John McDonnell - fee paying scholar to Marxist

Trisher Dispel all your fabtasies of today's private schools Back in the 1950s, there was very little difference between private or state schools. The education I received was no better than the local state grammar school, the facilities and class size were much the same. 2 playing fields used for hockey in winter and tennis or athletics in the summe The very small ill-equipped gym had to be used as a classroom when the cohort of 1947 came through and the boarding side, never very large was being rapidly run down so that dormitories could be turned into classrooms. Most boarders were forces children, with a few others whose father's jobs took them overseas to live.

I spent my first two terms at grammar school in an army grammar school in Singapore and the convent facilities were similar. Given how straitened life was in the 1950s, I doubt my school place cost anymore than if I had gone to a a LA owned and funded school. As far as I know the school actually had very few fee paying pupils. There were none in my class.

I doubt John McDonnell's experience was any different than mine.

Private schools only started flourishing in the late 1970s/1980s and getting the extra facilities they have today. Up until then wartime conditions and restrictions meant neither parents or schools had the wherewithal to finance them.

yes, very aware. There never has been sufficient Grammar School places - not in Leicestershire, not anywhere else.
My OH, the child of immigrants- moved primary schools 6 times - and no money for private coaching or support either. How he managed to get in is a miracle- and how he repaid 1000x over with his work.

I imagine there are many here who just failed to get in to Grammar School as they just failed the 11+ and never were allowed to achieve their dream or potential- because of a day or two at the age of 11. By the time I qualified as a teacher, and my kids went to secondary school- the Comprehensive system was well organised and working really well, overall.

The reason the inner London children gained places in outer London schools was because they were bright. Fortunately, inner London now has some high-achieving secondary schools and parents of bright children don't have to make the choice between a sink inner city school and a leafy outer London school.

jura A relative of mine was a schools inspector in Leicestershire. The pressure to go completely comprehensive came from the sharp-elbowed middle classes, who didn't want their offspring to go to secondary moderns because there weren't enough grammar school places for those who wanted them.

Urmstongran I'm still waiting for evidence that McDonnell tried to hide the fact that he went to a minor private school for two years.

I've never heard anybody claim that Attlee was less of a socialist because the school he attended really is "posh". I haven't a clue whether Attlee advertised the fact he went to an independent school or whether he tried to hide it. More than likely, it didn't actually matter, just as McDonnell's education is irrelevant. It's just dragging up muck by the Sun and the Tory smear-mongerers.

How about discussing important stuff like policies?

ah well, patiently waiting for reply and evidence.

I'd like to know how he "hid" it too. It hasn't been hidden since June 2017, so when did he lie or say he'd been to some other school?

Callistemon Is this the same St Olave's Grammar School which is so "excellent" that its headteacher was sacked for cheating?

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/nov/17/head-of-grammar-school-that-forced-out-a-level-students-resigns

I've always disliked gossips and thus is all this is really.

There is no evidence he tried to hide it that's one of the falsehoods in the OP. The other is that he paid fees, his fees were paid but not by his family. Talk about biased and incorrect!! He wasn't there long anyway.
M0nica interesting that you consider yourself "state educated" because your educaion was LEA funded. If only every child could have that amount spent on them.

I agree with everything Solonge has said. Can't add to it other than to say that my daughter has left teaching and says she will never return to it while there is a Conservative government.

Before we go, I truly would like EVIDENCE that he tried to HIDE it. The fact he didn't shout it from the rooftops, does not mean he made a conscious and deliberate effort to conceal.

So, please.

Urmstongran…..I think that private schools are money making businesses and should not have charity status, considering that public schools are cash strapped and suffering under the present government. At present, our local schools, I live in Berkshire, have had most music and drama removed from the curriculum. The local MP didn't even know this, and insisted they did still have 'the arts' in schools. His children have an extensive arts curriculum but then they go to a very expensive private school. I don't believe that state schools should offer a second class education, in the same way that I believe the NHS should offer the same great medicine as private hospitals. I don't believe in a two tier system, poor education and health for those without money. That isn't communism, that is fairness. To believe otherwise is elitism. Look to Scandinavia where they pay high taxes but private education is almost unheard of as the state education is excellent...as is health. Higher taxes, not lower taxes...and before you ask, we earned very good incomes and never employed accountants to reduce our taxes....we also never paid cash in hand as we believe we should all pay taxes...including those that own our right wing newspapers, who manipulate the British public but who pay no tax.

Is the fact that you think he tried to hide it that causes you such concern Urm?

If that’s the case, you feel the same level of concern at all politicians who you believe lie and hide things from the public? Is JMcD as bad as they come in your opinion, or are there others whose behaviour might be at the more severe end of the sliding scales of lies?

Thank you once again MOnica for being the voice of reason. And for the fact that you ‘get’ the point of this thread of mine. You’ve nailed it!

(Your post at 16:45pm today).

And let's not forget that Attlee went to Haileybury (a proper posh school) and Oxford and had middle class parents. Wow!

growstuff
The difference between him and JMcD is that he didn’t try to hide the fact!
?

Apologies to GGmk3 and WWmk2 who thought this thread almost beneath contempt.

It seems it did have legs (after all!)

It will, and probably ought, to fizzle out now.

Thank you very much for joining in and for all your comments!

and here is my point - are you supposed to watch your child suffer, be it for lack of healthcare in a critical situation, or because of their special needs, or devastating bullying - because of your principles?

Is it not possible to say - I am working like a Trojan to ensure good healthcare and education for all - but right NOW, my child needs this treatment, or to be moved away from bullying - and I will not let them suffer because others do. But I will fight, on and on, for this to be available to all?

If your child or grandchild needs an operation, but the NHS is in such a state that delay puts s/he in great pain or at risk of further deterioration, or worse- should you be blamed for paying to go private?

Absolutely not but some would deem it unethical jura

I have absolutely no argument with anyone who wants the best for their child - except those who try to prevent other parents doing the same.

exactly the case in Leicestershire, the first County to go fully Comprehensive and get rid of the 11+.

We were indeed 'criticised' by many neighbours, colleagues and friends - for 'sacrificing' our children to our principles and sending them to the local schools - unlike most of them, although we could have afforded it. It served them really really well.

There were two excellent girls' schools in the outer London borough where we lived, but very few girls I knew of managed to get a place at one of them.

We did move anyway to somewhere with a bog standard comprehensive school and absolutely no choice whatsoever.

Not being a Londoner, I cannot judge. But members of a a party determined to ban all selection, should live by their own policies. Special pleading is what people do when they are in a priviliged position and , lets face it any politician with a well known name ,a seat in Parliament and in the cabinet or shadow cabinet is in a priviliged position.

Just to jog your memory M0nica

1996:
Labour was bracing itself for fresh embarrassment over its education policy after the disclosure last night that Harriet Harman, shadow Health Secretary, is to send her son Joe to a grant-maintained grammar school in Kent.

Ms Harman's son - whose elder brother Harry,13, goes to the Oratory, the grant-maintained Roman Catholic comprehensive attended by Tony Blair's son Euan - has secured a place in the highly competitive examination for the selective St Olave's School, a boys' grammar in Bromley.

Ms Harman is married to Jack Dromey, a Transport and General Workers' Union official. Labour Party policy is opposed to the principle of selection in schools.

Ms Harman's son was one of the top 90 in the examination, out of 700 applicants. The 11-year-old is at present at a local state primary school, Dulwich Hamlets, in south London, acknowledged as a feeder school for St Olave's, a state school which has opted out of local authority control by becoming grant-maintained. The school is selective as well as grant- maintained, which makes the decision particularly sensitive.

Ms Harman said last night: "This is a state school that other children in my son's class will be going to. That he has got in has got absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I am an MP. Any child in Southwark can apply, many go and admission is open to every child in Southwark irrespective of money or who their parents are."

Ms Harman said that there had never been the same pattern in London of sending children to very local schools that there had been in other parts of the country. Many of her own constituents in the London borough of Southwark went to schools in Lewisham and many in Lambeth went to schools in Southwark.

She added: "There has always been a lot of travelling in London. It has also been common for a long time for parents in inner London to send their children to schools in outer London boroughs."

Ms Harman said the fact that she had not decided to send her second son to the same school as his brother in no way reflected on the Oratory, which was a "brilliant" school. "Sometimes a school is perfect for one child and another school is perfect for another. There is nothing unusual in a parent sending one child to one school and another to a different school."

David Blunkett, shadow Education Secretary, told the party conference in October that a Labour government would create no more selective schools. "Read my lips. No selection, either by examination or by interview under a Labour government," he said. But the party's education policy document makes it clear that the party will leave it open to local councils to preserve existing grammar schools.

St Olave's has a 175-pupil sixth form, with 96 per cent going on to higher education. It is a 400-year-old school which was founded by Southwark pensioners, originally in the London borough.

I have absolutely no argument with anyone who wants the best for their child - except those who try to prevent other parents doing the same.

It's interesting that it was common for inner London parents to send their children to schools in outer London borough.
Perhaps that is why it was difficult for children who lived in those outer London boroughs to get a place in their local or very nearby schools - pushy inner London parents who had 'clout' were ensuring their own children took up those places.

Now I know.

If your child or grandchild needs an operation, but the NHS is in such a state that delay puts s/he in great pain or at risk of further deterioration, or worse- should you be blamed for paying to go private?

I do not consider members of the Labour party who were privately educated are top be despised, it is their parents who decided what school they would go.

I do despise Labour MPs who send their children to private schools or go to great lengths to get them to effectivly selective state schools. I am thinking Diane Abbott and Tony Blair. There are others but the their names escape me.

This whole thing is a storm in a teacup but it serves John McDonnell right for his inverted snobbery.

Back in the time of the 11+ and grammar school, it was quite common for an LA, which didn't have a faith based grammar school and where their were a large number of faith based parents to take some or all the places in a local faith based private school. It also had the advantage that increased the number of grammar school places available for children who had taken the 11+

I went to just such a school. The LA took up most of the places in the local independent convent grammar school for girls who passed the 11+, also the children of other denomiations who preferred a faith based school to the state grammar. Most of the Jewish families in the town sent their daughters to the convent as did some CofE parents.

Now if John McDonnell had just been straight and open about this right at the start years ago this piffling little storm would never have arisen.

I went to a private school because my local LA took up most of the places there. I was one of a small group of boarders, my boarding fees were paid by the state because my father was in the army. I have never ever considered myself anything other than state educated because my eductation was entirely funded by the state and the same applies to John McDonnell.

What bothers me is if John McDonnell thought his state education was something he should hide. If can be devious and underhand about something as trivial as this, what else is he beng devious and underhand about that is of some significance .

I don't notice it being talked about a great deal on here SirChenjin and we are not that weird as a "cohort".

I actually told Jo Coburn (Politics Live) that at lunchtime but she just continued thinking she knew best. Then they had almost nothing to say about this "pivotal" part of politics.