Royal Children - Time for State school?

[microplastic]

Should the Royal Family children be educated in state schools? Why do they get to attend private schools on taxpayers money? Is this something the Labour government could push for?

Tarquinius is your idea of a typical state school pupil's name, is it?

And it's not even free taxpayers still pay for the "free schools" anyway so this is a pointless hill to die on imagine the conversation

Your children can no longer attend public school
Fine we will home educate as is our right (and everyone else's)

What then? Erm no we don't want you privately educating your own children either... hmmm OK change the law for everyone then that should save loads of money 🤣

TARQUIN. IDK what influence my autocorrect is under.

It’s not taxpayer funded so it is nobody’s business but theirs.

Ffs PRIVATE SCHOOL

They really aren't going to want attention on how they became "independently wealthy".

The point is that much of their income is taxpayers money

They should send their children to any school they choose! I am not interested in what thoughts a non English person has on the subject @microplastic .

I don’t think anyone, including the state, should be telling somehow how to educate their children.

That is a parental decision.

I support more educational choices, not less.

No I CBA to campaign about it.

It is surprising that nobody in the royal household has yet considered "state until 8" and easy PR win, though. Given they can easily buy into any catchment area anywhere.

I’m a teacher and I think it would be a fucking nightmare. State schools just aren’t set up for this and it wouldn’t be fair on the kids. Things would have to be so different to keep them safe; they’d have a very isolating experience.

That's what you get from that? 🤣

What's a state school name for you then? My state school class has a George, William, Harry, Kate, Elizabeth, Edward and a Charles!

OP, I do understand your impulse here (and I am a private school parent). There is something about being at one with the people of the country you will govern. HOWEVER, couple of important reasons to that it’s a total non starter

1. The ‘saving’ of their school fees and that money going towards security is a totally red herring. Even one of the most expensive boarding schools in the country, with all the added extras would still be approx 50k per year. That, when you take into account employer NI contributions etc is barely the cost of employing a single security officer. Proper security is painfully expensive, which is why Harry is battling in the courts.

2. (closely related) a significant number of Private Boarding schools in particular will have significant advantages which will seriously reduce the security bill in comparison to an average comp. Rural location, high spec alarm systems, cctv, perimeter fencing, more ground staff etc. Crucially many will already be providing high level security for other high risk children (children of people like the Beckhams, overseas super rich and dignitaries) so the actual ‘uplift’ for the royals is much less.

3. The leverage private schools have to enforce respect of privacy is much higher. This is nothing to do remotely with private school kids being ‘nicer’ (many are little shits!) but more that a private school can decide to exclude children on their terms. I imagine parents and children at these schools are made very aware of the consequences of talking to the press/ sharing images of social media and this will be a significant deterrent. State schools simply cannot legally do this.

4. That if you did say ‘state school it is!’ then they would end up somewhere which is ‘technically’ a state school but in practice nothing like what the vast majority of the country experiences. One of the state Grammar boarding schools for example, the Oratory school, Christ’s Hospital…this is the trick employed by many prominent politicians and tbh I find it more cynical than just paying the fees.

You can’t just single out the current members of the royal family for taking advantage of inherited wealth. Where would the cut off be for tracking back inherited privilege and whether someone’s inheritance was worthy or not?

The current Duke of Westminster controls billions of pounds because one of his ancestors was a friend and supporter of William the Conqueror. That’s where the source of the money comes from followed by some very good business decisions, and some wily tax maneuvering.

The ancestor who was given the original land and riches and title from William the Conqueror worked very hard for that money - he risked his life and all his family’s security fighting to secure part of the country - he could have been killed or defeated. He could have helped cause the defeat of William - in those circumstances someone else’s family line would be holding all those assets now.

Because state schools are generally much larger than private, with much more coming and going, so "identical" security would be inadequate.

Their school places are paid for by their parents.

The RF is funded thus: at the Accession Council Charles III handed the Crown Estate (that is the sovereign's personal wealth) to the state (as has every sovereign since George III in 1760). The Crown Estate gives back to the sovereign 15% (currently 25% because Buckingham Palace needs refurbishing and that property belongs to the state not to the king) of its revenue to fund the monarchy and working royals. The taxpayer pays for security for the head of state (the sovereign) and his/her heir (Prince of Wales, currently) and for those members of the RF who do royal duties (only when they are doing those duties). The cost per head of security is approx £1.50 per taxpayer per year.

In addition the King holds the Duchy of Lancaster (the sovereign's property since the reign of Henry IV) and also the Duchy of Cornwall which has been settled on the Prince of Wales as a source of revenue since the time of Edward I (12th century). Both these entities pay tax, as do both the King and his son on all other income.
Aside from these items the king as a private person has property (e.g. Sandringham, Balmoral) and private investment which he uses for his day to day expenditure (note his patched jackets and mended shoes - he's thrifty as was his late mother). Both the Prince of Wales and his brother, Henry of Wales, have private fortunes from their mother and grandmother, which they use to live on. Other members of the family work (Princess Anne, her DD Mrs Tindale etc) or have revenue from money settled on them from the RF's private wealth. All of this income pays tax.
If the royal children went to the local comprehensive the security involved would be massively expensive - and come out of the public purse, not their family's wealth. In what way would that be more cost-effective than having the children's parents paying school fees out of their own pocket?

The ancestor who was given the original land and riches and title from William the Conqueror worked very hard for that money - he risked his life and all his family’s security fighting to secure part of the country - he could have been killed or defeated. He could have helped cause the defeat of William - in those circumstances someone else’s family line would be holding all those assets now.

Those Duchies would have long been broken up, were it not for legal exemptions and all manner of special arrangements for the BRF.

There are small state schools. Paul McCartneys children went to a state school when he was incredibly famous.

I’m anti private school, so yes, I think especially all heads of state and public servants should use state services.

That's what you get from that? 🤣

Well it seemed a confused choice.

Almost any name but Tarquin would have been more suitable.

The state doesn’t pay for their education. The royal family use their own personal wealth so they are as entitled as anyone to use private education. Having said that, I don’t think we should have a royal family and it should be abolished.

Are you talking about the royal duchies or the Duke of Westminster’s business holdings.

Also they’d be completely ripped apart. It’s cruel to them.

This would definitely happen. On mumsnet there are regularly comments about how awful private school students are, how entitled, thick, arrogant, posh etc.
Presumably parents with these views pass them on to their children who would gleefully repeat them to the royal children.
Sneering at anyone because of their background - whether punching up or down - is despicable but it happens a lot.

Did I C&P the wrong passage @wordler ?

If so I'm overdoing the multitasking.

The Duke of Westminster's Merseyside portfolio is a tale in itself.

Stella was furious about being sent to state school
https://www.sussexlive.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/stella-mccartneys-attempted-ordinary-life-6765628