So called left wingers who pay school fees

baNANA I didn't know that Blair and Harman's children were at state schools, but it seems neither did Diane Abbot - I remember listening to her chatting with Andrew Neil and Michael Portillo late one night, berating all the New Labour MPs who don't espouse state education, and saying that Harman and Blair were the biggest hypocrites, hence my comment.

I don't have a problem with anyone who has a particular political view, acting in accordance with that view. I struggle with those who are vocal about their views, but only revert to their politics when it suits them.

There are plenty of MPs whose views and behaviour are a bit all over the place, but are wise enough not to get on their high horse about things, as they are bound to be knocked down again.

Lilygran - Exactly the point I was trying to make when I started this thread I stated that I have no argument with people who opt for the private sector, although I would say in an ideal world schools would be free and good, as in countries like Finland and Germany, even if taxes are higher to pay for this. My annoyance is with those who say they are socialist but opt out of the state system for whatever reason. I understand why you would do this if your child is dyslexic, but what do skint people do if their child is dyslexic and don't have the means to pay for an education where their child would get the help needed. I can't remember whether Ruth Kelly answered that one when she was Minister of Education and removed her son/daughter because he/she was dyslexic. As for those who have never used the state system, such as Fatty Falconer, who wanted to become a labour MP a while back and had all of his brood in the private sector and I believe a number of homes, both here and abroad, as you do if you are a champagne socialist, why don't they just cross the house and chum up with the Bullingdon Boys, what's the difference?

Lilygran and Mishap agreeing with both sides of the conversation here and that the choice must be in the childs best interests,DS2 went into prep at 3yrs 4mths the simple reason was that it was cheaper than private childcare at the time,then you did not have help towards childminding costs and I had to work even though after using child benifit and my contribution after working full time only left me with approx £300.00 at the end of the month but if I did not have that money we would not have been able to afford the bills and the increased mortgage payments at the time,I was lucky that my friend picked him up when school finished and then mr g. collected him 1 hour later,I have always felt guilty about sending him and not his siblings but needs must at the time.

Mishap - I have no quarrel with independent schools. We choose what we think is best for our own children within our own resources.Some of us have more restricted choice than others because of where we live or our income. If you choose to spend your own money on your children's education, that's your right. What I'm objecting to is the left-wingers who deplore the state of the education provided for the majority, often from a position of ignorance, and opt out for their own children when they could do more than write articles, make speeches, contribute to programmes on telly if they opted in. At least they would then know what they were talking about.

Indeed petallus, some families have no leeway at all.
But those on medium incomes who choose to both work, not have holidays etc. to get what they think is a better education for their children do exist - maybe they get something better, maybe they don't - depends where they live I guess.

But I would never judge a parent's choice - we all have to do what we think is best for our children.

My 3 children all went to different schools at different times: state, private, Rudolph Steiner - and the decisions were made on the needs of each child and whether what the state had to offer locally would best serve their particular needs or whether we needed to make the necessary sacrifices to give them something better suited to them. Politics did not come into it at all - we just wanted to make sure that each child had the best we could do for them - for some it was a state school and for some it was private. One of my children was dyslexic and this made it necessary for us to shop around to see who might make her happiest and give her the best education that she was capable of achieving.

First of all let me say very clearly that I am a socialist, and completely opposed to private education. I sent my first two children to the fairly average state secondary school where the first one did very well (bright, motivated child - liked by his teachers). My second child did less well as she was more feisty, got in with a nice group of girls who unfortunately had no ambition, and more to the point she was not particularly liked by the teachers (too opinionated).

My third hated school from the word go, struggled with everything, and was eventually diagnosed as dyslexic. He received no appropriate support or help and against all my principles I would gladly have paid for appropriate private education out of sheer desperation. Unfortunately it was too late; he had become incredibly resistant and refused to attend a school of any kind. At the age of 18 he made up his own mind to engage with education and it has all worked out very well for him. However I have learned that while bright children will do well anywhere, a child with difficulties is likely to struggle within the state system.

Mishap I can't help smiling when I read the often made comment that many people make sacrifices to send their children to private schools. The implication seems to be that others could do the same if only they were prepared to be thrifty.

But what kind of economies could someone earning £17000 gross p a make to be able to afford school fees of £10000 plus per child?

Mamie - I withdraw my intemperate remark about P Toynbee but maintain the principle that by withdrawing from the educational (or health) provision made for the nation, they simply indicate what she and her mates think of the rest of us - for whom it's the only option.

But I thought all left-wingers loved Polly Toynbee!

Do you think she is pernicious and destructive about state schools, Lilygran? I think she is sometimes a bit inaccurate and her stuff can be ill-researched IMO, but I would have thought her more broadly sympathetic than that. I think nobody researches the PISA data properly before they quote this "falling down the league tables" stuff, when in fact there are so many more countries in the PISA sample now, that you can't really compare anything with anything.
The problem is always that journalists only seem to know (or think they know) about London, when it really isn't typical of the rest of the country (although they have done some good stuff on raising standards recently there.)

True, Mamie, but she has an influence and it's that we ought to be trying to combat. More so if she is basing her pernicious and destructive views on state schools on the opinions she formed 30 years ago!

Nanaej to you!

Seems a bit late in the day to get het up about the schools attended by Polly Toynbee's children; they must be well in their forties by now.

I am a socialist, as are my close group of friends. All our kids went to local primary and secondary schools in South London. All have done OK and are graduates, employed and most now settled with families.
When I sent my girls to the nearest middle school my neighbours were horrified I had not sent them to the 'popular' and more 'middle class' school.
DH & I taught in schools in poor socio economic areas and knew one of the the ways to change the perception of schools is to have a better socio economic mix. If we wanted it for the schools where we worked we had to do the same for our local school..so we 'sacrificed' our kids for our ideals. They do not seem to have suffered too much!

Agreed there are some struggling schools but I would be surprised to hear that many of these individuals had to live in an area where they have no decent schools!

I don't think a lot of them care about the flak - they've justified their actions to themselves, and anyway, they don't live in the same world as we do.

Sadly Lilygran, that is exactly what it does mean - there are some abysmal schools out there. Just because someone might not want that for their child does not mean that they do not care about the children who are getting a crap education.

And many people who send their children to private schools can barely afford it - they make huge sacrifices to give their children what they see as the best. They are not all landed gentry!

There are of course also some excellent state schools - which is why people move house, go to church when they don't believe, lie through their teeth etc.

In a funny way I admire high profile left-wingers who take this decision for their child, knowing the flak they will take. But it does leave them with a responsibility to use their influence to improve the state education system - if they do not do that then my admiration wanes somewhat!

You've got a point there nightowl

Petallus I agree with you, particularly last paragraph and also like Lilygran's comment "our kids are all too important as indeed we are" Sorry, for me, calling yourself a socialist and educating your kids privately do not marry up they are a contradiction.

I do so agree baNANA and what drives me into a frenzy is when these so called socialists write about all the agonized soul-searching they went through in trying to decide whether or not to send their children to a fee-paying school (and of course they always end up doing so).

Are we supposed to feel sorry for them?

I almost prefer the straightforward conservative approach; at least they aren't hypocrites.

And I forgot to add

Whilst I agree totally with the notion that a socialist or person of left wing ideals could not possibly send their child to a private school, I do not agree that these politicians are being hypocritical for the simple reason that they are neither socialist nor left wing, simply carrer politicians like all the rest. I thought MPs from the 'New' Labour party had been banned from using those terms ever again!

Lilygran it's a case of "don't do as I do, do as I say" very convenient there's always a get out clause if you have the money!

Much more fundamental than the hypocrisy is the implication that while it's OK for your kids to go to the local comp and take their chances, OUR kids are altogether too important (as we are). Us and them in a nutshell!

I don't condemn anyone for opting for private education if they don't have any other choice, I would do the same, but then I don't regard myself as leaning to the left and tied up in never ending knots!