Keir Starmer went to private school

[Asking4afrend]

AIBU to be shocked that Keir Starmer went to private school? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. So he enjoyed an excellent education which increased his social mobility and then wants to bring down the system that helped him, even when they gave him a 100% bursary so that his parents didn’t have to pay the fees?

This is from wiki:

Starmer passed the 11-plus examination and gained entry to Reigate Grammar School, which at the time was a voluntary-aidedselective grammar school.[1][12] The school converted into an independent fee-paying school in 1976, while he was a student. The terms of the conversion were such that his parents were not required to pay for his schooling until he turned 16, and when he reached that point, the school, by now a charity, awarded him a bursary that allowed him to complete his education there without any parental contribution.

I only found out about this today when I was googling the school for another reason and looked up the alumni. What a hypocrite. You didn’t hear about this in the election during all his “my father was a toolmaker” speeches.

They’re going to have to lure a hell of a lot of wealth here to plug the £100 billion gap in their economic promises.

I have every right to criticise hypocrites who benefited from selective schooling denying it to other people

Those schools haven't disapperead so are still accessible.

I thought we were talking about Starmer going to private school, not grammar school? That’s certainly the thread title….

Brexit made it negatively impacted the UK as a major financial centre
We were the gateway to the rest of Europe, now we aren't.

Both are selective. And you must be new to MN if you think posters are only allowed to comment on the thread title.

It's one thing to debate the pros and cons of a society's school arrangements. However, the argument that politicians are hypocrites if they don't allow others the things they benefited from makes no sense to me. You wouldn't say that someone who had benefited as a child from their family having slaves or a high income from drug running was a hypocrite if they didn't vote for slavery and drug decriminalisation.

The minimum we should expect from our political representatives is that they make decisions according to what they perceive to be the best interests of society as a whole. Not to focus on the best interests of the narrow demographic they are from. We might have different views on the role private schools should play, but the hypocrisy argument is just a red herring.

So what’s he being a hypocrite about?

You could equally well point out that if Keir did "benefit" from going to grammar/ private ( the assumption being that he wouldnt have made it to PM without that) that's a proof of a flawed system since the majority of children will go to neither.

There is no denying schooling. All that is happening is that private schools are being asked to pay an appropriate amount of tax.

l didn’t have much say in where l went to school and l doubt if most people did.

Why is VAT an appropriate amount of tax? If we put aside both NZ and the Greek experiment then no other country taxes education.

We dont tax private healthcare or gambling.

I really struggle with the benign acceptance by the supporters of the VAT that this is logical or has any sort of precedence in UK law.

Private schools are selective
By adding VAT to school fees, his government are restricting the number of parents who could select those schools for their children

Adding VAT to the fees reduces the number of families that can afford them, removing their ability to select the best school for their children

@snowmichael not all private schools are selective. And some say they are, and have entrance exams. But tbh (as in the case of our local one) they are stupidly easy to pass!

Of course they all are. Academic ability is just one selection criteria.

The ability that 90% of the population has never had. Forgive me for having zero sympathy for an elite.

Ah, so now we know what sort of person you are

> not all private schools are selective
Of course they are
Otherwise anyone could go to them
They select in some way, even if it's just selection by the parents

Prior to 1870 only private schools existed. There were no state schools.

They will just have to live within their means, I am sure they will still be able to select good schools for their children.

Yes you do. One who believes every child should start life with the same opportunities.

Prior to 1880 education wasn’t compulsory. Your point is?

Prior to 1870 the only education anyone had access to was private education. A significant proportion of the population was still attended school - far more than 10%. Indeed in the mid 1800s factories had to provide six half-days of schooling per week to younger children. One of the biggest providers of education was the Church of England as can be seen by the large number of Church of England schools that still exist today.

And again your point is? What is the relevance of the state of education 150 years ago when it wasn’t compulsory and children were still employed in factories. They’d only just stopped forcing children up chimneys.

It gives the lie to your claim that 90% of children have never had the ability to go to private schools.