Them and us - why posh Tories who claim to care about social mobility haven't got a clue

[breadandbutterfly]

...and are patronising bastards to boot.

See:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/09/social-mobility-suzanne-moore

Esp enjoy the comment at 9 April 2011 9:32AM -

"The Camerons know how to 'work' their connections, too. David Cameron got his first job as a researcher for Tim Rathbone, his godfather and Conservative MP for Lewes.

Three months later he went to Hong Kong to work at the conglomerate Jardine Matheson - Daddy was stockbroker to the chairman, providing a fast-track into the business world.

When the young Cameron was due to attend a job interview at Conservative Central Office, a phone call was received from Buckingham Palace. "I understand you are to see David Cameron," said the caller. "I am ringing to tell you that you are about to meet a truly remarkable young man."

It has been speculated that the mystery call was from Captain Sir Alastair Aird, Equerry to the Queen Mother and husband of Cameron's godmother. The Airds vigorously denied it. Others have suggested the caller might have been Sir Brian McGrath, a family friend who was private secretary to Prince Philip. But he, too, though named as a referee for the job, denies it firmly".

You couldn't make it up could you? They're all in it together.
"

DoubleDegreeStudent, I fail to see what you are whinging about. You have been given every opportunity - make the most of it. Make the most of your life that you can. That is what EVERYONE should be doing.

Maybe Cameron would have made PM without that phone call (if it really happened) but he will now spend his whole life wondering if he only got there because of who he knew. I think it's very unfair to assume he isn't bothered by that.

No, the fact that he is a member or related to the aristocracy and was a member of the Oxford Bullingdon mafia had nothing to do with it at all FFS

btw, the same also applies to Gideon.

All the public school boys in the cabinet are there on merit not because of a leg up and connections nor because they are rich, who would think such a thing.

As for this party you missed try telling that to the millions out of work and those who lost their homes during the Thatcher years. Yes there was a party but it was for rich fucking yuppies.

Still at least you appreciate how lucky you are most seem to thing it was their right and entitlement.

Newwave, I agree. I live in Belgium where there is no real Public school system - there are some private international schools though. The standard of education is generally much higher. Even the King's GC go to normal state school. (Though I expect you probably need to camp outside for a week to get a place in Kindergarten at that one....)

wook, no problem. I make jokes about the Mail too, but I still think it is the best paper by far.

Double degreee You talk of disadvantage- well. there's disadvantage and then there's disadvantage ... most people would take the 'mild discomfort/disquiet' form over the 'one insurmountable obstacle after another' form whether or not both ends of the spectrum feel the effects of prejudice, because at least if one is at a certain end of the spectrum then one is not going to be terribly disadvantaged materially by this prejudice/disadvantage.
As for Cameron, I suspect he doesn't lose a lot of sleep over it really.

It was Labour who didn't want social mobility. I mean, if they did, they hid it awfully well.

"If they were abolished, the outrage of such people when faced with sending their "gifted children" to lesser schools, combined with their influence, would FORCE the improvement of all state ed."

State ed is not doing well because of Labour. I see no reason to sacrifice children on the altar of this failure.

Private schools and good grammars and comps are maintaining this country's knowledge economy against in a war of attrition against real achievement, seen by Labour as elitism. Twats.

The class argument or Labour v Tory argument over who wants social mobility.....

If you are a rich, very privilledged person who has watched generations of your family succeed just by bieng born, why would you want social mobility, in which you face losing your advantage.

If you are the average working class person, what have you to lose by gaining social mobility?

Gooseberry sadly they didn't do a lot to further it- a terrible wasted opportunity- but some thinking was on the right lines, eg Sure Start makes sense in this light, though flawed, as with BSF.

So true that state education should be improved, properly, and not just through the chucking of money at it (I have seen that not working...) But also the case that, while public and/or selective schools exist there will always be an issue to some extent, a kind of educational apartheid.

Many people just don't want it. There was an interview on R4 of a teacher trying to get children to engage with higher expectation and aspiration. The blank response was often "but I want to be a hairdresser". She said there was an attitude that many people would find difficult to understand, basically a rejection of "the posh", of moving away from your background. Sounded like cutting off your nose etc but there's security there for some, obviously. These were teenagers being actively encouraged to expect more, being taken on university tours, shown what could be achieved if they worked harder and wanted it.

Goose

It was Labour who didn't want social mobility. I mean, if they did, they hid it awfully well.

That's the problem, they hid it to well so as not to frighten middle england, how about:

Tax credits
Minimum wage
Winter fuel allowance
Pension credits
Increased access to university
Schools for the future

Sure they made mistakes but they did their best to get people out of hardship and now the Tories are doing their best to get people back into hardship, they will succeed as they are the experts

But why punish more children for the failure of the state system? Improve it look at private schools see what they do and copy it. Give children a chance. Stop expecting them to fail.

But that's silly gooseberry " look at private schools -- see what they do and copy it" How can the state system cream off all the students who come from wealthy backgrounds and/or have highly motivated parents and/or are highly able and say no to everyone else?!

Look at private schools -- see what they do and copy it

Great idea but can you see the Tories having class sizes of 14 and as much money spent on the school as is spent on Eton or Harrow.

We tried state education under Labour frankly because they were sloshing so much money around the facilities were all shiny and lovely I wanted to at least give it a chance. The buildings were fab but the teachers were being replaced by TA's who'd previously been shop assistants locally, I once witnessed the teacher ask the class a question and the TA excitedly put her hand up because she knew the answer and was gutted when a 6 year old was chosen, I wish I was making that up.
All I would say to those who say private schools should be outlawed, I'd have no issue whatsoever with that providing the standards in the state school become so shit hot that there is no need for them. When £7k per child is being spent on their well being and education then I'll use them, as it stands only £2k a year is being spent, unwisely and you can tell.

They hid it by not achieving it. They threw money at schools and lowered standards. They failed a generation of children.

Tax credits
Winter fuel allowance
Pension credits
Schools for the future

None of these encourage social mobility. In fact there is an argument that increasing welfare dependency deals social mobility a fatal blow, by removing the need and ambition to achieve in education. It is like giving people grain to eat this season and no grain to grow for next.

A good education available to all is the engine of true and lasting social mobility.

No it wasn't Labour or even New Labour Gooseberrybushes it was the elite who managed to gain control over Labour at the time, Mandelson and Blair etc., intensely relaxed at the filthy rich getting richer.

I'm with Three Bunnies, this coalition won't last, it doesn't have popular support, and Cameron is actually distrusted by the Daily Mail anyway for being a posh nob toff.

I wish people would stop blaming the govt of the day for their inability to do anything. I come from a humble backgroiund, as does DH. What you do is work bloody hard and make the most of every opportunity. I know lots of people who are doing just fine and none of them came from "posh" backgrounds. The argument seems to be that if you are poor, then Labour/Tories are conspiring to keep you that way. That is bollocks.

The truth is we can't all go to university without degrees becoming worthless, we need hairdressers and binmen more than we need bankers and lawyers, somebody's child has to be the hairdresser.

My children are not in class sizes of fourteen. Money was binned on shiny new facilities under Labour, on initiatives and studies and God knows what. Binned.

Look at the curriculum. Look at what they do in primary and Yrs 7 and 8. It's different. They expect children to achieve, and learn, to learn by rote sometimes, to play a lot of sport, to compete. It gets results.

Yes, I think they count as Labour muminLondon.

When £7k per child is being spent on their well being and education then I'll use them, as it stands only £2k a year is being spent, unwisely and you can tell.

And with that you hit the nub of the problem. As I have said and to your credit you agreed, money buys advantage.

I cannot see any government let alone a Tory one spending £7k per pupil, not whilst the elite can opt out, so lets stop the opt out.

We cant all be the Banker just as we cannot all be the Builder.

Society as we know it would cease to exsist.

Maybe the best we can hope for is that every child gets the chance to be what they want, whether that be the Banker or the Builder.

It's not silly at all. That's exactly the wrong attitude. Failure -- a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It has to be achieved, it has been achieved before. Look at what's needed to make it work.

If children can't read and count by eleven, what do you need to change? You have large class sizes, lots of people with ESL. What do you need to do?

You need to devote more time to them and change the way they're taught. And if that means giving up other things, give them up.

You don't need posh buildings to teach children though. I spend much of my Primary education in the dining hall/a portacabin. I still passed the 11 +. Home Ed'ers probably use the dining table. These flashy white boards are worth shit in the scheme of things....