To ask for your opinion on faith schools?

[Syrinx89]

That's it, really. In this day and age, it seems strange to me.

I am glad I have raised enough questions that the christian is running away.

You’re unpleasant. But I haven’t “run away” and am not “the Christian”. It’s awful to hear people talking about anything to do with inclusion and diversity while talking to and about people in this revolting way.

Neednewwellies

I do listen. It’s okay to listen and then disagree.

But with respect, that isn’t your decision to make. I am entitled to send my child to any local school under the same admittance criteria as any other, PLUS I am entitled to apply to the local faith school because I am of that faith. You can disagree with that, but it’s how it is.

You seem to be missing the point that many of us want to, and actively campaigning to, change the fact that ‘it’s how it is’.

That’s because state-funded faith education and in particular faith selection, sitting within the mainstream education system, is both religiously and socioeconomically discriminatory, socially divisive and entrenches privilege. And as such we think it is disgusting and should change.

No one will be preventing you from sending your child to a Catholic school if we are successful. Simply declining for the taxpayer to fund that choice.

You seem to be missing the point that many of us want to, and actively campaigning to, change the fact that ‘it’s how it is’.

I’m not missing it. It’s clear. But at the moment, I have no reason to take account of your opinion when I make choices about my child’s education.

f I am reading you correctly, you are saying it is unfair for people to be forced to send their children to faith schools? I don’t disagree that that needs to change.

Yes, in many areas of the country the closest 2, sometimes 3 schools are faith schools, especially at primary school. Parents who disagree with faith schools will often put 5 choices, none of these including their closest set of faith schools. LAs will still allocate these (as the non faith schools will be filled with people closer) and those parents will either need to accept or find themselves without a school for their child. This happens every year, especially in more rural areas. I believe it’s unfair to allow schools to set their own admissions based on faith rather than distance yet insist only distance counts when they are allocating ie pay no heed to the lack of faith held by parents.

Neednewwellies

I agree with you.

@JassyRadlett - so you advocate taking children out of an existing state regulated school and turning that school private? How does that benefit you?

It will create more division - a private school for the religious and secular state school for non religious.

There is also a shocking error in your description here - 'state-funded faith education and in particular faith selection, sitting within the mainstream education system, is both religiously and socioeconomically discriminatory, socially divisive and entrenches privilege.'

I 'd love to know what privilege. I really would.

Insulting whom? These are church buildings on church land, overseen by the Catholic Education Service. Any money they save you is a service, not an insult.

This is the bit I don’t understand. Are you saying that with no state funding, Catholic schools would not exist at all? And there would be no enhanced Catholic education out of mainstream school hours if Catholic schools didn’t exist? That they wouldn’t have to pay 100% of the capital and maintenance costs of these buildings if the state took their funding elsewhere?

The idea that the Catholic Church is saving us all vast sums because they are doing us the massive favour of getting the overwhelming majority of their funding from the state and then using that money to give preference in admissions and employment to those of their own faith and teach their own version of the curriculum is fairly creative.

As I’ve said, I’m totally down with the church getting preferential admissions as a proportion of the running + capital costs they contribute. That’s fair. How many places per year would that be at your school?

@ExEUCitizen, your rudeness is not bringing anything to the debate. And the fact you’re missing the irony of your own elitism is somewhat funny.

Are you saying that with no state funding, Catholic schools would not exist at all? And there would be no enhanced Catholic education out of mainstream school hours if Catholic schools didn’t exist? That they wouldn’t have to pay 100% of the capital and maintenance costs of these buildings if the state took their funding elsewhere?

I can’t state that as a definite as I have no idea. But I can state that there would be no obligation on them to provide it.

As I’ve said, I’m totally down with the church getting preferential admissions as a proportion of the running + capital costs they contribute. That’s fair. How many places per year would that be at your school?

I don’t actually know. But I think you are missing a key point: they own the land and buildings. It’s not state property. The state contributes to its maintenance but doesn’t have the right to make the rules about their admissions criteria.

It's also what you're used to. In Scotland, the concept of universal education came from the Kirk in order that every person could read the Bible for themselves and take full part in their own faith. These schools became the state school system though many of them retain links to the local parish church. Catholic schools came later.

Where I am originally from compared to where I am now in central Scotland, there is little sectarianism. There are seven Catholic primary schools and one special school in the whole of the North East of Scotland and no Catholic secondary. There are no other faith schools. Around thirty years ago, the Catholic diocese of Aberdeen surveyed parents as to whether they would like more faith-based education; the answer was that faith was a matter for the home and for the religious congregation, that parents and not the state were responsible for particular (as opposed to a knowledge of all faiths from school) religious faith in the home and by sending them to Sunday School, Hebrew School and so forth. No Orange Lodges for the bigots until recently when established by thick as mince incomers from the south; the biggest problem the police face with them is trying to stop them being torn to pieces by the locals who don't want this filth in their community - I remember a senior officer telling me that when he was inspector for the city centre they had to lock the pub doors to protect the marching divots. It was a shock to move south to separate education and hate marchers.

I still believe that people have right to educate their children in their faith but that responsibility lies with them and their religious group, not with the state. Teach them at home and send them to classes outwith the state system, and I say that as someone whose faith is in everything I do and am.

so you advocate taking children out of an existing state regulated school and turning that school private? How does that benefit you?

I get that it may be a struggle for you to see that I’m not looking for the system to benefit me - nothing would change in time for my own kids - but to benefit society as a whole. This isn’t about what works best for me. Particularly the poorest and most disadvantaged children, because faith selection (like all selection) disproportionately excludes those kids, and means they are disproportionately over-represented in non-faith schools.

I also firmly believe that, at a time when we are hugely concerned about integration in our communities, we should not actively pursue policies of religious segregation of children.

I advocate both a level playing field in accessing universal state services for those of all faiths and none - education, healthcare, benefits, etc - and parental choice in a regulated private sector if they do not wish to participate in that universal provision.

Plenty of religious parents who don’t have the privilege of a third of schools aligning with their faith (in the broad sense of Christianity, but still disproportionate numbers for each of the two main sects) make that choice for their children.

What word do you use when you have preferential access to a significant proportion of provision of a state service in a system that ensures that where there is pressure on school places, the selection system will help to deliver a disproportionately middle class group of service users? It is definitionally ‘privilege’.

@JassyRadlett 'The idea that the Catholic Church is saving us all vast sums because they are doing us the massive favour of getting the overwhelming majority of their funding from the state and then using that money to give preference in admissions and employment to those of their own faith and teach their own version of the curriculum is fairly creative.'

This doesn't make sense.

Church parishes contribute to schools plus the diocese (broader area) which gets money from the head of the Church. Also, whatever they can rent out/raise. Lots of stuff is given for free or low cost. Some churches have parishioners who bequeath their estates to the local parish/school. The buildings are usually paid for. The costs are teachers salaries and that comes from the DoE as the children are entitled to an education - the same amount would go to a state school to pay for the teacher's salaries there if that's where the children went.

The tax payer saves a huge amount from Church provision. That is why no government will vote against it.

I still believe that people have right to educate their children in their faith but that responsibility lies with them and their religious group, not with the state.

But Catholic schools are Catholic institutions, not state institutions. So the responsibility is being met by the religious group. Which, incidentally, also educates around 30% of its children who are from non-Catholic backgrounds. It is only the educational funding - which is no higher for a child in a Catholic school than any other school and may of course cost the state less - that comes from the taxpayer. It is a compromise, and one the government sought.

@mantarays. Yes please do not get upset. Most non believers are happy to discuss faith in a measured ,rational way, but inevitably along come atheists like @ExEUCitizen who are just plain nasty.

Girlinterruption

The actual numbers don’t back up what you are saying.
www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/faith-schools-funding-money-religion-voluntary-aided-accord-coalition-a9192296.html

@JassyRadlett

Because you are being utterly disingenuous in your assumption that faith schools are for the middle class and don't cater for the poorest when actually the Catholic schools absolutely did and still do.

The school dinners stats (if that is what you are going on) do not paint a full picture of poverty in the UK, now or in the past. there are so many families in London that are 'off record', don't claim benefits they are entitled to and dont appear in these stats that they are seen as laughable by those who work in these aras (as I do). The Church schools are not bastions of the middle class.

I don't think any of you who attack faith schools have a clue what really goes on.

Meadowland

Thanks.

Girlinterruption

You’re of course correct. My family is Liverpool Irish and we were poor. If attendance at a Catholic school is now a privilege for my child, I’m prepared to argue I’ve paid for it. 😂

Personally I'm against all taxpayer funded religious schools on principle; I'd much prefer religion to be a purely private matter and not taught in schools at all (except perhaps as a "this is what some believe" thing, but that's very hard to enforce)

Basically, if religions want children to be instructed then they can pay for it - and currently, within the state sector, they pay little or nothing

I don’t actually know. But I think you are missing a key point: they own the land and buildings. It’s not state property. The state contributes to its maintenance but doesn’t have the right to make the rules about their admissions criteria.

You’re incorrect.

Firstly, it does already make rules about their admissions criteria, under the Education Act and its amending regulations.

Second, the state has both the right and the power to go further - it would need an amendment to the 1996 Act to do so, in the same way that the state was able to require faith schools to take children not of their faith if they are not oversubscribed.

It currently chooses not to do so. If it did, the church could then pack up and say it’s not going to take the state’s money to run a school in those buildings. The state could then seek alternative buildings through the EFA. The church would then need to decide whether it was going to continue providing education without state funding.

You seem to think that Catholics and Anglicans have a special inalienable rig by for the state to fund your churches to provide education with no strings attached. I’m sorry to disabuse you that all it would take to change that is one piece of legislation - and I’m not even convinced it would need to be primary legislation to change the admissions system.

The state had paid for the land and the buildings in most faith schools many times over. In most schools the buildings have been almost solely funded by the state, either in original construction or in continuous upkeep that far outweighs the original construction costs. And yet the church gets to own them and benefit from that investment - which is quite a significant favour.

JassyRadlett

Then good luck in your mission. I believe you will face many legal challenges, both on the basis of actual proprietorship of these schools, and on the basis of the rights of people of faith to access education within their own traditions, without state interference.

But we will see where you get to!

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

There is so much wrong with that article I don't know where to start.

(Campaign group/less money given to all schools/article shows Church schools contribution increased from 7% to 10%/capital funding).

It really isn't a good source for impartial, factual information.

A better source is www.gov.uk/guidance/school-capital-funding