Royals should send their children to State schools

[Possiblynotever]

And politicians too. Just that really. I have nothing against private schools, but I think that if you head or represent a State you should proudly use the education it provides. Unless you think it is not good enough and then you should do something about it.

**

So you’re after a communist state?

No thanks

Oh you're so close to getting it.

I went to school in central London with some MPs children and a few Right Hons. It was 1980s, there was no extra security or anything. Big comp.

Regardless of the job you do an hour's work is still an hour's work.

oh good grief, you don’t actually believe that do you?

It's as much a security thing as anything. However you either say all private schools are dismantled or you accept inequality. Life has never been equal and never will be Best you can do is reduce the highs and the lows of inequality

I’m all for the class system personally. Some people are rich, some people are poor. We shouldn’t all have the same or be the same. Absolutely nothing about socialism or communism appeals to me. Royals, politicians and others can send their kids wherever they wish. But I can’t see any benefit to them being state educated for anyone else.

DH went to very posh public schools on a scholarship- he’s very old money background but it’s run out and they no longer own half the county. That stopped a few generations ago but he still benefits from his education. I’m working class roots but middle class upbringing and went to a good state, although almost opted for the grammar. DD will go public to DH’s old school if we can afford it or have the opportunity for grammar/state. She’ll be fine wherever I’m sure as no bad schools here.

If you want better for your own family get off your arse and deliver. Or accept what you have.

So going by this communist thinking there would be equal amount of people wanting clean toilets and be prime minister?

So if anyone on here and in the off-line world could get paid thr same no matter what work they do would people pick all the 'messy' or uninteresting jobs? Over 'exciting' ones

I’m all for the class system personally. Some people are rich, some people are poor. We shouldn’t all have the same or be the same. Absolutely nothing about socialism or communism appeals to me. Royals, politicians and others can send their kids wherever they wish. But I can’t see any benefit to them being state educated for anyone else.

I'm going to take a wild punt here, and guess you're not a member of the lowest income group?

I'm out. I literally can't care about inequality in the UK as long as attitudes like this and "but royals are special" exist.

But thank God there are.

Didn't Tony Blair and Nick Clegg send their boys to The London Oratory?

Admittedly, the Neanderthal-Toryish underthinking in this post is not much of an advertisement for your supposedly 'good state' school. Let us hope that your child, wherever she is educated, is taught thinking skills.

Some MPs use state schools but they use the ones that have selection-by-stealth so are like private schools. Isn't it better for the general population if say the PM's daughter goes private rather than use a grammar place which could go to another academic child?
State schools aren't big enough to have royal security in the classrooms and corridors. Plus I don't want my state school attending child inconvenienced because of a royal student. Private schools can be more flexible and are more spacious so the disruption is less which is the right thing to do. Plus like with MPs, they will pick the state school that is most like a private missing the ideological point.

Well that's the point isn't it?

If they had to send their children to public ally funded state schools they wouldn't let them fail massively as they are currently.

Politicians, yes they should use public services.
Royals, don't care what they do.

Personally I'd rather do away with the royals altogether. If not, do away with private schools.

If those in power had to use them they would be properly funded.

In reality though, what difference does it make anyway to the royals? It's not as if they need a good education or are going to need to get a good job to pay the mortgage. They've all had the best education money can buy and they're all thick as mince!

Prince Harry had hundreds of thousands spent on his education but his book is appallingly badly written. Hardly a ringing endorsement for Eton.

Gosh you really do have a chip on your shoulder don’t you. Stop being such a monumental cunt.

The concept of "levelling the playing field" is directly at odds with the concept of "royalty"

But they would just buy houses nearest the best state schools (which a lot of rich people do anyway), so poorer people would miss out even more.

Most of the shit schools are failing because the parents don't care about their kids' education.

When my neighbours said that they were going to send their kids to the local (failing) school and become governors so that they could improve it, they failed.

Maybe Princess Catherine as governor would not fail?

she's not a princess. If you are going to use one of their ridiculous titles, Catherine, Princess of Wales is sufficient.

Presumably they fund the children's education from private income so have as much right as others to choose? And I would imagine it's easier for them to set up security at some private schools

because they wouldn't be shit or failing if everyone had to send their children there

This is naive. If the royals and politicians all had to send their children to state schools they'd be sending them to the top grammars (providing the child could pass the entrance exam of course). They would not be sending their child to some "shit" comprehensive in a poorer area. They'd be making damn sure their child got into the best possible state school and all the other schools can go to hell.... Even if the child wasn't able to pass the entrance exam, they would still end up at a comprehensive in a very good catchment area, by the very nature of the property their parents could afford to buy.

My cousin went to a top grammar school in the south of England. The school had many politicians' children over the years as well as other children from "prominent" families and the usual doctors and lawyers.

I don't agree with private schools, nor with church schools, but forcing Royal kids and politicians' kids to go to state schools will not make the slightest bit of difference to the standards of average state schools. You'd basically have to get rid of the grammars too and do something about catchment areas.

Children are not extensions, or the possessions, of their parents. Their education and life choices shouldn't be made to use them as political pawns or placate the 'loudest' voices of the 'public'.