Angry parents pack Town Hall
Friday 22nd October 2010, 2:58PM BST.
The scene at the Town Hall last night. Picture: Rob Currie (01079904)
HUNDREDS of parents packed the Town Hall last night to share their views on plans to cut subsidies to fee-paying schools.
The doors were closed at 8 pm after the room reached its capacity of 300 people. A number of States Members were in the audience. Missing, however, was Education Minister James Reed, who had declined to attend, and over the next two hours he came under heavy fire from the vocal audience.
Many claimed their children had been ‘in tears’ after being told that they might not be able to stay at their fee-paying school and one man suggested calling for a vote of no confidence in Deputy Reed.
• See today’s JEP for the full report
Read the full story in the Jersey Evening Post. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are also available online.
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
JOIN US ON...
Facebook and Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Got a story? Get in touch
KIT 4 CLUBS
Win a share of £10,000
2012 is the year of the London Olympics and to celebrate this great event the Jersey Evening Post, in association with sponsors Ogier is giving all sporting clubs a chance to win a share of £10,000.
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
Only 300..now call a meeting for everyone who supports Dep Reed’s decision, there’ll certainly be a lot more than 300 who would attend.
Pathetic…it’s not even a big increase in fees, suck it up and pay them!!!
Report abuse
Its simple. If you put your child into private education, you should be willing to pay the fees.
The level of education across State schools and private schools are the same – as exam results show, so parents who want to pay for the private education ‘label’shoudn’t back out now. Cuts have to come from somewhere, and need to be timely.
Report abuse
Sounds like the next meeting should be at a more appropriate venue which can hold everyone – Fort Regent?
As for the minister – declining to attend to meet the people who 1) voted for him and 2) ultimately pay his wages?!? What an idiot.
Report abuse
BR, what IS pathetic is your comment. Not all parents who send their children to the fee paying schools are rolling in it. Many of them work very hard to ensure they can afford the fees and they can’t “suck it up” and pay the increased fees just like that, particularly if they have more than one child.
By the way, I imagine Dep Reed, being too cowardly to turn up to the meeting, would happily attend your “anti-fee paying school” meeting and lap up the plaudits.
Report abuse
…and re Don Pantelon’s comments; where is your evidence for this equal level of education? After all, Reed wont release the State school results (probably out of pure embarrassment).
Report abuse
1 and 2 Both your comments are ill-informed. Maybe you should find out more before shouting out. You could start by reading the letter from Mr Harrison in Wednesday’s JEP and carry on by looking up the word CHOICE.
Report abuse
Agree with BR
There are more tax payers who agree with this than are against.
When the pool closed at the hospital where were the 300 people then? or where were the protests and meetings when the school milk was axed? how about the protesting over the loss of jobs to go in the States?
Oh it does not effect them so lets not say anything…
Private means Private! so pay up or send your kids to a funded school!
Report abuse
I hope for the sake of Jersey’s education system that 1. and 2. are on the wind up. If not, the island is in more desperate trouble than I thought…and I thought these posts were moderated!!
Report abuse
No 1 – BR. If you actually read the article, it states that the doors were closed once 300 parents were inside as this is the capacity for the hall. There were actually more parents trying to get in who were not able to as the doors had to be closed.
No 2 – Don. Seeing as the States refuse to publish the exam results for States’ schools, how do you know that the results are the same?
Report abuse
I take it Nos 1 & 2 were not at the meeting then. For a start, it was not angry, and I found it very informative, especially the presentation which showed that if parents stop paying the ‘suppliment’ to send their children to these fee paying schools, an increased burden will fall on tax payers at large. (As per Guernsey !)
There was also the mention of Reed’s plans to increasing the size of classes in States schools and reducing any existing spare capacity in the States sector, so the States schools are going to get really crowded with the influx of children from Fee Paying schools.
There was certainly a lot of interesting information made public last night, of interest to parents of both school sectors, and the Minister of Education, if he had bothered to turn up !
If nos 1 & 2 really object to me paying a suppliment of £4,000 to educate my son, I really could use the money for something else (14 years x £4,000 per annum = new C Class Mercedes for me every 7 years – Thank you taxpayers !!!!!)
Report abuse
Firstly to respond to BR only 300, I like many others were turned away as the venue was not big enough. Pity it wasnt 301 with James Reed attending !
I am abosultely amazed to read in the paper tonight that 12 full time primary school teachers are to go, 20 from secondary schools and 20 more from Highlands ! Has anyone asked the question, What is going on at the Education depart ? If there has been an over supply of teachers/ and under supply of children, within States schools, questions have to be raised for how long? How is it they can just loose 91 posts especially at a time when there is going to be a mass departure from the Private Schools to the States schools, who is left to education our children ?? Lets see get rid of the teaching posts, see an increase in pupil numbers. A full review has to be undertaken as to what has and is going on at Education depart, sounds to me like they dont know what they are doing. There is a bigger picture pity they cant see it !
Report abuse
Fly on the wall, JEP 22.10.10. Hilarious, now do the same about chavs and spongers and see what happens…Chris Bright has a lot to answer for.
Report abuse
mark, the proposed changes hit many people directly in the pocket ie cash, and not services as the cases you mention, in a completely disproportionate way. They are generally the ones impacted by 20% means 20% and are getting hit directly in the pocket from all angles. That is why parents are up in arms. We are all aware cuts need to be made, but this unfairly targets a very large proportion of educations budget cuts on one small area of its spending.
BR How many taxpayers have you canvassed that are against this, why dont you provide factual stats instead of unsubstantiated pathetic claims.Like to see what you would say if your finances were suddenly impacted in such a dramatic way. You and don pantelon are pointless contributers and should get a life.
Report abuse
10. Warren J
Having read your comment i think to myself why did you not take the Merc! Lets face it and be honest, the States funded schools are just as good as the fee paying schools and the kids who wish to study leave with the same results as the fee paying kids. Jersey has a better education system than most UK schools. Why not stick the £4000 in the bank for your kids Uni fees as no doubt you will moan like crazy when they are costing you £12,000 a year!! I forgot…keep up with the Jones. Private means Private! so pay up or send your kids to a funded school!
Report abuse
If I am forced to take my daughter out of private education, I will have to cut down my full-time employment by 4 hours a day because States schools do not cater for people like me who work full-time.
Additionally, what am I expected to do during the lengthy school holidays – take my daughter to work with me?
I don’t send her to private school from choice, as I have none. All I have is a desire to see her properly looked after, for her to be well educated and that I am able to do a proper job and not rely on Income Support or housing benefits.
Perhaps Nos. 1 & 2 will be able to help with out-of-school-hours care for people such as myself.
Report abuse
Think of the children – when I was small I went to Mont Cantel primary school and my sister to Jersey College for girls at the age of 7 and 11 we were forced to leave that education and attend states schools, there was no comparison and it affected us both badly, more disruptive children, not so much room for one to one teaching and caring – definitely caused our schoolwork to go downhill. As one of the comments above stated a lot of parents go without so that their children can have a BETTER education. Think again Mr Reed!!
Report abuse
@Kaz
Basically your children will be taught in bigger class sizes by a smaller spread of teachers working for less pay. I leave it to you to work out how that will impact on your respective childrens’ education.
Several months ago the teaching unions got together and held a rally through town protesting at the looming cuts…looming no longer as they are here for all to see.
I wonder how many of the ‘angry parents’ at last night’s meeting cam on that rally.
I wonder how many of them will be protesting when Greenfields is merged with Highlands, pushing a large number of extremely challenging youths in need of specialist attention in with the adult and teenage learners studying on that site.
I wonder how many of them will be protesting as the after school and holiday clubs are done away with and the island’s pitches and sports facilities allowed to run down through lack of funding.
I wonder.
Finally (and most ironically) I wonder how many of them voted for Ozouf and co. at the last election and will probably do so again come the next one…
Mick
Report abuse
Do the tax payers realise that private schools save the states a fortune , just think how many new schools would have to be built and at what cost if they did not exist , just because families choose to send their kids to private schools does not mean they are rich , we go without a lot of things to send them there ,
just typical of jersey to have a go at everyone who works hard and wants to do their best for their families.
The states must have nearly run out of straws to clutch in desperation to survive
The greed and narrow mindedness of all concerned with the running of jersey and a lot of the population makes me realise that we made the right decision to leave the island we were born in years ago not to come back .
Get you life jackets on YOUR SINKING
Report abuse
Dear James Reed, I agree with to you so Worldwide and some in UK have private school and Free School becuase the Parent should help to Child and care, aim calm and contral it also Public is awful some UK and USA have ASBO (anti social-belivour order) however you and Family should contral with Children white Unversity-fee should scarp it same as UK, Wonderful in India and China is storng family and community than Channel Islands. sorry it is best to way so you need open-in-mind.
Report abuse
@jeff
Do YOU not realise that there are thousands of low income families out there whose tax is being used to subsidise YOUR children in the privileged affluent surroundings of their private school?
Try explaining to a parent on minimum wage why some of their hard-earned money should go to help little Eric get his A* at Vic College. You’ll have a job.
Report abuse
19WB, what utter tosh, have you seen the facilities of the fee paying schools compared to the new and refurbished states schools, the amount of capital expenditure on states schools over the last five years has been massive, and they are now actually much better than the fee paying schools. Perhaps tax payers should be more concerned with this? And yes tax payers should be very proud and happy that they have contributed to anyone who achieves A* whatever school they are at. And the tax they contribute to children at fee paying schools is much lower than for those at states schools. Your argument would therefore be that all parents should pay for their childrens education and not the taxpayer.
Mark G please provide the results then as these are not made public so you do not know this as fact unless you are priveledged to have them?
Report abuse
BR, WB and others – the states spend £44mill on states primary and secondary schools, yet only £9.8mill on the fee paying schools, so I think you can clearly see what good value the fee paying schools are for the taxpayer. Instead of forcing students out of fee payings schools, which are oversubscribed, the states should be encouraging the reverse, and if they actually increased the grants to the fee paying schools to allow then to cope with the demand, then this would actually result in a svaing to the taxpayer. Hope you can see this now!
Report abuse
Perhaps its time all parents of children in education in Jersey should be means-tested and pay a proportionate amount based on their income and family circumstances. This might mean that parents with children at the States ‘fully-funded’ schools might have to take one holiday a year as opposed to two and many of them sell their own ‘Chelsea Tractors’. I myself struggle to send my two boys to one of the States ‘partially-funded’ schools and because of this have only one holiday every two years (BTW my ‘Chelsea Tractor’ is 20 years old). All this bickering, and potential increase in school fees is going to do is drive an even bigger social wedge between States ‘fully-funded’ and ‘partially-funded’ schools just when they all seemed to be getting along so well, well a lot better than when I was at school anyway.
Report abuse
WB
If families are low income then they wont even be paying any tax or hardly any – so therefore my tax pays for their childrens education as well as my own childrens, together with what I pay for fee paying schools and hey Im not complaining about that because thats what tax is all about. Also Consider all the people who have no children – their taxes are paying towards other peoples childrens education – Education is the most important for the future of our Island and ultimatley benefits all therefore it should not be means tested. If a family has 3 children at fee paying school how on earth can you come up with an additional £4500 per annum especially as there have been no pay rises etc. You cant just drum up that amount of money at a click of a finger and at so short notice. As for 4×4 I dont own one of those – both my husband and my cars are over 10 yers old and we have not had a holiday in 4 years – we are trying to support 1 child in fee paying and 2 at univeristy for which we do not recieve any help – we are very proud of our children whom we have supported through out their education
Report abuse
21. Steve
I agree that results should be published as this will show that funded schools are just as good as fee paying schools (not all of them). As i have a lot of friends who are parents i know that the funded schools are producing high grade students all though i do agree as well that funded schools do have under achieving students, but this is no different to fee paying schools. Fee paying schools also have under achievers. As commented on my earlier post if parents can not afford to send their children to fee paying schools why not help them though funded schools and save the money for their Uni fees, I believe that Uni results are much more important than school results. If i can not afford a service or goods i have to go with out and make the most of what is out there for myself and not rely on States hand-outs and in my opinion parents should do the same.
Report abuse
#20 WB @jeff
It is the taxpayer’s money which goes to help support low-income families to “top up” their earnings.
Surely if they are able to pay Income Tax they do not need our contributions….?
Report abuse
I pay my taxes which includes funding for my child to attend a state school. I CHOOSE to pay for my child to attend a private school because I want the very best for him. I work full time to pay his fees. I think some of the comments here are very short sighted – and perhaps those same people who think we are ‘rolling in it’ will be singing a different tune in 5 years time when the education minister is up to his eyeballs in funding problems. Oh and yes – how on earth can someone who wasn’t even elected by the people of the island hold such an important seat as Minister for Education? Says it all really!!
Report abuse
27. CC “how on earth can someone who wasn’t even elected by the people of the island hold such an important seat”
Nearly all the Ministers are Deputies and are voted in by their parish, Only 3 Ministers are Senators. The Ministers are voted in by your States members who were all voted in by the public, US. Could you not say the same about the Chief Minister Le Sueur?
27 CC “I CHOOSE to pay for my child to attend a private school because I want the very best for him.”
So please answer why should i, as a tax payer, part fund your child or any other child in a private school if you have made the chose of giving your child the best? Not my problem.
Report abuse
One could look at it as follows.
If the figures I have been given are correct, there are approx. 12,000 children in school at present; Roughly 4,500 in private education and 7,500 in the states system.
The Education Department needs to make a saving of £14million. This equates to approx. £1,166 per child.
So, if my maths is correct, £1,166 x 4,500 = £5,250,000 from students in private schools, which is more than what is actually being cut back.
On another point, in defense of the Education Minister, my understanding is that disucssions and negotiations were in progress with the schools to look at how this could be managed. Unfortunately one of the private schools decided to notify their parents thus causing widespread panic and anger; not helped with over sensationalising by the media.
I do believe that parents should be asking the school why they did this, and why are parents not asking the school to look at more viable options to absorb the costs rather than pointing the finger and just automatically passing it onto the parents. What can be done to save money within. Why were mixed A level courses scrapped at DLS and Beaulieau. Why aren’t more resources shared between schools (all schools).
As for the chap who is the spokesman for choice for parents, he really needs to do his homework. It was clear from his presentation at the town hall that he is not aware of the facts or how an Education Authority runs, and I can assure him and others, that parents in Jersey have it far better than parents in the UK.
Report abuse
iVE seen how some of these so called low income families live in their subsidised state housing with a boat in the front garden , 2 expensive cars out front , designer clothes for the kids , all subsidised by who , the tax payers , i struggled to run one old bomb of a car so that i could put my kids through school going without in the process, also not a state handout insight , So give up on the hard done by garbage an get on with it , try keeping out of the pub for a couple of days a week
Report abuse
@22 Steve
I can see what good value private schools are for parents who “CHOOSE” to send their child to one.
Report abuse
29 Brady, so as the States cost for primary and secondary education for states schools is £44mill, then this budget should be cut by £1166 X 7500 children, £8.75mill, yet the states are only cutting by £2mill, so the proposed cuts to fee paying schools is totally disproportionate and unfair.
It was absolutely right for the said Headmaster to alert the parents from his school of this. Said school operates a very tight budget I can assure you. You only have to compare its facilities to those of the new and refurbished states schools to realise this. You should as a taxpayer be questioning the vast capital expenditure programmes for states schools over the last 5 years and the overcapacity they now have. This is why Reed wants to force children form fee paying schools to states schools. With fee paying schools oversubscribed it would make better economic sense to actually encourage more children to fee paying schools which would relieve the burden on the taxpayer!!
Deputy Reed will not answer emails, will not consult with those affected, and more crucially will not release the exam results of schools so fair comparisons can be made, one can only assume why not!!
What sharing of facilities and resources do the states schools do?
Report abuse
28 Mark G, Mark I really dont understand your logic, fee payings schools you part fund (as you say in your post), States schools you fully fund, so your saying your wish is to pay more taxes? thats very generous of you. The fact is that as a taxpayer you would be better off if more people sent their children to part funded fee paying schools. What do you think would happen if everyone moved their children from fee paying to states schools, yes, your taxes would have to go up. So rather than berating people who work hard to afford fee paying schools you should be thanking and encouraging them (if you want to save yourself money that is).
Report abuse
It’s funny – with all these people rushing over themselves to point out how much better funded and equipped the States run schools are – makes you wonder why they are killing themselves to earn the money to go private…?
What’s the big deal? What advantage is to be gained by sending your child to a private school?
There must be one! So now take that advantage, spell it out to a low income family with children at a States school (ie DISadvantaged)
and ask them if they think it is fair that your child’s advantages should be funded by their tax money. See what they say.
Report abuse
it is important to highlight that all schools are different in what they offer and what their rationale is e.g to provide a catholic based education in jersey a child HAS to go to a private school as there are no states funded catholic schools.It is clear that this is a very emotion provoking subject(naturally) so I would beg every parent when making their point to consider the effecr on their child(our own child overheard us discussing the proposed changes and immediately asked if She would have to leave the school she loves) I know that a number of people would read this and say “tough” because that is life. Perhaps it is so but I, like many others have grown up in a family where money was very tight and I make no apologies for trying to provide a better quality of spiritual and material opportunity. This proposal invokes a fear of huge change for the children. Please dont forget them when making your point
Report abuse
34 WB
1) choice, with states school you dont choose, its by catchment area
2) continuation of schooling from primary through to secondary through to A level, with States schools you have to go to 3 different schools
3) Faith education, wont call it catholic as its a broad curriculum providing very strong ethical and moral values
I could go on!!
The low income family pays less in taxes and is protected by state benefits, income allowances etc. Fee paying schools ensure they dont have to pay even more as the parents pay.
next argument please!
I am sure if there was a proposal that would significantly impact your finances in a major way you too would be opposing it.
Report abuse
28. Mark G – ok, so if I now choose to take my son out of private school and put him into a state school, I can spend the money I save on material items, and the tax payer foots the bill for his education? It really doesn’t add up to me, but by the look of all these comments, this argument could go on forever. It’s going around in circles and is no longer a constructive discussion.
Report abuse
With regard to Deputy Reed not having the gumption to turn up; was a toast raised to “absent friends”? It has been said elsewhere that we don’t have politicians of the calibre and courage of old and here we are! Mind you, with barely 0.5% of the vote, it is questionable whether the good deputy would fit the description of the word “politician” as, say, an academic would recognise the term in the context of a proper democracy!
Report abuse
33.steve & 37.CC
You both keep mentioning that the tax payer foots the bill for funded schools, we all know that already and it will never change, so i except that. But you do not except that you will have to pay more for your child to go to PRIVATE school because you want the best for your child, again please give me an answer why I should pay for your child to go to PRIVATE school?
Report abuse
39. Mark G
Perhaps if you had gone through Private education you might be able to spell properly. Just “accept” that others have the right to choose to send their children to a fee paying school. They pay their taxes too, which go towards funding BOTH private and state schools.
Report abuse
@steve
1) Why should I pay so that you can choose which school to send your kid to? The rest of us can’t – deal with it!
2) Why should I pay so that your child has the same school for Primary, GCSE and A Level? What’s wrong with transfer…they will get to meet more people and learn in a variety of different environments. You must be dreading their move to University…a NEW beginning…wow how frightening.
3) Why should I pay to allow you to indulge in your superstitions?
WB
Report abuse
Incidentally steve you hit the nail on the head when you say:
‘I am sure if there was a proposal that would significantly impact your finances in a major way you too would be opposing it.’
Essentially you have laid bare your NIMBYesque standpoint here for all to see.
Cuts need to be made, and if they aren’t made via cuts to Private School funding then they will have to be transferred to other elements of the States education sector.
In essence this would mean that the more affluent parents (who can afford to send their children to private schools) would be passing on the burden to those less well-off than themselves, the education of whose children would then suffer, with resultant inequalities for future generations.
We hear everywhere the cry of ‘fairness’ – the needs for cuts to be ‘progressive’ in order to ensure that the more affluent in society do their bit to help – and yet all of a sudden when it’s YOU who feels the pinch…you cry foul play and start fighting hard to hold on to your money.
Sorry steve but we are ALL feeling the pinch. If you would rather that States schools, after school clubs, the youth service etc had their budgets slashed to enable you to keep your child at a fee paying school then just say so.
Oh, you are.
A rather selfish standpoint, IMO.
WB
Report abuse
So #42 you want me to keep my son in a fee paying school, paying the increased fees so that the taxpayer, of which I am one does not have the additional burden of funding his schooling, so that thouse in the States sector dont suffer.
I can tell you now that the States sector is going to be affected by Reed’s proposals as much as, even more than the Fee Paying Sector !
Just tell me why I should go without while thouse who chose send their children to States schools can enjoy expensive holidays and new people carriers ??????
Report abuse
Fair play to Deputy Reed, I understand that there is a waiting list to get into fee paying schools, so let the malcontents leave and let the others in.
Due to the snobbery in this society the private schools will always be full, too many people do not want their little Timothy, or their sweet little Hermione mixing with the riff-raff.
And remember, fee paying schools in Jersey are considerably cheaper than the U.K. or Guernsey,so pay up and smile.
Report abuse
@5 Richard – if you were to look at the results tables for GCSEs and Alevels then you would find that results across the board tend to be on par through States funded and Private schools. I myself went to a private school then onto Hautlieu for Sixth Form, and my parents weren’t rolling in it. I have 5 siblings whom were all privately educated, and I strongly believe that if one chooses to send one’s child to a private school then one must be willing to pay – after all it is their CHOICE. Not the tax payers. As for Deputy Reed – what a babe, cutting teaching posts, on the other hand, is completely ridiculous.
Report abuse
@Warren J
I work in the public education sector and am probably more up to speed than you are with regards the looming cuts. They will affect my colleagues and the students greatly, though we will do our best to ensure a high standard of education for all placed in our charge.
You can perhaps understand why I and others are getting a little sick of listening to the moans of the fee-paying sector. We are ALL feeling the pain. Quite why you feel that you have a right to siphon money from the public sector to enable your child’s private education is beyond me.
As for parents of children at States school enjoying expensive holidays and people carriers…what utter nonsense. You would rather they had no cars at all and walked to school, would you? A ridiculous generalisation on your part there and one that belies a rather spiteful outlook on life.
WB
Report abuse
Children? Crying? ok scrap the plan to save the economy, we can have stroppy kids crying, we’ll just let the island go bankrupt instead. You make me laugh
If you cant afford it got to a public school.
Report abuse
44. Good point, why didn’t anyone else think of that? It’s so simple isn’t it? Oh wait, what if you are wrong and the effect on both malcontents, especially those moving to Hautlieu at 14, and those not putting their names down for future entrance to fee-paying schools is not as you imagined? What then, more money being shelled out by the “rolling in it” States to fund Timothy, Hermione, and future imaginary fee-paying student Tarquin (let’s go for it) to go mix with Kev, Perry, Dwayne and Chardonnay and Britney in their extended school recently funded by who, yes you. Your imaginary world is a dangerous place unless you are prepared to deal with the consequences. Sweet dreams.
Report abuse
46 WB, the states budget for states primary and secondary schools is £47.8mill and is only being cut by £2mill. The grants to all of the fee paying schools is only £10.7mil but the proposal is to cut by £4.2mill. I think the states schools will easily be able to bear a 4% cut!!
Good to see scrutiny looking at this favourably and there are other politicians on board, this will be defeated im sure.
The logic is that if more children are encouraged and facilitated to attend fee paying schools then this will decrease the burden on all taxpayers and will allow for a greater part of the ESC budget to be spent on states schools. That is the win win solution.
Report abuse
Why not make everyone pay then we will see who is happy with the states one size fits all policy.
Private schools are cutting schooling costs to the tax payer by 50% per child educated. This is a fact. Those who are constantly snipping, for whatever reason, need to realise that they will be paying more in taxes should the private schools close. Happy with that? I thought not.
Not all states schools are equally as good as each other so people in the wrong catchment area are not getting the best education for their children. If they’re happy with this so be. However it could impact adversely on their childrens’ future job prospects.
Report abuse
the man with less than one half of a percent of the vote didn’t even turn up. He is a minister. Ministers are supposed to have the bottle to stand by their policies, not hide cowering behind the stout wooden door of the states building
Report abuse
Did anyone read the small print? Anyone in the finance industry knows investments can up as well as down. The same happens with private school fees. That is the contract you entered into. I read the small print when I considered private schools and I also read that there is a pension liability as well for certain schools.
However the minister is just asking for private schools to examine how they are run and to reduce waste and inefficiencies. That is what any business does when faced with tough times. We ask the states to be more business like and when they do they get criticised for it. It could be simple things like using emails to parents or negotiating better supplier contracts.
If there is to be a Parents pressure group, then ask your school first where they are going to reduce waste and inefficiencies first before directing your anger at the minister. This whole debate seems to have excluded those that run these schools and I haven’t seen any suggestions on how they can meet the minister half way.
The fact is Jersey cannot sustain subsidised private school fees anymore. Jersey cannot afford to subsidise a lot of things anymore.
We need to make cuts and hard decisions, it is going to be a different Jersey we are all going to be affected and that includes private schools, no one is immune to the cuts and no one lives in gilded cages anymore.
I am a parent and a tax payer and part of Middle Jersey, I am not happy with all of the cuts but I understand what needs to be done.
Report abuse
Fair play to Deputy Reed, I understand that there fortunately is’nt any waiting list to get into non fee paying schools, so let the malcontents leave and let the others in.
Due to the inverted snobbery in this society the non-fee paying schools may not always be full, too many people do not want their little Darren, or their sweet little Tasha mixing with the hoi-polloi.
And remember, fee paying schools in Jersey are considerably cheaper than Belgium or Yeoville,so pay up and smile.
Report abuse
With regard to publishing results
JCG/Vic Prep only changed their intake criteria in 2005. Up to that point intake really was determined on where your birthday fell in the school year on a first come first service basis therefore any summer babies were at a disadvantage.
This can also adjust the academic ability of a year when you have more autumn and spring birth dates.
Since adjusting their intake criteria they have had problems getting the boys to a standard for them to get into VCP Prep at 7.
Therefore exam results are not a true representation of a school that has engineered its intake to its advantage many years before the exams are set.
Other schools have a much broader base to cope with. You cannot make clear comparisons.
Also one has to consider what subjects are studied, softer subjects will generally result in higher grades. Science and maths will be more challenging. Jersey seems to have a heavy bias towards the arts and the social sciences.
Other schools have a much broader base to cope with. You cannot make clear comparisons.
You need to choose a school based on a whole range of factors and one that will provide the best environment for your child so that they become a well rounded individual that is prepared for this knowledge based ecomony.
Report abuse
WB / Bean Bagr / Mark G
You are so right all children should go to States School. Lets extend State School Classes from 25 to 35 or more pupils per class. Then try for everybody who still has a will to learn at this class size to do their A-Levels in Hautlieu. Surely we can squeeze them all in? You are ill informed if you think the State System will get better if more pupils join. I don’t care about your views of rich and poor, but even you should be able to see that the proposed cuts are not going to have the desired effect of saving money. It is not just making some parents, who are not “rich” enough, pretty miserable it is going to make everybody in the State System loose out. My child may suddenly have to sit with 30 or more students in class instead of the 20 -27 right now. Also, my child may not be able to get to A-Levels, thanks to you, who thinks it’s great if more pupils apply for a place in Hautlieu! I am sure YOU are aware that there is no other place to go unless you pay! The State School kids are loosing out, as always! But people like you feel great having a go at the parents who’s kids don’t wish to finish at 16. I would like my child to do A-Levels, but there is no place apart from Hautlieu! There will be NO extension to courses or School-space because the States are saving! No spending on education! DISadvantaged???
I wonder what Mr Reed’s real agenda is, as it clearly is not to save money or to help keep education standards at the current good level.
Report abuse
For all of you who have posted comments regarding fee paying schools and as I am one of those parents, then hopefully you don’t have any children in States schools as I am actually subsidising you and your children. Shall I take my son out of a fee paying school which will then impact on the children in a States school who will ultimately end up in a class of 30+ with still only 1 teacher. For all the ridiculous comments being made do go and do your maths before you take to writing rubbish. Perhaps you agree that GST should go up to 5% or shall we say 10% what comments will you have to make about that?
Report abuse
Are you all thick or what? You just dont seem to understand that its the Fee paying schools who are subsidising the states- where did you all go to school?? This is getting boring now!!
Report abuse
there should be no public money going to private schools at all.
is anyone seriously suggesting that VC etc will close were they to pass on the full cost to parents? no, didnt think so.
would we need to build more states schools? doubt it. wouldnt there be some perfectly serviceable 2nd hand former private school premises in need of a new owner [fully equipped with newly redundant staff]
the manner of the cutbacks could and maybe should have been handled better, but the whining from these greedsters has been quite an unedifying spectacle.
answer me this: would you expect the states to part fund your BUPA subscription and medical expenses [dont get smart and quote me tax breaks] should you not wish to wait your turn for treatment at the general?
Report abuse
40. Steve
Sticks and stones…is that all you can comment about is my spelling? You must lead a sad sad life. Just answer my question: Why should i pay for PRIVATE schooling?
Serious comments only.
Report abuse
43 Warren
“Just tell me why I should go without while thouse who chose send their children to States schools can enjoy expensive holidays and new people carriers ?????”
Warren it is your chose to send them to PRIVATE school so you have to pay.
Report abuse
Which ever side of the fence you are on here I doubt that anyone could have seen James Reed on Channel TV last week and not be seriously worried about the man.He was incoherent and obviously totally out of his depth.The only thing I understood him to say was that some expert survey had been done(no doubt by an English company who charged handsomely)A complete joke and if I had children in Jersey education right now I would not be happy that this man is in charge.
Report abuse
@58 = most sense anyone has spoken on here.
If you want your child to be privately educated, you must be willing to pay.
Report abuse
59 Mark g – NOT MY COMMENT, apology please. I only stick to facts and comments relevant to the subject matter i dont agree with personal remarks as we all have opinions. I still dont understand why your happy to fund 100% school costs for a child in states education, but have a rpoblem with less of your taxes going towards a child in a fee paying school. See my post #49
61 Julie, you are right, Tribal Consulting Ltd, a UK company produced a report.
Report abuse
Ah Julie
What a relief that there are some intelligent people out there, it seems that quite a few seem to think that we chose FEE PAYING school because we are wealthy, think again, we don’t have a people carrier or take expensive holidays we drive a fiesta not like some of the people who send their children to States schools, allow the states to subsidise their housing whilst they have expensive cars, take holidays abroad and also park boats outdside a subsidised states house and all the best of everything which we are ultimately paying for through our taxes. How about for those people who live off the taxpayers if the States take away all the subsidies for them and then see the outcry. Has anyone taken into account that the States members are not taking a pay freeze unlike the fire service, nurses etc. I too am seriously concerned that James Reed is in control of education, in fact in control of anything is a very worrying thought, interesting as I believe he went to College himself…………..
Report abuse
bonami (comment 64) We are in agreement! By the way I believe that James Reed did go to to Victoria College but moved to Hautlieu…….
To Steve (comment 63)Thanks for confirming this- isn’t it totally pointless to spend money on a report from the UK when the people writing the report have probably never set foot in Jersey-money thrown away again!!
Report abuse
Deputy Reed should be prepared to face “his” public whether his policies are right or not. It is his job to explain matters and to justify his position. It is called accountability.
That said, it is not really “his” public at all, because 99,500 people out of 100,000 did not vote for him. For some odd reason, the “jobs for the boys” states process made him a minister, even though he had a tiny minority of the vote. A shaky and marginal mandate indeed.
So, with his half a percent vote, he decides to do the deed behind safe closed doors and then, when asked to account for his actions, he won’t face the people whose lives he has affected. That is not democracy, but then, they don’t care about that, do they?
Report abuse
If #46 and #60 had followed the thread, rather than shooting from the hip, my commnet was in response to a second wave of objections, in that people who have the audacity to remove their children from fee paying schools to fully funded taxpayer education (i.e. States Schools ) will overburden these States schools.
To be honest, this whole debate is getting nasty. Summing up, Reed’s proposals will REDUCE the number of children in fee paying schools and INCREASE the number in States schools, as is the situation in Guernsey and the UK. This will INCREASE the burden on the taxpayer, who due to Zero 10 is generally now the man in the street, rather than corporations.
Report abuse
Doesn’t it rather look as though Deputy Reed is placed here as Ozouf’s fall guy? After all, this must have come from the Treasury. Perhaps Senator Ozouf should have been at the meeting. It is not too late for him to explain now and I dare say that another meeting could be called if he has the courage to break cover.
Report abuse
Mark G at al.
I totally agree with you.
I shall remove my three children from the partially funded school that they are currently in, and which I will no longer be able to afford soon, and stick them in a States school where they can be educated for nothing – well strictly speaking, by you.
The £10k+ pa savings I make will enable me to have two holidays a year (not had one for 4 years, perhaps replace my old banger with a 4×4 and …oooh maybe even a small boat.
Thanks for the tip. Now, where’s my suncream?
Report abuse
The bottom line of all this debate is the fact that we have an incompetent group of individuals running our island, and running it into the ground! Please don’t let us take our frustrations out on each other the answer is in voting, albeit tactical voting to prevent even more incompetent people standing for election. There is not 1 of them that I would trust with my money! The States need to remember that elections will be coming up and their time in the States could be short lived, if we had democracy (which I doubt will ever happen!) then we could have voted for a Chief Minister…….It horrifies me that we have these people representing us all over the world, what must the rest of the world think of Jersey!!!!!
Report abuse
@57 Tracy
I just bought private health care. Hope you don’t mind but some of your taxes are going to be spent on subsidising this private health care that I have just bought to enable me to afford it.
You happy with that?
No?
But I’m saving the States money by going private…can’t you see that? Costs you all less to look after me and my health. So do pay up and subsidise my private health care. Cheers.
Private health care. Private schooling. Where’s the difference?
You would be happy to subsidise me if the above were true? I would like an answer please.
WB
Report abuse
I am very concerned about my youngest child, who is studying for GCSEs; how will the Hautlieu cope with a possibly large influx of children from private schools?
There is nowhere in the island for children to study A levels except in the fee-paying sector or Hautlieu, and I expect that many parents will choose to move their children at 14 to provide continuity. Children from selective schools like JCG and Vic will presumably easily meet the entrance requirements for Hautlieu at 14, thus disadvantaging children from Hautlieu’s existing feeder secondary schools.
As a cost-cutting measure it seems a very silly proposal as we pay less to keep a child in a fee-paying school than the alternative, and there is no way to stop parents claiming places for their children at States schools should they choose to do so.
Report abuse
Julie – this is fromm a question i asked of ESC if they engaged Tribal and how much it cost
A Steering Group was established in respect of every major service review that formed part of the Stateswide Comprehensive Spending Review. Tribal was then engaged by the Chief Minister’s Department to provide an independent assessment of the Department’s review programme to the Steering Group.
As such the Department was not involved in the recruitment of Tribal.
Report abuse
re; Warren J @ 43
Just tell me why I should go without while those who chose send their children to States schools can enjoy expensive holidays and new people carriers ??????
and Warren J @67
Summing up, Reed’s proposals will REDUCE the number of children in fee paying schools and INCREASE the number in States schools,
Warren J,
Will you be one of the family’s who transfers your children from fee paying to States education?
or referring to your comments on another page re parking charges @19 -
Well to be honest, I don’t care anymore, because I am close to being mortgage free, and I will pay whatever it costs to park my car.
I probably think that if you are prepared to pay anything for parking, then you should be prepared to pay ‘anything’ for your children’s education.
Be careful when you mention poeple having expensive holidays and new people carriers. Holidays don’t need to be expensive, to be a ‘great family time holiday’ and these people with a people carrier may only have one car per family whilst others may have several play cars. Again, make sure you compare like with like. IT’S ALL ABOUT CHOICES – YOU MAKE YOURS AND I MAKE MINE. Don’t expect me to pay for yours. User pays.
Report abuse
Some VERY simplified maths.
Parent A and Parent B send their children to Grainville and Beaulieu respectively. Both live identical lives. They earn the same, live in the same street and each pay £4,500 per year in tax.
From the total of £9,000 tax, £6,000 goes to pay for the education of Parent A’s child at Grainville and £3,000 goes to pay for the education of Parent B’s child at Beaulieu.
So Parent B is subsidising the States education of Parent A’s child to the tune of £1,500. And then pays more on top for the education of their own child.
So why on earth are people still banging on that those who send their children to non-states schools are being subsidised when it is so clearly the other way round?
Report abuse
71. WB
Read concerned mother!
Also on your private Health Care comment: If you fall seriously ill your private health care will do nothing for you, but mine and other people’s tax will pay for your treatment. Your own tax contribution wont be enough! Example does not work, as you still have not realised that education is NOT paying when people cant afford the four big schools anymore. Mr Reed has no contingency plan. He just relies on people like you who are running around happy to hit the rich, not noticing that it’s us normal people that get hurt.
Report abuse
This whole debate is fast becoming personal – the States cannot manage money and cannot manage the island and that is the truth of the matter – be it housing, schooling, parking or any other public service – it is so easy to hide behind a pseudonym.
Why on earth are we not gathering together to get the States to be accountable for their actions – losing £240m is a disgrace along with employing outsiders to do their maths because they are incapable…………….
Report abuse
I pay for private medical insurance so that if I need medical attention, I can get a superior service. Can anyone please advise where I should apply for my states subsidy or does it only apply to education.
Report abuse
Geno -the states subsidise private medicine.
And the doctors who do private stuff do so using public facilities so the public lose out there as well, especially when the private doctor is supposed to treat public patients but very often does not do so because he is too into his private “clients” It’s called mixed lists and it’s banned in some countries, but not in jersey, even after recent events.
Report abuse
@MLS
Some very basic English:
a ‘subsidy’ is cash paid by a government to a private undertaking. As State education is free there can be no subsidy and nor is there any need for one.
Private education ALONE can be subsidised.
Hence public sector tax payers ARE subsidising Private School fees to a greater degree…by virtue of the fact that it is simply impossible to subsidise something that is already free.
Report abuse
@G* 76
‘as you still have not realised that education is NOT paying when people cant afford the four big schools anymore.’
Erm…I believe that every child that leaves a fee paying school will be provided with a place at a States run school? So education WILL be paying.
Report abuse
Rather than attempting to penalise those parents who already pay twice (through tax and fees) in order to educate their own and other people’s children, it would actually be more logical to either (a) increase taxation so that all education, in all schools, was free at point of use, or (b) demand a means-tested contribution from all parents, regardless of which school their children attend. Imagine the outcry, from those who believe someone else should always pay.
As it is, there is absolutely no logic in selectively surcharging a group of taxpayers who voluntarily pay a large part of the costs of a service they have a right to receive free.
There is no possibility that all the pupils currently attending fee-paying schools could be accommodated in the non-fee-paying sector (as is their absolute right) – and even if that was somehow ‘magicked’ by installing elastic walls at Grainville, the cost to all taxpayers would be huge.
I can only imagine Deputy Reed’s aim is to increase the burden on fee-paying parents by as much as the market will bear – in other words, success will be measured by the number of them who pay up rather than giving up.
Report abuse
G (76) – agree with you re comments made by WB(71)
Report abuse
I can’t see Reed backing down because he will get told off by Ozouf and won’t be in his chummy cabinet when he gets to be “chief minister” against the wishes of the people of Jersey. That’s why Reed can’t explain himself, I feel. It’s because he doesn’t really know why he’s doing it, he’s just been told to! It’s all posturing politics and the people of the island are an irrelvance while all this power nonsense goes on beyond any meaningful democratic control.
Report abuse
WB you are talking cobblers. Every child educated privately saves the tax payer 50% at present. When it goes up to 100% then the tax payer isn’t contributing at all. At this point it becomes user pays.
Since the states are implimenting a user pays policy why not make everyone pay? Would people be so pro-states education then? I doubt it.
Another option is for everyone to be given x amount for their child’s education it would then be up to them to select what they thought was best. If they thought the states school down the road was best then so be it. At least they would have an option should they need it.
Good points Jerry.
Report abuse
This is geting really silly!
Those that send their children to the 4 main fee paying schools are helping with the costs of education for the states!
Those who are complaining that they dont have children and why should their taxes go to education – well who paid for their education or didnt they go to school?
Report abuse
For all of those who are saying that the States do NOT subsidise States school you are right, they pay all of it and only pay a proportion of fee paying schools therefore I should object to paying for any child going to States school and in turn get a rebate from the tax man and then I can pay for the full education of my child at fee paying school. If the States continue to cut all the subsidies then the outcome will be a disaster, buses, private health, prescriptions, the list is endless and the effect on the working class, as I said previously none of the island will stand together as a whole and therefore the States are always going to win – it is simple ‘togehter you conquer and divided you fall’, that is the aim of the States and viewing the comments from some above they are succeeding……..
Report abuse
Just a few thoughts.
Currently the cost of educating each child within the states system is approx £6000 per year. If more children attended states schools that figure could reduce per head. Does it not cost the same to run a school whether you have 20 children in a class or 27 children in a class? Do people think that teachers get paid less if the class isn’t full, or less heat/electricity is used? Does the building magically shrink when not full to capacity!
A figure of 300 was banded about as the number of children expected to leave private education and but I believe the education department have already said that they can accommodate this number. If this is correct perhaps the tax payer will not be paying any more to fund the children making the switch.
Another thing to consider is that there are considerably less children in primary schools now compared to say 5 years ago. This will mean less children going into secondary schools so maybe the states schools will gladly welcome the extra bums on seats. This might dispel the assumption that more schools will need to be built.
If we are going to insist on subsidies for private education then where do we draw the line. Private health care? Private housing?
Education is a basic human right and everyone should be entitled to it, and every child in Jersey if offered a good standard of free education. Therefore if a parent chooses to put their child through a different type of education is this not their choice and should they be subsidised for something that is already offered for free?
I would rather see less money go into private education and more money go into subsidising university grants. Not all parents can afford college fees and I wonder how many children miss out because of this.
Report abuse
To Pongo Abelii
You should know that fees for fee paying schools are more than 70% of the figure you quoted and to be quite honest I am fed up of people quoting figures when I believe that most of those did not attend the meeting at the Town Hall. Just think how ridiculous it is to say that the States will set up a bursary system for parents who struggle if they implement this cut, how much is that then going to cost you? Believe me you WILL be paying towards this along with every other taxpayer and it will amount to far more than you think you are subsidising children in Fee paying schools now…………
Report abuse
Deputy Reed is displaying vicarious politics in the sense that this clearly comes from Ozouf. Ozouf will, regrettably, still be there next time but Reed, with his mere 500 votes probably won’t be. Is this an example of sacrificial politics? If so, who else but a fool would choose to be kind for a day?
Report abuse
Can you imagine what the bursary would involve? If the income support application is anything to go by, they would be asking you lots of nice invasive questions like how much did your grandfather earn? What is your inside leg measurement? When did you last pass water? They’d probably also ask you how many times each week you “get down to it”.
Report abuse
Deputy Reed should be prepared to face the public whether his policies are right or not. It is his job to explain matters and to justify his position. It is called accountability. We pay his salary and expenses.
That said, it is not really “his” public at all, because 99,500 people out of 100,000 did not vote for him. For some odd reason, the “jobs for the boys” states process made him a minister, even though he had a tiny, tiny, tiny minority of the vote. A shaky and marginal mandate indeed.
Report abuse
At 90; don’t you mean “who else but a fool would choose to be KING for a day?”
Report abuse
Can someone explain to me why I as a tax payer should pay for your kids to go to a private school?
Report abuse
Kev
Posted October 27, 2010 at 7:51 pm
‘Can someone explain to me why I as a tax payer should pay for your kids to go to a private school?’
Wow, Kev, how come no one else has come up with such an original comment until now?
Report abuse
#81 Pongo Abelii – well said. There is an economy of scale point to this debate.
With regard to all the discussion on who subsidies who and by how much.
Every child has a right to a free education up to the age of 16. This is a commitment most western governments make to their electorate and we commit to that pledge through our taxes whether you have children or not. Similar to providing services to the sick and the less fortunate. It is in most written constitutions or bill of rights.
If you as a free individual living in a democracy are not happy with the services the states provide you than as an individual you have the right to pay for better service or to move to a society/state that you feel provides a better service to its citizens.
However as a member of that society you still have a legal and moral obligation to pay your taxes.
How your taxes are spent is up the government of that state and that is why you use your democratic right to vote to decide who makes those decisions. You therefore pay for services which you may use, or not use now but you may use in the future or may not use at all.
Trouble with Jersey is not enough people pay direct taxes or vote.
If you had been following the last 10 years and the Jersey tax debate and the world economy this round of budget planning and cuts has been long overdue.
The class sizes at the four subsidised schools are not marginally different to states schools if you really want smaller sizes and more individual attention then you pay more for that i.e. St Michaels or St Georges.
A private service therefore means you pay.
Report abuse
I think it was Benjamin Franklin that said “nothing is certain but death and taxes”
The majority of us pay taxes and our elected government spends it on our behalf. We are not able to dictate where our individual tax is paid so consequently we end up paying for things that we don’t necessarily use.
Part of these taxes get spent on providing a first class education system. It is my opinion therefore that should a parent decide to opt out of this system and choose the “private” route, then they should be prepared to pay the full cost of this and not expect to be subsidised.
The quality of the debate especially from those who have chosen the private route is frankly pretty poor and seems to centre around what kind of car people drive. This does nothing to gain sympathy for their plight.
I also believe that if this proposal goes through very few children would actually be taken out of their schools so those that are would easily be accommodated in the States system. Going forward more children in future will go through the States system but with a falling birth rate there will be room to accommodate them.
Report abuse
Its very simple really. I currently pay 75% of my child’s school fees – 25% is subsidised by the States. When the subsidy is reduced to nil, I will then transfer my child to a state school, and the States will then subsidise 100% of my child’s education. I will be saving money and the States will have to spend more tax payer’s money on my child’s education. It’s not rocket science! Instead of all this bickering, why can’t we all just work together? This affects state schools and fee paying schools, and to me the logical approach is to fight this together, and stop Deputy Reed’s proposal.
Report abuse
I wish all of you would stop using the word “Private” they are not private they are fee paying schools, I object to subsidising private health care, along with subsidised housing, and all the money that the States pay for the children having children not to mention all the 4 x 4′s that are too big for our roads……….this whole debate is now in my view purely about the few people who THINK they are paying for my child to go to fee paying school, if you have a child/ren I am subsidising your child and I object to that so perhaps I should ask for a refund for all the years that I have paid and then I can pay the full fees for my child at FEE paying school. Thank you
Report abuse
Why should my income tax go towards private school tuition when I cannot afford to send my own children to private schools? I was suprised the tax payer was subsidising these schools in the first place, it should be all paid or nothing so I support Deputy Reed with this.
Report abuse
Fully agree with you BR.
As for Richard 4 “Not all rolling in it”
I like many have been caught behind Large 4×4 driven by mothers who can’t drive them. Large expensive flashy cars driving their dear little darlings who can’t seem to walk. Please don’t tell me it is not the Private schools as there isn’t a problem this week while the children are off.Don’t tell me they can’t afford to pay for the school fees if they can’t use the states schools.
If there was a meeting as BR said in favour of Dep Reed half the island would be out.
Report abuse
I work hard and pay my taxes and I have earned the right to put my children through private education.
More money should be put into the fee paying schools. These are the schools that are going to produce the next generation of lawyers, accountants, doctors, politicians and other worthy members of our future tax paying society.
It’s these children that the island should be investing in.
Report abuse
There are substantial cuts taking place in the non fee paying schools as well.
There will be job losses and sharing of resources.
I guess that adult education will get a savaging as well so that could be the end of learning a little Italian for your next holiday in Tuscany.
There is so much pain to be shared out that everybody is going to get a decent sized dollop!
Elsewhere Real Truthseeker accuses me of being a leftie.
Almost everybody is left wing compared with him but I would say that I belong more to the liberal persuasion.
I am also a realist and I know that the island is in a very deep hole and we have not stopped digging yet
Report abuse
@102 Rupert Nice p***take, but I’m afraid a few people here will actually believe you’re serious.
@94 Kev – You aren’t ‘paying for someone else’s kids to go to private school’. This debate is not about private schools, but about fee-paying and non-fee-paying schools.
In reality, the fee-paying parents are subsidising the costs of the non-fee-paying sector. Fee-paying parents knew the rules when they made their choice. What they are now objecting to, is Deputy Reed’s proposal to balance his budget by unilaterally changing the rules, penalising them for having got into a quasi-contractual relationship with the States.
@WB 80 States education is not ‘free’, in the same way there is no such thing as a free lunch. It is just ‘free at point of use’, which is a very different thing.
Anything which has a cost, can be subsidised – your very narrow definition of ‘subsidy’ seems designed purely to bolster your argument. Chambers’ primary definition of ‘subsidy’ is simply ‘aid in the form of money’.
States education, like any other service, has costs, and those costs have to be met from somewhere – the taxpayer. Books don’t grow on trees, and teachers expect a salary.
The fact that a number of parents choose to pay a major part of the costs of educating their child, on top of their fair tax contribution, makes a considerable extra contribution to States funds, and therefore reduces the tax demand on everyone.
This ‘aid in the form of money’ is a subsidy, from fee-paying parents, to the generality of taxpayers. Some of the more extreme ‘anti-fee-paying’ comments here represent the first time I have ever seen people angrily demanding thet their taxes should increase – for this would be the inevitable effect of pupils migrating en masse from the fee-paying schools to the non-fee-paying ones.
Incidentally, though I no longer have children of school age, I have experienced both the fee-paying and non-fee-paying sectors, as a pupil, parent, and teacher. The sort of polarised argument exemplified by many comments on this thread, gets no-one any forrarder, and only serves to assist those who would wish to divide and rule.
Report abuse
It seems the debate cannot move on because too many people who have children in the State Schools (or no children) feel hard done by.
I would just like to know from all of you, do you really think Mr Reed’s idea is good because it will save money, or is it a good idea because you hate your neighbour who spends money on his kids education?
I personally have no issue with my neighbour (I don’t care if he’s much richer than I am) but I do think Mr Reed’s proposal is not going to save a penny. Therefore nobody should vote for it!
Report abuse
#102 Rupert
Do you honestly believe that if a child does not go to a fee paying school in Jersey that this will mean that they will not ever be able to be any of the professions you listed or indeed ever be worthy?
That it is not worth investing in any other child’s education unless they have managed to get into a fee paying school through no academic ability (dependent on when they enter the system) but just that they managed to win the lottery of getting a fee paying place.
I thought I lived in a democracy not a fascist state?
oh well there is always the boat in the morning – I think I will catch it if this is what people like you honestly believe……..
“More money should be put into the fee paying schools. These are the schools that are going to produce the next generation of lawyers, accountants, doctors, politicians and other worthy members of our future tax paying society. It’s these children that the island should be investing in.”
Report abuse
G*, spot on. I urge everyone to look at the real issue is here, saving money for the states and the tax payer, and maintaining standards in states schools, because Mr Reed’s proposals will do neither. He is making a huge gamble which will not pay off. Sit down, look at the numbers, and ask yourself why Mr Reed is so determined to say that he does not want people leaving fee-paying schools? Approximately 300 places capacity in secondary schools, most are probably in 14-16 year group, because they have moved to Hautlieu. The independent Tribal report backs this up. Will this be the case in the future! I very much doubt it because there will most definitely be an influx at this age from the fee-paying sector to Hautlieu at the very least, competing with the states sector. Not ideal, but extremely likely…and who pays for the Hautlieu pupils, and those that would have normally gone to Hautlieu and stay at their initial secorndary states school? That’s right, the tax payer in full.
Report abuse
Dear Rupert
What a narrow minded biggot you are are you a product of Private school!!!!
Report abuse
Every department were asked to make 10% budget cuts as part of the spending review, reducing the grant will save nearly 5%.
The report clearly lays out all the areas under consideration. There is more erosion of other education services and potential threats in the states primaries in the report than this one subject of state subsidised fees which has become very emotive.
This is a REDUCTION of the fee paying grant.It is not going completely for most of the fee paying schools.
‘Reduction in the ratio of grant [paid to the
private secondary sector] from 50% to 25%,
ceasing the grant to St Georges and St Michael,
and reducing FCJ to 25%’
‘grants to fee paying schools (4.7% of the budget);The largest single saving comes from the proposed reduction in grants to
schools.’
Source Tribal – Comprehensive Spending Review
peer review – Education, Sport and Culture Aug 2010
http://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Tribal%20ESC%20Peer%20Review%2020101022%20AC.pdf
The fact is cuts have to be made we will all be effected.
Report abuse
Which is better, parents paying X% towards their children’s education and the States paying the difference ?
Or the State’s paying the full 100%.
Don’t forget these parents are also tax payers !!!
I don’t have children but still pay taxes which go towards the education budget, do I get a reduction or rebate….. like hell I do. In fact I pay more for not having children.
Report abuse
102,Rupert.
The children who are educated at private schools will nearly always be selected over children educated at States schools, not because they are any brighter, that is the way it will always be.
Report abuse
It’s not going to make a bit of difference.
The fees will go up, the parents will continue pay them, education will achieve its cuts.
There will be no influx of pupils from fee paying schools to state schools.
Why, because after making the decision to send ones kids to fee paying schools one would give up anything (sell the house, sell the car, sell the wife, anything) rather than send them back with the rubbish of society to get a lousy education.
Well that’s why they were sent to fee paying schools in the first place, wasn’t it?
OOH the embarrassment.
I can feel it from here.
Report abuse
112 ‘…rather than send them back with the rubbish of society to get a lousy education.’
You flippin’ hypocrite, PJG. there’s your credibility in the ‘scum’ debate gone straight down the pan!
Witty post otherwise! I know you were only imagining that’s what others think, weren’t you? I hope.
Report abuse