Categories

Blog powered by Typepad

« Ten lies about the Iraq war | Main | Darts: A last vestige of white working class culture? »

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Comments

Tom

Good piece Jessica.

But the problem with a 'mix of provision' is that private schools are not (or hardly ever) free at the point of use.

Your point about Kelly's choice undermining other, less well off parents in the same position is surely closely linked to this.

If the Labour party is about anything, it's about ensuring everyone - including disabled children - get a fair start in life.

If it costs parents £15,000 to educate their child adequately, then clearly our society is extremely unfair and unequal. And clearly private schools are a major part of the problem.

Stan

Not sure I understand the argument that it would have been better if Kelly had accepted public funding in this case. Surely she would have then been accused of using public money that could have been spent more appropriately on a poorer family. Another case, I'm afraid, of New Labour ministers just not being able to win whatever they do.

Helen

Kelly should have resigned. She shut umpteen schools for children with special needs, telling parents that their kids should integrate. I've always supported the Labour party, but no longer. Its been taken over by career politicians who are without principle. I look forward to massive Labour losses in the regional elections. The sooner we get rid of these hypocrites the better

Di

Ruth Kelly had a difficult choice-thats agreed. Its being portrayed that she made the correct choice by putting the interests of her child ahead of politics. Thats sounds good, but she got elected by people who, for the most, would not be able to afford to exercise that choice. Its sophistry to suggest that Kelly is not a hypocrite simply because the Labour Party is not opposed to private schooling. The Labour movement has always opposed education in exchange for cash. I do not buy the argument that Kelly saved the state cash by paying for her own childs education. Most kids with dyslexia get a bit of one-to-one with a classroom assistant rather than 17 grands worth of private education in an oak-pannelled listed building in Oxfordshire. The suggestion that kids with mild dyslexia get anything more is risible. Kelly is a hypocrite-its a horrible word, but the cap fits.

swatantra nandanwar

Its unacceptable that it takes about 18 months to get a child 'statemented' when the maximum time should be 3 months. Why do we allow this situation to continue?

The comments to this entry are closed.