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 ..

Haha. I'm sure most of last week's racist rioters were privately educated too? Your post only shows how blind and uneducated people's hatred towards these school is

Sob Stories??? Oh no, darling DC will have to go to, the horror!, a normal school like the majority of the population!
Nooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

Some people seriously need to get a grip.

There are a number of reasons why parents are concerned about their DC having to change schools, including previous negative experiences in the state system and the impact on their DC of having to move from schools where they are happy and settled. It’s interesting that many local authorities warn parents about moving DC and the upheaval that it causes but so many “experts” on this page believe it’s a non-issue. Why is that?

I think it’s easy to pretend that those who object to private education are motivated by hatred, envy and ignorance. Easier, at any rate, than acknowledging that private education entrenches and perpetuates inequality and that its existence actively prevents a first class education system for all children. Certainly easier than accepting the difficult truth, that action does have to be taken to end the two tier system resulting in those in positions of power and authority being drawn from a small and elite pool. Change, even the small and less than radical VAT policy can be frightening.

How is my DC’s private school entrenching inequality? My other DC’s state school is far higher performing at GCSE and A Level with a far more impressive list of leavers destinations than most private schools. Again, you are falling into the trap of looking at a few elite schools which WILL NOT be impacted by this policy. In fact, this policy will make them more elite. Why should other private schools (and more importantly the children that attend them) suffer or end up being closed down because so many prime ministers went to Eton. It’s ridiculous. Added to that, the common denominator amongst prime minsters is Oxford. Are you campaigning for VAT on their fees?

I’m not falling into any trap; I’m looking at the system as a whole rather than individual parts of it.
You also have to question why so many wealthy and privately educated people attend Oxbridge.

@ChallahPlaiter our state primary school in a posh area was much worse, with more wealthy and more entitled kids than our private secondary. You should look at the inequality created by the catchment by house price if you want to be fair and change that. The kids in Starmer's state school live in houses worth 2 million or so. A perfect little bubble right? But pretending and telling themselves they are in a state school and draining tax payers money while watching the price of their properties go up and up

You’re not looking at the system as a whole. You’re looking at a few elite private schools. If you closed them down, the vast majority of the pupils would be educated at equally elite schools out of the country. I have nothing against state schools, I have a DC that is educated in one but for some children they are torture. Have you ever watch a child put their hands over their ears and shake with terror because they cannot stand noise and large groups of people? Now, imagine putting such a child in a school with 2000 pupils and see how they react. So, many parents like myself, put their DC in small, calm private schools where they probably won’t get stellar GCSEs or A Levels, but they will hopefully leave with their mental health in tact. And now people like you want to destroy those schools.

I don’t argue that inequality doesn’t exist within the state education system, or that changes don’t need to be made there. I can disagree with the existence of private schools at the same time; it’s all part of a whole stance. I would like to see every child have access to a first rate education and to everything else that’s needed in order for them to fully benefit from that including a decent roof over their heads and enough food to eat. There’s no contradiction there.

With respect, you’re wildly extrapolating and absolutely leaping to conclusions, Olympic style, based on that.

No, I’m not, I’m informing you of the impact of a policy that you support. It’s doesn’t harm the elite, it harms the children who will be forced to move schools because of it. Given that so many LEA’s warn against parents moving their children to other schools on their application pages, why do you think that it is acceptable?

Again, with respect, you are making a lot of assumptions and throwing around some unkind accusations. I don’t want to destroy your child’s education, why would I? Imagine how good it would be for families like yours and mine if we could access suitable education for our children without having to consider paying twice for it? Believe me, I understand where you are coming from and I understand that I’m fortunate not to have had to pay for private education. But while there’s money to be made from desperate parents, the system will not change organically. That change has to be put into place.

State schools can be improved without this VAT policy. They should be funded by general taxation. But it’s more than money, there needs to be a complete restructure and an understanding that many children cannot thrive in large schools.

‘our state primary school in a posh area was much worse, with more wealthy and more entitled kids than our private secondary. ’

of course it was, my darling. Because, famously, that’s why parents choose to send their children to private schools - to mix with children from all backgrounds and avoid that posh, wealthy privileged bubble you get in state schools.
Well done you for decided to send your children to a truly diverse school, and ‘striving’ to find the money for the fees.

Looking at the system as a whole - our political system is dominated by Oxbridge graduates.

7% of pupils go to private schools, and 28% of of Oxbridge students are from private schools.

Doesn't that illustrate inequality to you?

Yes I agree, the current system is not fit for purpose.

Provide a first class education for all children before you condemn people for wanting to improve their children’s life chances. If state education was good most people wouldn’t feel the need for private schooling. There would also be no need for private tutors or dance classes, music lessons and theatre schools because all children’s needs would be catered for. And make no mistake once Labour have got away with taxing private schools they will come for all the extras that people pay for too. We will have equality for all. Equality based on everyone having the worst education the state can provide.

I’d be interested to know where you’ve seen me condemn anyone.
I think the first rule of using any type of social media should be reading and understanding people’s viewpoints before you waste their time.
Also your assertion that our incredibly mild and cautious government is secretly some kind of radical communist rabble is laughable.

This. Absolutely spot on

Is it? What evidence do we have?

I don't agree with this argument. When parents who value education send their children to state schools, it's good for the school; it helps create an ethos of academic excellence there. If pupils come from families who believe that regular attendance and dedication to study are important, that makes the job of teachers enormously easier. When pupils are surrounded by other pupils who value learning, they learn better. Cultural capital is real, and when parents with cultural capital (not just economic capital) send their children to a state school, the whole school and community benefit. But when these parents decide that the state school isn't good enough for their children, it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Also, schools receive funding for each pupil, so if more students attend the school, the school receives more government funding. That's why state schools are so keen to fill all their places. For every empty place, the school is losing money.

It's not at all like the NHS vs private health care. When a pupil chooses an independent over a state school, that doesn't mean that the state school has more resources to allocate to the remaining pupils; it means it has fewer resources.

It's a sad truth though that state schools are woefully underfunded after so many years of Tory government. Pupils with SEND have suffered in particular. Getting an EHCP is ridiculously difficult as @senmama007 has said, and many pupils with SEND fall between the cracks.

So even though I'm not opposed to the idea of adding VAT to independent school fees (apart from in the case of pupils with SEND!), the real change that needs to happen is for the government to pour more funding into state schools, especially for pupils with SEND. Over my years as a school governor, I have seen financial support for SEND decline more and more. There used to be support available for pupils with varying levels of SEND; now it's an EHCP or nothing (and EHCPs are rare as hen's teeth!). Whether or not a pupil gets an EHCP also depends on how good your school SENDCO is at writing the application 😢

Actually my daughter has been in two private schools in the last few years - one for her GCSEs and one for 6th form so I must have found the only two private schools who don’t fit your narrative.

I don’t know where you live in the uk, but my son’s local government school charges for extra tuition, we have to pay for trips and our uniform has to bought from a local sports store (both blazer etc and sports kit).

No two schools are the same - you can’t generalise about private schools they do not all fit your vision of them.

This a 1,000’percent and if we didn’t have private schools I suspect the state of our education system would be so much better.

Actually this doesn’t stack with the thread I started about making all schools state schools. I got responses from it would guarantee behaviour decline to we would all become politically brainwashed.

You’re correct, you can’t generalise, but you can use facts, actual statistics that prove that private schools are overwhelming used by people who are in the top10% income group, for example. And infer from that. Sti, if you have indeed found not one but 2 private schools chocka with WC kids, then I guess you have.
Who am I to suggest that other posters may be full of it to further their own particular narrative.
Presumably these schools have such low fees, being so socio-economically diverse, that 20% extra is well affordable.