuts and stopping subsidies for travel. It applys to those children in rural areas, and if the nearest catholic school is miles away the parents can apply for travelling expenses.
The parents they talked about paid £300 out of their own pockets, but without the subsidy they would have to pay almost £1000 in travelling expenses. So the council is paying £700....I was actually quite surprised at this as i didn't even know that this existed, and do find it outrageous that this has been going on. How can this be right?
The interviewer then asked the parent (dad), that a lot of people would be saying something along the lines of, 'if you choose to send your child to a faith school then you should pay for that'.
The dad then replied something along the lines of, that the council cuts were like a 'tax on faith'....I'm like 'what?!'
Why should parents receive a subsidy on the gournds of faith? Actually i don't think I am being unreasonable...It's made me feel a bit angry..

Rant over

scallops but surely you can 'respect someone's faith' without paying £700 a year to do so??

IMO this is outrageous, really. I think people should send their DCs to the local school and if they don't like it, move or pay themselves to send them somewhere else. This should be a blanket policy unless the DC in question has SN and needs the support of a particular school's facilities.

It really adds injury to insult to think that all this time, children with SN in the area could've been enjoying some facilities that might really help them and their families, but have been missing out just because someone can't organise transport to send their child to some particular school.

Our council do not pay any child to travel to their school above or beyond the free-on-buses/reduced-travel they receive via the zip oyster. If you feel you need assistance with the extra you may need to pay you can apply for help but each case is, I understand, assessed on its own merits. Apparently very few actually end up receiving it.

I agree with you Joni on how oversubscribed the schools are. Around here, people seem to pick a 'good' school regardless of it being a faith or non-faith school. It seems that the education of their children is the most important thing and who can blame them?

But TSC surely it's not about having faith?

I absolutely think parents should be able to send their children to faith schools if they wish and teach them what they like - liberty of conscience and all that.

But I also think that if parents wish to use some special schooling system that takes a bit of extra effort to access, they should put that effort in themselves, and not expect other taxpayers to foot the bill.

Honestly do you not think the money is better spent on children with SN?

RevoltingPeasant, like I have said, I do believe we should respect peoples faith and language, and should imagine that the £700 paid per child, per year, it just the tip of the iceberg in what the council, etc, stump up every year.

We live in a multi-cultural society and we should respect that.

I agree that children with SN are more worthy, but I am not the person who decides the rules, and, if this money for travel does stop, I doubt it would go straight to the SN children that are desperate for it.

i guess if one has a faith then it is fair enough that that be treated as a 'special circumstance' and therefore funded as such. I guess if you don't have a faith then you wouldn't get it.

TheSecondComing - totally not out for a ruck at all. As you will see i have been perfectly reasonable and polite to all posters who have responded. You yourself wrote the above statement. Obviously you either have faith or you don't, but I actually genuinely don't know what you mean, what wouldn't I 'get', if I don't have faith. What do you mean by 'special circumstance', are you saying that if you have 'faith' (what kind of faith), then you are a special circumstance? That is what you wrote

Honestly scallops, to me 'respect' is about allowing the existence of faith schools. It's not about shelling out money to actually transport people there.

'Respect' does not equal 'enabling', IMO. Of course I think we should respect people of other faiths and cultural backgrounds - I grew up in another country myself and know what it feels like to be a 'foreigner' or from a different religion to the norm.

Even regardless of the SN children, I don't think perfectly able children with a perfectly good local school should be given extra funding to go to a different school because of their parents' beliefs. Allowed to, yes, funded with public money, no.

I personally don't agree with the faith school system at all- how many of us know people who magically 'find God' and start going to Church when their kids turn four?? People who are really keen on their kids getting a religious education should be prepared to pay for private schools.

The way it works here is that if you llive more than 3 miles away from your nearest school you get the travel subsiby. If you are of a particular faith and live more than 3 miles away from your nearest faith school you also get the subsidy even if there is nearer non faith school.

It is being cut locally as far as I am aware.

Will just add that I grew up in the States, and for all you can say about the US and religion, one very good thing there is the separation of church and state, whereby religious groups do not get special state funding of any kind.

You may note that this does not exactly stifle them!! :) They are 'respected' by having freedom of speech and freedom to associate, but they have to stump up the cash to do so themselves.

Ah but TSC that is different - if it's about not being able to take exams she wants to take then it's a matter of education which the state should support.

And no, pensioners are clearly different, they are being blanket discounted travel because of presumed economic straits, they are not being bussed to (say) particular political conventions or religious gatherings.

I went to a catholic school 10 miles away (it was such a rural area that the school I should have gone to was also 10 miles away), I remember having a bus pass that cost £90 a TERM, this was in 1982!

My mum did all she could to try and get funding for this from the diocese to no avail; it was crippling for us.

I am totally against the council paying for Catholics to attend catholic schools, but the diocese should contribute. After all, the want kids to access their particular form of indoctrination, sorry I mean education, they should help families to do this. But there is no reason why councils should pay for this.

TheSecondComing - Not focusing on catholics in particular. I made it clear a few posts back that i was listening to a radio piece about it and the family happened to be catholic. I presume the travel funding is for other faiths also. So no not just people who are Catholics.
As I have also said, I do realise how obviously important it is on many different levels for parents to send their children to faith schools. In the sense that in your heart you know it to be the right thing. But I still don't believe that should equal a special entitlement. Not in a modern democracy such as ours

Dh and I are church-going Christians and dh grew up Catholic. Neither of us can see anything in our faith that would be damaged by education in a standard state school. What is it about my faith that I don't get?

It must depend a lot on your local geography, if you're rural. If your village is roughly equidistant between two towns would you think it fair fir parents to apply to either or both?

Because as soon as you start restricting parental choice (eg on faith schools), then locations with separate routes to two towns will be the next to go - one paid for route only - and the bus to the other town will vanish as it becomes uneconomic.

The tail will wag the dog, and another nail goes into the coffin of parental preference.

RevoltingPeasant - I guess we are 'enabling' them, but then I see no problem. Some people have strict faith and that's life.

The state is 'enabling' people to do a multitude of different things, not just attend a faith/language school.

meditrina don't see at all how this is about parental preference. Parents can send their child to the religious school that's two towns away. Just, the council shouldn't pay for it.

Okay, fine, I guess I just believe in separation of church and state, i.e. that the state should not be involved in people's religious lives. This accords them some liberties that some British people seem reluctant to give, such as the absolute right to wear things like niqabs or Sikh bangles but also refuses to actually give them active money or support. Guess it's just a different philosophical position - anyhow, will stop dominating thread!!

Thanks TSC . Hope you get more sleep tonight. Tiredness is a killer.

My council pays for and organises buses if you are more than 1 mile from the school. And you have a choice of catholic or non denominational school, and can apply for other schools (usually get it) if you wish, but will need to pay for your bus if you need one and get the transfer agreed. This applies to rural and non rural people. I see no problem whatsoever with this. For many, a catholic school is not a fancy choice they are making. It is quite simply a right that they are exercising. I really don't see a problem with it.