Impact of abolition of public schools

[daffodilbrain]

Labour want all public schools abolished - hypothetically how much pressure would this put on the state- could we afford an extra 7% in the system. Can a government really abolish them if so how? Make them
Illegal? Remove their charitable
Status and probably make them even more elite?

An MPs job does pay that well especially given all of the claimable expenses on top and the one year salary cushion if you lose your seat.
Those who say it doesn’t pay well don’t live in the real world on an average salary.

MPs don’t actually run the country - their skills aren’t in how well they passed exams. They’re representatives. The civil service are the clever ones!

a tax on school fees is a great idea, especially if it could be used to improve state schools

What, like the tax I already pay? Everyone who uses private education still pays tax which is used for state education.

I disagree and suggest you do some reading up on the entrenched advantages you get from going to Eton and the like yes, lots of advantages from going to private school. I wouldn't say being an MP is necessarily one of them

Hmm.

IME, when there are alternative options for a good education for one's children - be that grammar, leafy comp or private - no one, MPs/those working in education especially, are as motivated to improve the system or the failing schools within it.

So I can kind of see the idea.

But removing choice doesn't sit well. Removing charitable status however is a no brainer.

The point many seem to miss this is that most pupils from Eton et al don’t go into to become MPs.
The “entrenched advantages” they have would exist what ever school they went to because they are intrinsically linked to money and family connections. Boris earned more writing a column for the Telegraph that he does as a prime minister.

Yeah yeah happy it's not all about money, though. It's about power.

Power over the little people.

It seems centrist politics is disappearing in the main two parties, to be replaced with frothing extremism. For every fascist Tory, there's a communist Leftie. It feels like everyone is furious, that there's a mass uprising at inequality/immigration/insert issue here.

Yeah yeah happy it's not all about money, though. It's about power

So dismissive!

Good point happy

Ha! It's that kind of thread, is it?

Shame.

An MPs job does pay that well especially given all of the claimable expenses on top and the one year salary cushion if you lose your seat

The expenses are just that, expenses. They can only be claimed against genuine expenditure by the MP on matters related to doing the job - office staff, stationery, etc.

There is no one year salary cushion if you lose your seat. At the 2015 election any MP who lost their seat got one month's salary for each year's service up to a maximum of 6 months. They now receive double the statutory redundancy pay.

Our MPs are reasonably well paid at just under £80k but that is not a spectacular salary. Lots of people earn more than that.

But money buys you power (and influence) Boris has connections to both.
We live in an age where “frothing extremism” is what the people want, Trump and Putin clearly demonstrate this. But this has nothing to do with elite independent schools.

It does have to do with elite private schools. They represent power and privilege to the oppressed. So the far left extremists want to abolish them.

It’s lazy politics to say that the inequalities in our society are caused by independent schools. Abolishing them even if possible which I doubt will not have any effect on societal inequalities the rich will remain rich the poor poor. But it will delight many who are against them but it’s bread and circuses. We’ll give you what you want whilst we’ll do what we want.

It’s not the elite independent schools that represent power and wealth and oppression it’s some of their parents who represent it. These people will still exist even if every independent school in the UK regardless of how elite or not was abolished.

Lazy politics perhaps, but it's something the disenfranchised understand.

Arabella as I said bread and circuses.
Abolishing independent schools will not effect societal inequalities. It might make the people happy but the very wealthy will still have money and power.

The disenfranchised have schools. Free education. Campaign for that to be improved?

Interesting article in the times today where the head of the school next to Grenfell says he doesn't think abolishing private schools is the right idea.

Also how his pupils go to Godolphin for some A level subjects, something that a poster on a different thread insinuated that I was lying about

Trewser - As I said, you need the right people, those with money and power, campaigning to improve "free" education. And none of them do, because they're alright Jack, with their children attending the grammar, leafy comp or private school.

happy - agree. It's a vote winner for those that oppose inequality though.

For the record, I was NOT suggesting that state schools only educate plumbers and electricians, decorators and beauticians; nor do independents cater exclusively to those destined for first rank universities. Good schools, whether private or maintained, aim to open students' eyes to a range of occupations and opportunities that they and their families may not have encountered firsthand, and to develop the skills and confidence that with effort , ability and persistence, then doors will open.

My DC, who attended maintained and independent schools, does not currently know what career to follow, so has postponed applying to university. The A level points will be enough for a decent but not world-class university. Meanwhile, DC is a junior chef in a five star hotel, earns £22k pa after 11 months (for atrocious hours TBH) and is prized by the hotel for reliability, punctuality and the ability to recruit old mates for casual vacation work.

One teacher has invited DC to speak to (a modest independent) school to explain that there are opportunities out there which don't require incurring £50k in debt over three years and that, until you have a direction to follow, it may not be the right choice for everyone. Clearly, if a person wants to be a doctor or dentist or astrophysicist, then a degree is the next step. Conversely, another teacher, who is a friend, is hellbent on persuading DC to apply for uni next year!

Surely the reason that that countries with better state education systems have a minimal private sector is self explaining. They don't need a private sector. Instead of punishing the private sector in this country (which will only serve to make it even more elite, as even fewer will be able to afford it) surely the answer is to make state education better, thus removing the need for private education. Punishing achievement doesn't make underachievers improve, it simply drags everyone to the bottom

Eton does give the boys who attend it a huge advantage, because they get a brilliant education, and each one is supported in nurturing their talents - whatever those talents are. It also gives a fifth of the boys who attend some level of financial support, and there are boys in every year group whose families pay no fees at all. It is an extraordinarily humane place, and the boys who attend know how privileged they are.

This might not have been the case 30 years ago when the current crop of politicians attended, but it is the case now.

The impact of abolishing private schools like Eton would not be to enhance state education but to put more strain on it, to discard some of the sources of educational innovation and cut away a set of institutions which give opportunities to all sorts of children.

I should probably declare an interest here: ds asked a few years ago if he could go to Eton. We didn’t even know he’d heard of Eton. But we looked at the website, not particularly seriously, saw there were lots of boys on bursaries, and went to an open afternoon, because why not?

Then we put in an application, and a few months later drove there in our ancient and battered car, and sent ds in for a test and interview, which he enjoyed, and a few weeks later he was offered a place, and there was a letter telling us how to apply for a bursary. So we did, and he got one, and he’s there now. And we’re not elite, bankers, etc etc but pretty normal and our other kids are at state school which is just fine.

I hate the lazy assumption that everyone there is the child of some sort of illuminati merchant bankers cabal, and that the school would only accept people from posh families, as it just isn’t true. There are some very wealthy parents, and there are also some pretty normal ones. Ds is massively privileged to have been given this opportunity, and I hope that what he gains from his education there, he can give back to wider society when he’s older.

Over the past couple of decades, the gap between state and private schools in England (not Scotland and Wales) seems to have narrowed, and the fees have increased to a fairly ridiculous degree. If things go on this way, the number of people using private schools will decline naturally anyway. Why not leave them to it?

If they actually did ban private schools, I bet the superrich would seek a "fox hunting" type solution and get boarding schools set up just one stop over on the Channel Tunnel in France....

If they were abolished , rich parents would just buy houses near the best state schools. It would do nothing to improve the education of poor children attending the worst schools.

@dolphin50

I am all for this. Holland and Germany dont have private schools and do very well

Err... I'm from Germany. My brother went to a private school and I went to a Gymnasium (academically selective statr school akin yo a grammar). The only reason Germany had less private schools us because they had a huge number of academically selective schools. They are now trying to be more 'comprehensive' and people are turning to private schools.

Apologies for the typos - am in my phone