Whitehall “braced for private schools collapse” 5

[ICouldBeVioletSky]

Starting a continuation thread in anticipation of the fourth one filling up…

www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5301690-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-4?page=39

No, it's just pointing what a complete tosser he is to attack other peoples children's education - and justify his attack by claiming their education is 'unfair' - whilst taking plenty of 'unfair' educational advantage for his own kids.

Never a waste of time to point out what complete gobshites Labour are.

Of course Starmer is a hypocrite. They are middle class and now uber elite and pretend to be working class, toolmaker’s son and part of the “people” because they send their DCs to “state” schools. And the press is respecting the anonymity of their children’s schools (rightly so) yet Jacob Rees Mogg’s son got hate mail at Eton.
It is Labour politicians who have vilified private schools for years and it is unacceptable. Especially if they want their own children protected. It is unethical.

Show me one other country that is not Communist China that makes such a fuss about what type of school a child goes to and how it is funded. There is not. This is a Labour created British phenomena and it is entirely unacceptable on a rationale level.
What next? Labour politicians and members cannot send their DCs to Russell Group universities because they are elitist?
You cannot be a member of the Red Group because of your education? It really is incredibly Soviet all the way and should be rejected at every level. It is not free thinking democratic diverse Britain.

My kid didn't ask to be in school during Starmer's years in power either, but who cares - she was forced out of the school by him.

The main issue is the deep, outrageous hypocrisy. He protects his own children from minor and short term disruptions whilst destroying education for thousands of other people's children including SEND, causing life long damage not just "oh my DS won't get straight 9s because of paparazzi!", and he dares lecturing the whole nation on morality, justice, social cohesion and whatnot!

Not that he's worse than others, the whole lot of them is utterly corrupt, both morally and financially. It's just the hypocrisy and lecturing on morals that I find outrageous.

They don’t hang around the house for teens no. Can you verify that in any way?

A campaigning leading politician is traveling to press events that are organised, you know where the press turn up. Do you think some prefer to loiter outside a house for an image they probably can’t even get printed?

he dares lecture the whole nation on morality, justice, social cohesion and whatnot

Exactly. Labour's claim to be morally superior is so utterly laughable. They are Orwellian.

Ha ha, they really do seem to struggle.

66% getting 5 GCSEs 4-9. These are not stellar stats, in fact they're the worst in the area. I suppose we should castigate him for hanging his kids out to dry with his virtue signalling.

I imagine the poster who "knows the schools in the area" was looking at the wrong one.

I wouldn't do it even to Starmer's children.

Camden and Islington are interesting areas in terms of education, but there are no utterly horrible secondaries people often talk about on MN (though can't remember all Islington ones atm). And even average schools in the area often have "specialism" streaks, sets and partially selective programmes MC children go to and do well. So it is also very hypocritical to say "they go to an average local comp" when there are people on this thread whose "average local comp" has five times worse results than "average comp where Starmer's DS goes".

Now you confirmed that I was looking at his school indeed.

Maybe stop outing him on a public forum?

So Starmer should NOT have sent his children to the catchment school for the house he has lived in for more than 20 years. Right.

Oh, and Jacob Rees Mogg made no attempt to preserve his children’s anonymity. It is absolutely shit that someone wrote to his son. That’s unforgivable.

What has JRM got to do with what is put online. Mners don’t need to get the school identified just to chase a point.

He sat his GCSEs there last year. I have no idea where he does A levels or other qualifications, but if you actually did know the schools then you'd know that after GCSE it feeds into a four school consortium, but most will go off to sixth form colleges. The danger of any current outing is zero even if I spelled out the name of his previous school.

Fact is, that Starmer sent his son to an Ofsted requires improvement secondary with the worst GCSE results in the area. And still you call him a privileged hypocrite.

Noooo....

Starmer should do what he wants for his children's education. Education is a good thing.

What he should NOT do is attack other people's education.

And definitely NOT lecture about the wrong type of educational privilege- whilst using his own privilege - to justify the unjustifiable.

https://bmmagazine.co.uk/news/families-earning-100k-worse-off-than-minimum-wage-after-private-school-fees-says-report/

Not sure "salaries fall below minimum wage after vast discretionary spending subtracted" is much of an argument...

I don't keep all these details in my memory but if he's left already we can safely say that the school was in top 10 nationally for particular subjects and nearly 90% were entered for eBacc compared to 30% nationally.

I'm sure other posters who were trying to avoid "average local comp" with how many? 20%? achieving 4-9 will be absolutely delighted to know that our Labour politicians' children are being educated at such mediocre educational establishments.
🤦‍♀️

Fact: Starmer’s children are far more privileged than the vast majority of children in private schools.

One need only follow the trajectory of Euan Blair leveraging his political connections for commercial gains.

The same blatantly incorrect assertion has to be repeated over and over again, dontcha know?

Fair point. Not even Labour politicians are ready to give that up.

It is an argument that you can't claim that those families are so super-rich that you can throw anything you like at them since it won't affect them... including taxing them at 62% marginal rate, plus demanding an extra 20% tax on their children's education - even the 8k per year they're subsidising the government by paying for it entirely themselves.

Yet somehow those outrageous levels of tax are needed... to subsidise people who have a higher disposable income than they're getting by on themselves?!

Yes, I think that is definitely an argument that's worth making.

And @tortoise18 could you please lying about their results being worst in the area? Their eBacc is way above LEA snd national average. And the nearby school is doing ~15% worse than them.

Are they? Could you expand?

Obviously they are very privileged indeed. But I do find nd that when I say on other threads that having rich, professional parents and a nice house to live in and so on means you’re privileged there are always people ready to question that….

Because that school does EBacc and the other LA schools don't?

All I can tell you is that there are four secondaries within a 20-minute walk of the house Starmer bought, in his constituency, before he was an MP. His son went to the worst of them, academically. We all have all sorts of reasons for choosing a school, but I can tell you that it's not the one that most middle-class parents choose at the moment.

Starmer declared the use of Lord Alli's penthouse as being worth £20,437.28 from 28 May to 13 July 2024.. Starmer also maintained in June 2024 that there was "no evidence" that schools would close.
In September 2024 he defended the decision to use the penthouse by saying "I said, we’re going to get you out of here and get you somewhere where you can just study and get to school and back without having to go through all of that. And that’s when someone said, well, in which case I can make this flat available to you. It’s safe, secure. He can get on with the job. No money exchanged hands … And I wasn’t going to let my son fail or not do well in his GCSEs", also saying “any parent would have made the same decision”.

Between those dates, in July 2024, the treasury and DfE officials advised his new government that 56000 students would be forced to leave their schools and 100 schools would close. They hid this from the public until March 2025. They were also briefed in July 2024 that “January is the most disruptive for pupils and local authorities” and it was suggested that they look at exempting students with SEN and student mid-way through GCSE and A level courses. They chose to ignore all those suggestions that would have mitigated the damage and implement what even DfE had advised was the most disruptive option.

Hypocrisy is accepting tens of thousands in hospitality to avoid any disruption to your own children's exams, defending it as "any parent would have made the same decision", while at the very same time (a) pursuing a course of action that even your own officials have advised you will cause maximal disruption for other children's exams, and (b) hiding evidence of that advice, which contradicted your public statements - made only a month before the advice was received - from the public for 9 months until it became clear that it was going to come out in court.