To think that senior officers in the armed forces should use state schools for their DCs

[soul2000]

I think it is wrong that many senior officers have a perk, that in effect is worth 40-50k pa in benefit in kind. There are state boarding schools, grammar schools and all types of state schools available.

Why should public sector employees, have this ludicrous benefit when there are state boarding schools, and if there was more demand more state schools could open boarding houses anyway.

I think this is a throwback to the 19th century, it is totally wrong in todays world. Today schools are having to make massive cut backs in all kind of expenditure, yet some officers DDS/DS are getting lessons in how to stage the perfect dinner party. This paid for by the struggling taxpayer who is forced to educate their DCs by comprehensive..

Never heard of State Boarding Schools at all ! Thought they were all private.

And, anyway - their children are entitled to a stable education..........same as your.

erm mainly because they move countries an awful lot and being in boarding school provides their kids with a stable education without having to move schools all the time

however this applies to most serving members of the armed forces so it's unfair they don't all get the same

interested to know where the state boarding schools are

1)There are very few state boarding schools.
2)This is not just available to armed forces.
3)It is surely better than being constantly moved, a secure and stable environment for the child is a good thing.

I was under the impression that any armed forces personel could claim around 50% of boarding school fees which is capped.

Makes sense to me much better for the kids in some circumstances.

Look - before you start going on about how this is a perk and the poor struggling taxpayers etc etc, think on this.

MP's (over 600) get vast numbers of perks, all of which cost a damn sight more than this school 'perk' - which is actually of benefit to the children concerned.

If you're going to complain about how the poor taxpayer is being fleeced, start with your local MP - they're the ones doing the fleecing FFS!

According to Wiki, there are 36 state boarding schools in the UK - and some are single sex, reducing the selection further.

Forces personnel need boarding schools so that their children don't have horrendously disrupted educations from having to move all the time.

If the forces children had to use state boarding school, no places would be available for anyone else - effectively turning them into forces schools.

I don't have any problem as a tax payer providing a suitable private school place for the child of someone who can't stay in one place because they are defending our country.

You are being deeply unreasonable.

state boarding schools

I must admit a colleague of mine has two kids at a private day/boarding school, paid for by the Raf. They've lived in this city for at least the last ten years.

She says they're at that school in case they get deployed abroad and then the kids could board at their current school. Ido see its good that the kids won't be disrupted but for them seeing as they've managed ten years its a bit of a waste of resources.

You generally have to pay for boarding, even at state boarding schools...

Continuity of education allowance is available to all ranks in the armed forces as long as the serving member fulfills certain strict criteria, which mean that, due to the particular demands of their service, their children would be forced to move schools every 18 months to 3 years.

Your question shows a level of ignorance and selfishness that is quite honestly breathtaking.

Before you post on here, and make yourself look like an idiot - do your research.

There are currently around 34 state schools that have boarding facilties. There are located all around the country, some of them are grammar schools like Cranbrook/Skegness grammar, some are single sex some are comprehensive. In other words the state has provision of boarding schools. They only charge for accomodation they are no fees for teaching.

so a state school would cost about 12kpa insted of 25-30k pa. You can see the saving already would be useful to the services who are having to make cuts in manpower and equipment.

state boarding school or pay out of own pocket for anything else, so an equal playing field apart from the usual, money.
we would need more places at state boarding schools though, so im not sure it would save loads of money

And the bit about Officers - why don't you go and pedal you DM nonsense somewhere else.

It is available to ALL members of the Armed Forces.

Also, as I understand it, the spouse of the serving person has to move around with him/her if they are to receive the benefit - in other words, the spouse cannot make a home or get a job in one place. I would prefer to do the latter and forgo the benefit, as I believe many many spouses now do. The generous subsidies you are describing are, I believe, a thing of the past.

hmm. I am divided over this
[and no, an argument of well the MPs do this and that is worse type of argument doesnt work with me. 2 things can be bad at the same time you know!!]

I am not undertstanding the not moving the kids part. If they are in Britain and at a comp, they wouldnt be moving schools then would they?

So, these state boarding schools should only be available to forces children? Because 36 schools does not provide a lot of places in the scheme of things. What about all the other children who might have use for a school like this?

Wow. A whole 34 schools in the entire country to choose from eh? I bet it's not at all difficult to get a place at one of them.

still massively expensive though - and only 34 of them - hardly lots of provision

Are people saying that if a man[or a woman serving officer] gets deployed abroad, the wife or partner goes too, and leaves their child in the state boarding school?

If they are in Britain and at a comp, they wouldnt be moving schools then would they?

How do you see it working if the parent is posted elsewhere in the country or abroad then?

its REALLy a recruitment and retention policy - so many wives get hacked off with moving that they LURE them in to stay longer with private edication

As the daughter of an officer I went to a boarding school as the nearest English secondary was 3.5 hours away. I did go to a state boarding school and my parents did have to pay a % of the costs

If they were at the local comp and their parents were sent abroad then where would they go every evening?
Boarding offers continuity.

Oh, this is available to other staff in other offices too. My sister attended a boarding school when my mother worked for the British Overseas Development Agency.

maybe they are both serving in the army or maybe the serving parent is a lone parent Havea0 or maybe, yes, their partner goes with them

I haven't read the whole the thread because I cba.

It is not just senior officers, anyone serving with children can claim this allowance because their (my) children are as entitled to a continuation in their education as much as everyone else's.

We didn't claim it, fwiw, because boarding wouldn't have been right for DS1, and fortunately we managed to keep them both in the same school all through secondary. Why should they move in Yr10 when they have already started their GCSE courses? Not all schools offer the same courses.

Don't be so short sighted.