Council tax and new ways..........

I think there was a valid point. Most of local government funding comes from central government. Why do you think that your council tax has gone up so much recently? Because less money is coming from westminster.

Mark.

Reply to
Mark
Loading thread data ...

Fairest for whom?

Mark.

Reply to
Mark

So only the wealthy should have access to healthcare and education? Does anyone really want as system like in the USA?

Mark.

Reply to
Mark

Did I say that? At the outset, I said that individuals with need should be supported by those with the ability to pay.

The question is about the delivery model and the choice.

There should be a range of options available, operated by the state sector and the private sector, and people should have the freedom to choose. It should be possible to take a sum of money or voucher (which is the same for everybody) and spend it at any facility with the option of topping it up if the individual wishes to do so.

Reply to
Andy Hall

Fairest for people who pay for and use goods and services.

Reply to
Andy Hall

20 years back the London Borough of Sutton used to put out community skips in each road once or twice a year for people to get rid of big stuff. I don't know whether they still do it. Arguably it's less necessary now that most people have cars and can take stuff to their local tip.
Reply to
Tony Bryer

I've a strong suspicion that things are being said for the sake of impression - minor trolling, in fact. u.p.m may appreciate a look-in.

Reply to
Chris Bacon

Most of the benefits are because of inappropriate fast-tracking of ex-public school products - and this is certainly not in the public interest. Other benefits come from the freedom available to private schools to exclude pupils and have other sanctions not available in the public sector.

Only then do the benefits of small classes and better equipment step in.

I'd like to see all private schools closed because everyone appreciated that the public sector schools were clearly better; the mere existence of private schools puts a charge on the public purse that is difficult to calculate but is probably very high - it has certainly contributed to the bad state of management in UK industry.

Reply to
John Cartmell

Public schools are but a small part of the private education sector.

I was talking about the individual and the educational benefits. Unless you have actually experienced use of both sectors personally, it is difficult to appreciate those.

All schools should have the ability to exclude pupils under certain circumstances. This is how things work in adult life.

The benefits of small classes are apparent from the outset in terms of the attention that each pupil gets and the accelerated speed of learning. Again, unless you have been involved in and seen the results personally, it is not easy to appreciate the benefits.

Who is this "everyone"? The trouble is that public sector schools have been in decline for a generation or more. Not their fault by any means, but as the result of being dicked around by the political and social experiments in education carried out by successive governments.

The benefit of private sector education is that it has, to some extent, been insulated from some of the worst excesses of that.

The existence of private schools (and I mean in general, not public schools) has been to retain a quality in education despite the worst efforts of successive governments to destroy it.

The bad state of UK industry has been for numerous reasons, predominantly related in one way or another to government interference.

Reply to
Andy Hall

I know. That's why I use the term publc school and private school appropriately.

I have.

Private schools have it much easier in general. And never have to pick up the pieces.

I have.

Exactly. Some might say that the National Curriculum was designed to cause as much damage as possible to public sector schools in order to boost private schools. It's framework was designed by an ex-public school / private school twit with no apparent understanding of the reality of public sector school teaching at the time and undermined many good developments.

Certainly some retain *a* quality - and not necessarily a good quality. Again from personal knowledge.

High profile cases may be exceptions but the major problem has been extremely bad management sourced using the old boy network.

Reply to
John Cartmell

... and why I was talking about the private sector in general, and not particularly about public schools.

In the sense of having paid to have a child educated in one?

That isn't quite true. They still have to deal with a lot of unnecessary state interference.

In terms of pastoral care when needed, that is certainly a significant aspect. There is also the time to make sure that the child is equipped to deal with how to think and how to approach issues rather than just dealing with curriculum.

Then I am sure that you will understand the benefits.

Some might, but that is something of an extrapolation.

Public sector schools were semi-reasonable when there was proper selection into appropriate schools for the child. Comprehensive education and the National Curriculum together have screwed that up quite effectively.

I know. The sad thing is that a lot more used to before the setup was meddled with by the educational theorists.

I know a lot of people in middle and senior management in a variety of organisations and very few come from the "old boy network". Ultimately, if what you say is true, then natural selection will resolve the problem.

Reply to
Andy Hall

and their little dog too....

Reply to
Andy Hall

In Sutton it was last done in about 1996/97 - then they stopped, which was utterly stupid.

Apart from the usefullness of the scheme, it was partly aimed at discouraging fly tipping.

Tunbridge Wells BC have really been on the crack in the last couple of years. We now have rubbish collection fortnightly; designed to encourage recycling, but in reality means smelly bins in summer and putting surplus rubbish in the neighbours bins. I take the more cynical view that recycling is secondary and they are just saving money. The recycling provision is pretty useless, being in the intervening weeks they collect paper and garden waste. The paper is fine, but I use the garden waste "feature" about 5 times a year. What I would rather have is glass and metal collection. As point of fact, I'd rather the CC waste processing facility did the metal as even back in the 70's some where using electromagnets to collect the ferrous materials. I believe other metals can now be auto seperated using linear motor technology which makes it quite practical to do centrally, and the CC should get some money back from the scrap.

When one spends 12 hours a day working or travelling to work the last thing I can be bothered with is doing the council's job for them - I'd be much happier to pay extra for a decent service rather than a half-arsed one.

Tim

Reply to
Tim S

I thought Cherie was quite tall :-)

Reply to
Matt

In that case I'd better mention that the public school/private school overlap is quite large and the former is almost entirely a sub-set of the latter. But I didn't think I'd need to spell it out.

I don't believe it. I think it was designed by an ex-public schoolboy who got his job because of his school rather than his competence.

The only thing wrong with selection was the state of the schools that the majority of pupils attended. And the fact that most authorities didn't select but used a scholarship system. It was all based on a pernicious lie.

Certainly less than there used to be.

Sometimes 'ultimately' is too late. In this case it is too late.

Reply to
John Cartmell

Not in so many words - but I strongly believe that such as system would amount to a more unfair system in practise.

If there was a voucher system like you suggest I don't know how state schools could survive. If you (and others) choose to use your vouchers, for example, at a private school that would mean less resources for the state school (unless the gov't put more money overall into such a system and I doubt this would happen).

Mark.

Reply to
Mark

If private schools do offer such benefits then shouldn't these be open to all children and not just to those with wealthy enough parents?

Mark.

Reply to
Mark

But unfair to those who cannot afford to pay.

Mark.

Reply to
Mark

You didn't. As I said, public schools are a relatively small subset of the private sector.

So no, then?

That may well be, but incompetence is not the preserve of the ex-public-schoolboy. The state does a pretty good job of turning out people with qualifications that are not very useful to the economy.

Well.... as an anecdote, I have a number of friends in my age peer group who went to grammar, selective and secondary modern schools in my area in the late 60s. All were and have remained happy with the education they received, and all have become successful in their chosen paths in life. They all say that their parents were happy with their education as well. All of the schools bar one, have since become comprehensives and/or have been combined together into larger entities. Each of the people has had children of their own going to either the school that they went to, or one of the others. Only one of them and only one of their children is happy with the state education that he has received. That one has been to the one remaining grammar school.

To me, that says it all.

There are many reasons for the decline of UK industry and blame can be laid at the doors of the trade union movement in more or equal measure as to the gates of the public school.

Reply to
Andy Hall

Adding the equivalent for girls' schools - I think not. Do you have the figures - and how are you defining 'Public School'?

Be very wary of rash assumptions. Ths one is *very* rash.

[Snip]

So none of them at secondary school were told they were just marking time before going into the mill? None of them notice the gross imbalance between funding for grammar and secondary modern schools? You're not bothered that the 11-plus was sold as a selective examination when all it did was cream off the number of places available in far better provisioned grammar schools? It doesn't worry you that girls had to obtain a higher score than boys in order to 'pass' the 11-plus simply because there were more grammar school places for boys? You're not concerned that there was meant to be three types of school - grammar, technical grammar, and secondary modern - but most authorities never bothered about the second or hardly developed the idea - and there was no attempt to select for those fitted for such an education?

Reply to
John Cartmell

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.