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

[sexonthebeach]

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?

Because there's an election next year?

And as Rudis says, it's not going to be your common or garden comp is it? It's going to be a super selective one.

I thought they were looking at the one Gove's child/ren go to?

Cleggy can send his kids to work up chimneys or to fetch yellow label reduced for quick sale stuff from Lidl in an attempt to win votes from the people his arselicking round the Tories has destroyed and he's still going to be finished come next May.

Which will be poetic justice for the man who sold his soul for his 5 yrs of in fame y

Unfortunately, on the whole, rich kids do better. It's grossly unfair of course.

not all private schools are boarding schools fwiw.

I went private and I do not come from a wealthy background at all. my husband went local comp, we both had similar upbringings, and he used to do really well for himself (until he met me and moved up north_ though now we are doing considerably better than we were) I detect and detest inverted snobbery.

What is is supposed to do? He woul get pilloried for private and now people having a go for a state school.

Those who dislike this, please say what choice he could make for his child's school that would make you happy?

They really have to at least be seen to look around all the local schools for political reasons. I doubt they will actually choose state education unless there are specific reasons. Their daughter may have special needs which are best dealt with in the state system or she may not be capable of passing entrance exams to the better private schools. But if there are no specific reasons, I would be she will end up private. I don't think it's really an issue for a Tory PM in the same way as it would be for a Labour PM.

Are they not looking at the top state schools in London? We're not talking a bottom-of-the-league tables comp.

One of them is the Grey Coat Hospital C of E Comprehensive. Pretty much on a par with the Blairs sending their children to the London Oratory.
Both single-sex church schools with top results.

And maybe they don't want her to be a boarder.

Grey Coats Hospital school is an unexceptional choice, because it's the closest school to Downing Street (and one of the few within the Division Bell, where MPs tend to live). If she went to the closest primary, that'll be a priority feeder for it too. I don't think there is such an obvious (and excellent) option for boys though.

Um, they are going to walk into a ten-times-over subscribed school with Latin and a choice of five modern languages. It's not exactly Stabbington Comprehensive.

I doubt he would choose state school if he wasn't PM, but even so it doesn't say all that much that his kids will go to one of the country's top state schools.

Seems to me he's going to criticised wherever he sends his kids.

Private school > rich bastard! State school > politically motivated!

Given their backgrounds, I doubt that the Camerons would have even considered state education had he not been in politics. However, they had to at least look at the options, and perhaps they found that they liked what they saw?

Not all state schools are "rough", you know.

Surely its their business and not open to debate really I can tell you that the school wont be some sink comp.

Hahaha all the lefties are just baffled why don't you all talk about why it is half the labour lot send their kids to private schools

They want the medicine for us but they don't want to take it themselfs

I believe gov and Carmon's children all go to state school and fyi my sons state is in the top 5% of the country

It's not a rule that if you can afford private education you must...... My dad could have easily sent us to private schools but didn't (which I'm thankful for!)
Similarly a family friends daughter was privately educated when they couldn't really afford it.

I'd like to be a metaphorical fly on the wall in that Staffroom!

As soon as they leave office their little sprites will be in public or private school, no mistake.
They will be going to the best state schools in the area so they can save their wads of money.

They can't do right for doing wrong. I am no fan of his but perhaps they have simply made the decision they feel is best for their daughter?

I think they've made the decision based on what's best for his public profile.

He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, isn't he? And as many have said upthread, the schools they have visited (not necessarily committed to) are hardly representative state schools.

I hope that she does go to a state school - it would be refreshing for a Conservative PM to trust the sector. I was privately educated throughout, as were most of my friends - but only a handful are sending their children to private schools - probably because it was a Catholic boarding school and we all have too many children to afford the fees .

However, I do think it's somewhat depressing that a Conservative gets vilified whatever s/he does, but that it's very rarely mentioned how many Labour ministers and MPs children are educated privately - apparently that's not seen as so noteworthy or as hypocritical.

Because there is an election in a few months?

It is of course political, otherwise he could have kept it silent.

Is it Grey Coats? That's a good school - there are some good non-private schools in the richer parts of London (my cousin went to Oratory from a council flat in a nasty part of London).

As the poster above says, I reserve my disdain for Labour politicians sending their kids to fee-paying schools. "Do as I say ... "

he's sending them to state school not borstal - there are lots of geed state schools around and lots and lots of kids go to them

of course it's political but he's a politician - so not sure why that's shocking

good not geed - obviously I went to state school

The Camerons have been seen 'looking' at a number of state schools including Holland Park Comprehensive. He said they'd 'like' to send their daughter to one ??...

I have no axe to grind either way.

There is no way on earth he would have considered state education if he hadn't thought it would be a bad political move to go private.

I have friends with a DD at Grey Coat. It's a great school but I'm not sure how it works, but they are definitely not in the catchment area or churchgoers - I think she was tutored for an entrance exam. Not exactly the local school.

Our local authority gave us a free choice of any school in the borough for our foster child - we chose the best one and it was pretty rough.