Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to expect my local cancel to pay for transport to a private school

458 replies

tootyflooty · 13/12/2008 12:23

My dd has been offered a place at a theatre school, it is fee paying but not local and they do not have scholerships. I asked the council if they would provide the cost of a train pass, but were told no, because it is not our local state school.My argument is that by funding my dd education for the next 5 years (not easily affordable for us)I am saving the local education authority vast sums of money as they will not be paying for her place at the local state school, it seems unfair that we are penalised for our decision, She would get a free pass if our local school was over 3 miles away.Sorry to ramble but we have never had handouts from anyone and this seems grossly unfair.

OP posts:
navyeyelasH · 13/12/2008 15:20

Clam- in the end I sweet talked my dad into buying them for me

clam · 13/12/2008 15:23

at turnip! Do you reckon we'll see that rabbit on tonight's final?

navyeyelasH · 13/12/2008 15:23

Turniphead1

I don't know much about the rabbit she gave it to a friend because "it smelt funny"

RubyRioja · 13/12/2008 15:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

clam · 13/12/2008 15:24

He could be filmed wiping a tear from its eye, saying "I'm doing this for my kids, all the hundreds of 'em, and for navy's sister, who brought me up from nowhere to realise my dream."

Turniphead1 · 13/12/2008 15:25

This reply has been withdrawn

This message has been withdrawn at the poster's request

Fivesetsofschoolfees · 13/12/2008 15:26

The government subsidises fee paying places in foundation stage. I think they could extend this to compulsory school age if they wanted to.

I do feel that it is wrong to pay twice for school places. I feel that there should be some kind of tax deduction, or at very minimum, stating which state school the money should be attibuted to.

It is definitely wrong for anyone to be bleating on about the charities' act when it is surely enough of a public benefit to educate 800 000 children free of taxpayers' expense.

I suppose the government knows that they can tax and tax and will not actually influence the behaviour of very many families - ie they won't actually decide to capitulate and take up state school places - because their educational values are simply too strong.

Turniphead1 · 13/12/2008 15:28

Oh Clam - you spoke to soon... It seems Navy's sister ABANDONED him. But luckily this heartbreaking story got him this far in the competition and will make good copy on the New of the World when he poses saucily tomorrow...

chocolatemummy · 13/12/2008 15:28

I agree that there should be more help for those who need it but to be honest, if you can afford to even contemplate sending your kids to private school then I dont think a bus pass is going to be a problem. OK the child might not cost the education system for the five years that they would have been using it but its because they want a stage school right?

clam · 13/12/2008 15:29

Fivesets (not xenia, name-changing it it?), you're not suggesting that state-school 'customers' don't have stong educational values, are you?!

clam · 13/12/2008 15:30

And, hopefully, his makeover for the show will have got rid of the funny smell.

AnarchyInAManger · 13/12/2008 15:44

NavyeyelasH - precisely what 'benefits' did your sister get for the rabbit?

I have never in my life come across state benefits for poor peoples' pets. Never.

chaufleur · 13/12/2008 15:49

Regardless of it being a stage school or not, the point is that the child will not cost the education system for the five years that they would have been using it.

The other point being that given that the child will not be costing the eduction system for five years, is it completely unfair to want a fraction of that cost for help (means tested) with transport?

Does it make Tooty a snob of some sort that she can contemplate being able to send her child to private school? What if she'd worked very hard and saved very hard and spent very little on other items that most people take for granted? Should she not want her child to have the best opportunity she can give it?

As I have said before, I have no illusions of extremely poor circumstances as my mum came from such an environment, in this country, where the most humble and modest of household basics were an often unaffordable luxury and this is no exaggeration. If anyone could be bitter, she could, yet she would applaud any attempt to better yourself or your children including private school which you have worked damn hard to pay for.

ChristmasCakeYerbouti · 13/12/2008 15:49

This sort of thread, and some of the posts contained within, is the very reason why I am starting to think I no longer want to continue posting on MN

Original poster
tootyflooty · 13/12/2008 15:56

An annual train pass is not make or break on our decision to use the private school, we can not easily afford the school fees and will be remortagaging and cashing in endowements, but it would have been nice to know there was a little help available for this, as there was when I was at school.I'm not about to write to my local mp or anything, and I don't begrudge other people financial assistance when required. There just does seem to be a big imbalance on who gets what, I pay full cost for swimming, music etc and others on benefits are either fully or partially subsidised. i don't have more available cash just because i work , i just have to work more to pay for what i have .

OP posts:
chocolatemummy · 13/12/2008 16:04

I am no against private education AT ALL! it is all about choice and that is eactly what this country has strived for, to give people choices. If they have worked hard for their money, great, good for them I am sure plenty of people work very hard for their money, it is usually the lowest paid workers who do the hardest jobs isnt it!
This is not my argument I just think that the whole, I am saving the taxpayer money thing by not using my state school so therefore i should get a free bus pass is pretty meak. If we all abandoned state schools and went private what about the children whose families simply would never be able to do that, the state schools would be terrbile with no balance of children from different backgrounds or experiences, full of children from poor and low or unacheiveing families and even more of the kids would become dissaffected and hopeless. It is by socialising, learning and sharing experiences with other children from differnet backgrounds that some of these start to feel more hopeful and optimistic and driven about their futures

Jux · 13/12/2008 16:05

It is not a question of saving the government money when you choose non-state, what is happening when you choose state schooling is that you are costing them money. Therefore, by choosing non-state education you are not saving them anything, you are simply not costing them something.

DoesntChristmasDragOn · 13/12/2008 16:06

FGS, she doesn't need to go to stage school like some children need to go to a specific school. If you want her to go, you have to pay.

chocolatemummy · 13/12/2008 16:08

tooty I am totally behind you on your last post about those who work having to pay full price for everything and have tried to start a thread about this, low to average earning (working parents and families) and what help we get (or don't get) more to the point. As I am possibly doing some interviews about this in the new year with MP's. I just think that if you decide to opt out of what your state can offer you, its your choice to do that and therefore take on what comes with that decision.

TinselianAstra · 13/12/2008 16:10

I'm a bit surprised at the number of people who seem to think that taxes and public services are about getting out what you put in.

In reference to travellers:
"What's your take though on those that don't pay council or income tax (and still get taxis and school places and hospital treatment etc?) Do you think that's fair?"

So are you suggesting that any MNer would think it would be fair to deny a child a school place on the basis that their parents were not contributing taxes? Or to deny hospital treatment to anyone, at all?

chaufleur · 13/12/2008 16:11

Same difference ultimately, Jux, regardless of the terminology?

Jux · 13/12/2008 16:13

No, it's not because it's about a principle and an attitude of mind. If people thought of it in the terms I've outlined then we wouldn't get threads like these.

Idrankthechristmasspirits · 13/12/2008 16:14

JUX made the same point i wanted to. The argument that you should receive a rebate for going private is ridiculous.

Lol at private education producing a better citizen. Oh yes, because no private school has ever produced a murderer/rapist/fraudster etc......

Also agree with Dragon. If you wanted to get your daughter away from bullies you could choose another school, that doesn't have to be a stage school or any other form of fee paying school.

chaufleur · 13/12/2008 16:21

Firstly, TinselianAstra, regarding whether that is fair or not was a question directed specifically to Anarchy.

It was in response to an earlier post whereupon Anarchy qualified that travellers are entitled to taxis etc etc because they paid VAT, council and income tax.

Hence the genuine query, what was Anarchy's take on those travellers who don't pay council or income tax and did Anarchy still think that was fair they get taxis etc, by his/her OWN definition of entitlement being paying council and income tax.

Secondly, I am not suggesting that "any MNer" is, was, or should be, anything!

chaufleur · 13/12/2008 16:24

Jux: Costing them money? Where's that money come from though? Is it the council's own pot of private cash - or is it the people's taxes?