To marvel at privately educated Keir Starmer's hypocrisy?

[Bursarysadness]

Both Kier Starmer and his wife are privately educated. Kier's senior school converted into a private school in the second year of his attendance and he has received a generous full bursary up until his A levels. He has built his life and his success on this education, supported to the end by the bursary funded by the same schools and parents he is now trying to destroy. It pains me as my children receive 50% bursaries from a brilliant local school. We've worked incredibly hard to cover the remaining 50% but it has been worth it, seeing how my children blossomed. We had a very different experience in their primary state schools, including bullying and racism. We don't live in a great area. We have just been told that the school will probably reduce all their bursaries to be able to lower the fees for the non bursary parents who are now struggling because of the VAT introduction. I don't know what the future for my children is now and they have so many close friends where they are. They are both academically brilliant and work very hard - hence the bursaries were granted. I feel so depressed that, from what is becoming obvious, they won't be able to benefit from the generosity of bursaries the same way Kier Starmer did when he was a child ..

You don't understand the meaning of the word "hypocrisy", do you? And you haven't done your research very well. Starmer's parents didn't choose to send him to a private school, and he didn't get a bursary until he reached the 6th form; till then,he simply benefitted from an arrangement whereby children in the state school were not charged when it changed into an independent school.

You chose to send your children to a private school under an arrangement where apparently the value of bursaries could be reduced (though that's really quite odd - you should check on this). That's a risk you chose to take. You need to accept the consequences of your decisions.

@VJBR "The best state school with a very small catchment area where his wife became a Governor before his kids went there. I wonder why she did that?"

Because, I presume, she has a sense of social responsibility. It would have done nothing to help her children's chance of a place if that's what you are rather nastily implying.

How do you know that, by the way?

What's so strange about that? Being a governor has precisely zero effect on whether your children get admitted to the school in question.

@ladykale, thank you for flagging, that post is excellent and striking and I fully agree the thing that makes the difference isn't money but parenting. You can have a school with endless pots of money but if all the parents have previously been failed by the system, have many difficulties and struggle to raise their children there's only so much money can do.

I suppose that's the question at the heart of the experiment. If you take away private school and have an influx of parents fiercely committed to their childrens education with extra money to support fundraisers, involved with the school and children who are taught to be committed to schools will that raise the bar for everyone?

I have to admit to bias, I went to a very mixed income school and found a lot of benefit being exposed to different classes, lifestyles and philosophies.

I agree with a lot of people on this debate that bright, capable children should generally be ok but not if all resources the time is with children who are seriously struggling or have unsupported SEN, thats where the additional money should really target.

Actually the grammar school thing isn’t accurate for the whole of the UK, only England. Almost 1/3 of all schools in NI are grammar, so it’s not the case that they are all in affluent areas.

They will shine if the local state school is a good one. There is a comprehensive not far from me with a fine reputation but the competition for kids to get in is enormous.

There are also some good grammar schools, two in Orpington, one in Sidcup; I have known children who went to all three and did very well indeed. Again, entry is competitive.

If I go a little way in another direction, but not far, the schools are a totally different kettle of fish altogether and, if I still had a school age child, I definitely would not want them to go to any of those.

We have to dio what we think is best for our child at the time.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11498813/amp/Keir-Starmer-sent-children-state-prep-middle-class.html

I know exactly where you live, and one I would never work at or send my children to, another comp that is local has a great reputation but its not great either, hence why I sent mine to a private school.

Do not worry OP he is going to be so ridiculed very soon about this. The numbers do not add up. He just threw a divisive policy to get votes. Cheap as all politicians but the worse kind as he preach to be so fair.
I really hope your kids can keep their bursaries. I would be very upset 😢 and worried too. This may not even become legislation as there are grounds to oppose it. KS probably hoping for it to be shelved to avoid the backlash of the policy failure. Better to drop it earlier than later.

This, with bells on ⬆️

Keir starmers kids are at a state school. I know because my sibling teaches there. Its a reasonable school but not exceptional! Its got a reasonably diverse catchment and its... wait for it... where he lives. There are lots of excellent state schools and hes an older father who had a highly paid law career so yes, he can afford to live in a nice part of london wirh good schools.

I'm a state educated one - does that count?! Because contrary to the MN belief that such a thing is impossible, I managed to work my way out of poverty...what a "privilege".

It was literally the school down the road, only 180 yards away from his home. No doubt she wanted to support the local school.

Corvidmango
He had no choice in his school. He was a child. Ridiculous statement.

Of course he had a say in where he went for sixth form - he was 17 when he started his sixth form education (2 September birthday).

Starmer wants to allow 16 year olds to vote in general elections.

Not to mention this;The Labour leader spoke about how he "marched around east Surrey" as a teenager trying to convert people to socialism.

You will have lots of "politics of envy" responses. No logic to it all.

Sure she did.

Marseillaise
Starmer's parents didn't choose to send him to a private school, and he didn't get a bursary until he reached the 6th form

His parents obviously filled out some sort of bursary application form for the sixth form - it was a fee paying sixth form.

Why would he withdraw from a school because it became private during his time there?

Actually, my nurse friend's son has a 100% bursary for a top private school.

And that’s why private schools shouldn’t exist. So that ALL schools can be like the one your kids have been lucky enough to go to, you’ve run head first into the point and still missed it.

It's not all about academic attainment though. It's the behaviour of the other children in the classroom. The expectations on them.

At private school excellent behaviour is expected and mostly backed up by decent karentibg and expectations. State school sadly have the poorly behaved to contend with.

@Izzymoon So you think at the age of 16, Starmer should have had a think about the possibility of being a Labour prime minister one day and decided to move schools? Please tell me you don't mean it??

Sure, in an ideal world. Look at the existing state of schools. They cannot recruit in most subjects.

OP called someone a hypocrite for choices their parents made as a child. They aren’t being bullied, just not getting the sympathy they think they deserved. The idea that private schools are bastions of anti-racism is also laughable.

Rather naive to think that getting rid of private schools will suddenly make state schools non racist utopias.