Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to wonder why David Cameron is sending his daughter to a state secondary school?

229 replies

sexonthebeach · 19/10/2014 14:18

He went to Eton and his wife went to an exclusive private school. Both have done brilliantly well, so why are they sending their daughter to a state school, particularly as most London state schools are apparently a bit rough.

On the one hand, I applaud them, as they are showing support for the state sector, and of course the standards should be sufficiently high that no parent should feel they have to spend £££s on opting out. On the other hand, are they just using their child for their political agenda.

Miriam Clegg has also made similar comments ie that their DC will not be educated privately, as why would you pay so much for the privilege of your DC to take their maths exam in a tailcoat? For some reason, Miriam comes over as more sincere, but I still can't help wondering if this is part of the Cleggs' political agenda, given that Nick went to a top 'public school'. Miriam, not being British, probably can't understand why the Brits want to send their kids away to boarding school, in any event, instead of bringing them up yourself - it seems to be something peculiarly British, going back centuries to the days when the noble families would send their children to the households of other noble families to be brought up.

Anyway, I've digressed. Do you think the Camerons are being responsible parents or being unreasonable to use their child to further their political agenda?

OP posts:
LemonBreeland · 19/10/2014 14:21

Wow, this post has Daily Fail written all over it. First it is not Miriam Clegg. She uses her maiden name.

And as for the Camerons, it is their choice. And I'm quite sure they will have picked a decent school.

Nomama · 19/10/2014 14:21

Is there a scenario in which they, or any politician, can make either choice without being pilloried?

Trills · 19/10/2014 14:22

They would only be just using their child for their political agenda if they were disadvantaging her by making this decision.

I think that what other people think plays a part in the which-school decision of every family who have a choice, whether the choice is around paid schools, selective schools, single sex schools, faith schools, etc.

smellycandles · 19/10/2014 14:22

They can do what they want. But they're doing it for political gain. I don't believe for a second she'd be doing into a state school if he was a banker, rather than PM. A bit sad really.

So they ABU for making a choice based on PR, I guess

Also, London state schools a 'bit rough'? Best in the country, I thought. Many excellent schools.

Give it a few years and state schools in London will be all dead posh - you can't afford to have kids in London unless you're earning a squllion pounds!

motherinferior · 19/10/2014 14:22

Wtf?

Why are you assuming London state schools are a bit rough, to start with?

Alisvolatpropiis · 19/10/2014 14:24

Because either 1) they just want to or 2) they want to make a statement about their faith in state education.

Not that hard to work out.

Both David and Samantha Cameron have done "brilliantly well" because of their family connections. Their daughter will experience much the same. There's no risk of her not doing well and leaving school without GCSE's and a rather good job to fall into.

IrenetheQuaint · 19/10/2014 14:24

It's because if the prime minister/deputy prime minister sent their children to private schools it would look as if they had no faith in the state sector... for which they have ultimate responsibility.

There are lots of excellent London state schools, incidentally.

elportodelgato · 19/10/2014 14:24

London state schools are among the best in the country

motherinferior · 19/10/2014 14:25

And actually I don't think she's done brilliantly well professionally.

Smilesandpiles · 19/10/2014 14:25

It doesn't matter what school they send their kids too because I'll bet they'll have private tutoring at home and in the holidays because those kids will be under extra pressure to perform really well at a state school because of who their parents are.

It's all a political move and means fuck all.

MrSheen · 19/10/2014 14:26

Doesn't Gove's dd go to Grey Coat Hospital?

Tricky to fight an election whilst shunning the education system used by 93% of the electorate but win or lose, it won't actually matter by the time she starts.

MegTeg · 19/10/2014 14:26

I agree, with their background, if he wasn't a politician I doubt they would choose a state school.

TinyDancingHoofer · 19/10/2014 14:27

Because it's the one nearest to home and all her friends are going?

Not everything has to have some undercover hidden agenda.

motherinferior · 19/10/2014 14:27

You'd call my daughters' non-leafy comp a bit rough, I expect. Has poor kids and black kids and girls in hijabs and all Shock

They're doing extremely well indeed.

smellycandles · 19/10/2014 14:27

Remember when David Cameron's mil got him a £90k job at itv despite him having no relevant experience? I suspect similar will happen with their kids.

Rich smart kids will do well wherever they go to school.

TinyDancingHoofer · 19/10/2014 14:28

Also they lost a child and their daughter lost a brother this may be why they want to keep her close to home instead of away boarding.

MegTeg · 19/10/2014 14:29

According to the Daily Mail (if you believe that) they are looking at schools rather than decided at this point.

Shlep · 19/10/2014 14:30

London state schools as a whole aren't the best in the country. Many of them are 'rough' as you put it. Most of the best state schools are in London, there's a difference. Fwiw, yes you can technically afford to have kids in London without a squillion pounds, seeing as more than one in four, nearly one in three, Londoners are in poverty, many of them with children.

Anyway, to the OP- it is political, but they won't be impacting their kids at all. The state school they'll pick will be like a private school in terms of parental income etc, in fact, it might be even more selective than some can be as there aren't bursaries and the like, it just relies on where you live. Most of the kids will come from £1mil+ houses, nannies, the whole lot.

Sallyingforth · 19/10/2014 14:30

Rich smart kids will do well wherever they go to school.

As do lots of poor smart kids.

Noctambulist · 19/10/2014 14:31

Rich smart kids will do well wherever they go to school.

And rich thick ones...

WooWooOwl · 19/10/2014 14:35

Of course he's being a responsible parent. He's sending his child to a school where he thinks she will achieve and do well. Like many of us who use the state sector.

He'd be questioned and judged on his choice wherever he sent his child to school, and I expect the Cameron's know that, so like most parents they will just do what they think is right for their child.

DogCalledRudis · 19/10/2014 14:45

Even if its a state school it won't be an inner city comprehensive.
And whatever school she goes to, her future is going to be pretty comfortable anyway.
Actually i think its a good thing that she'll go to a state school.

BigglesFliesUndone · 19/10/2014 14:48

I think that if he loses next May she will suddenly end up at Marlborough or somewhere similar. Of course it's political!

Viviennemary · 19/10/2014 14:51

I think it's a good choice in his postion. Those Labour MP's sending their DC's to private schools make me furious. State schools good enough for everyone else but not good enough for their PB's. Totally sickening.

Thebodyloveschocolateandwine · 19/10/2014 14:52

I don't imagine she will struggle in life with millionaire parents and grand parents.

after the ridiculously hypocritical Dianne Abbots sending her ds to a private school nothing suprised me.

Swipe left for the next trending thread