School governors urged to unite
Saturday 30th October 2010, 2:59PM BST.
Dan Le Blancq who is the subject of the Saturday Interview in today's JEP
GOVERNORS at fee-paying schools should join forces to fight the proposed cuts to their States subsidies, the founder of a parents’ lobby group has urged.
Dan Le Blancq, who set up ParentsForChoice following the Education Minister’s controversial announcement to cut more than £4 million from the annual subsidies to fee-paying schools, believes that those bodies are in the best position to tackle the issue, especially if they join forces.
However, Mr Le Blancq’s calls came on the same day that the board of governors at Jersey College for Girls said they had ‘a legal duty to remain neutral’.
In a statement, Philip Taylor said that none of the governors wanted their States funding to be reduced but that ultimately they were bound by the decisions of the Education Minister, as they are a States fee-paying school.
• Mr Le Blancq is the subject of the Saturday Interview in today’s Jersey Evening Post
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
Dear Mr Dan Le Blancq,
You and ParentsForChoice already have a choice and you do not need the authority of any Minister or Member of the States to exercise your right to exercise your choice. Very simple, either work within the States of Jersey Education System as operated by our Minister or go PRIVATE. Most submissions to this BLOG support the Minister.
I will be very surprised if you or your fellow governors want to take the subsidised school PRIVATE; rather too expensive for most parents.
Report abuse
Good luck to Mr le Blancq but if it’s democratic process and public consultation he’s after – he’s on the wrong island.
Report abuse
There was a nice bit of intellectual dishonesty from Mr le Blancq in today’s published interview.
He states that he isn’t saying that one is the better than the other as far as private/subsidised versus state schooling is concerned.
But if that were really the case, he wouldn’t insist on educating his children at a private/subsidised school.
What rational person would pay for something that isn’t better than what can funded entirely by The States/their taxes?
Of course they think it’s better!
Report abuse
The educational experience IS better, as are the results. I would rather live in a one bedroom flat and drive a second hand fiesta and give my children the chance of a better future by sending them to one of the Colleges. The reality is that the Colleges ARE better than States schools and anyone who claims otherwise is kidding themselves.
Report abuse
im sorry but cuts have to be made. if you want to kick off about something then maybe kick off about states spending or rising GST. If they don’t take the money from you then tazxes will raise for all of us.
Report abuse
@Getreal
Absolute tripe.
Report abuse
@Getreal
The colleges attract children from middle class to upper middle class backgrounds. These children invariably have more money behind them, more opportunities at home and parents who place a high value on achievement.
There will be less children from dysfunctional homes attending the colleges. There will also be less to NO children with learning difficulties or physical handicaps.
(Oh and by the way, should your child manifest such conditions as dyslexia or ADHD during the course of their fee paying education, don’t expect them to get much help…provision for these disorders is close to zero in this sector).
Anyway, the fact that a child’s private education is costing the parents money will also result in added pressure being placed on that child to succeed, moderate their behaviour etc.
All of these factors mean that the initial intake for the colleges will be pupils that are more academic and generally better behaved.
The States system is open to all and takes in children from ALL backgrounds. It also caters (brilliantly) for children with learning needs as diverse as autism and ADHD.
As such the spread of students is much wider, and States sector teachers have a much harder task maintaining discipline and raising low achievers up to levels that may not look great in a table of statistics, but actually equate to a great leap of development for the children involved.
To claim that Fee Paying schools are ‘better’ is total nonsense when viewed in this light.
The choice therefore boils down to this:
A: Do I want to send my child to study with an exclusive single-sex group of better behaved, more academic children from wealthier backgrounds or
B: Do I want my child to grow up surrounded by a more general representation of mixed ‘society’ and all that it contains.
If you fall into the A bracket, then good luck to you. JUST DON’T EXPECT US TO SUBSIDISE YOUR DECISION.
Ahem. Sorry, I appear to have lost my calm there.
You get my drift though, Mr le Blancq.
Report abuse
I am fed up of reading about this. If they cannot afford the fees then use a States School, simple!
I support the Minister on this, why should I pay towards a middle class educational system when we cannot even afford it ourselves? These people need to come back to planet earth.
Report abuse
Insignificant
Your observation is right on the money could you confirm if you are states school or private school educated?
Why should a single man without children pay for your childs education Mr Le Blancq, when he only earns £1500 a year wake up MAN
Report abuse
Why – because he knows he will lose the argument without their support!!!
Report abuse
The private schools do not give a better quality of education, they simply dont accept people below a certain level. So of course their results look better, but the public schools have students with equal skill and talent.
Report abuse
How refreshing to read a forum which hasn’t been hijacked by the spelling police or full of silly comments made by people who are more concerned with what car someone drives.
Congratulations to all the above posters.
I read the Saturday interview and the piece regarding the board of governors with great interest. It seems to me that JCG and VCP are looking at solutions whilst Mr Le Blancq is just focusing on being critical.
I also read that there is a great deal of discontent that schools were not consulted regarding the proposals. Mr Le Blanq should know that schools were to be consulted and negotiations were due to take place, however one of the schools decided to write to all parents before this could happen, thus creating a wave of anxiety, panic and anger.
Would it not have been better to explore all the options first, arrive at solutions suited to all, then inform parents and hopefully be open to negotiation then. This has all been handled terribly and in my mind it is not the minister or the Education Department to blame.
Anyone in business who is responsible for any form of decision making should know that before final decisions are made there is a great deal of discussion first. It is not always in the publics best interests to know everything every step of the way.
Report abuse
In my experience some of the cleverest and commercially “savvy” talent came from the comprehensive system, you cannot keep bright children down. Private schools merely “add an air of useless superiority” to the individuals they teach. When we took on “Rupert” in the office this summer, and asked him to …do some filing, he ruined the filing system and announced later in the day “……one has changed the filing system so that one can find information more easily…..” “One” was escorted out of the building and “one” went to a private school. Erm No thanks Dan!!!
Report abuse
If the Board of Governors at JCG and Victoria College have ‘a legal duty to remain neutral’ they are not “Governors” at all in any sense, and are therefore not providing the corporate governance that their position and the children that they should be representing requires.
This statement is not only a sad reflection on these great institutions, but unequivical flag-waving at the first assualt. I would have expected greater intellectual vigour.
Report abuse
Will Mr le Blancq et al also be campaigning to prevent the closure of the Alternative curriculum and the transferral of the current Greenfields system with Highlands?
Will he be writing letters of complaint about the plan to merge certain aspects of Highlands and Hautlieu whilst reducing the number of teachers in these schools?
Will he be asking Mr Reed to rescind the decision to withdraw funding from after school and holiday clubs, sports pitch maintenance etc?
I guess not.
Essentially his is a kneejerk NIMBY reaction dressed up as some kind of moral crusade. Sarah (5) is right; go protest something that effects us society as a WHOLE rather than getting uppity about something simply because it happens to impact your wallet.
There are enough places at the island’s secondary schools to take those children whose parents can no longer afford the fees, just as there are enough teachers to teach them. The claim that the removal of these subsidies will result in more money being spent in the States sector is therefore fallacious. The States schools will simply hoover them up (and gladly so, I would imagine; the academic mean of each will probably rise somewhat in the process).
Report abuse
“There are enough places at the island’s secondary schools to take those children whose parents can no longer afford the fees, just as there are enough teachers to teach them”. You’ve got to love the confidence in this statement. I hope that this is the case, but nothing that I have read or seen fills me that confidence, I’m afraid. No matter what way you look at it it is a pretty big gamble, and no amount of reverse snobbery can hide that.
Report abuse
Hi correct me if Im wrong but I pay my taxes which go towards paying for the education of the children in the states schools, income support for families who dont or cant find work etc etc but I still have to pay fees for my children to go to a private school ? so if the funding is taken away from these private schools does that mean I wont have to pay tax to pay toward the states school education ? also I called to see if my two children could get into Le Rocquier school as that is my catchment area and was told that this was not possible the only schools with space are Haute Vallie and Granville ummm interesting …
so to sum it up I would be paying for my children’s education plus those in the states school who get it free ? why ?
Report abuse
In response to #s 5 & 15, I understand that Mr Le Blancq’s proposals seek to maintain the current position whereby parents of approximately 40% of the islands school children make a signifant finacial contribution, over and above their taxes, in the eductaion of their children, a model that other jurisdictions would be very happy to follow.
For every child that defects to the States schools from the fee paying sector, there is a COST to the taxpayer, so as Sarah has said, taxes for all will rise.
You cannot campaign for tax cuts without valid proposals, and a situation whereby parents of 40% of school children pay a significant suppliment, which saves the tax payer money, is worthy of preservation.
Report abuse
It’s not the schools that are subsidised, it the parents who subsidise the states to educate our children. If it were not for the parents then it would be all states school. I detect some envy from some of these blog writers.
Report abuse
jsybean wrote:
“So to sum it up, I would be paying for my children’s education plus those in the States school who get it free? Why?”
Because that it what happens elsewhere, presumably. On the UK mainland, people who choose private schools for their children end up paying their schools fee plus whatever amount of their taxes would be used for educating their children in govt. funded/provided schools.
They don’t get a tax refund (although there might be some tax relief) because they’ve chosen to opt out of the govt. provided system. Whether they should get a refund or not is an argument for another time.
I’m actually undecided as to what should happen in Jersey. On the UK mainland, it would easy for the govt. education sector to mop up all of the refugees from the private schools were they all to close tomorrow, but I’m not sure that that would be the case in Jersey.
If that isn’t the case, then I don’t think that is a situation that should have ever been allowed to arise. There should have always been enough States funded school places for children whose parents could not afford the non-subsidized fees for private education, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Consequently, the private schools and the parents who can afford the subsidized fees have much more leverage than they ought to have, and there is no easy answer to this question apart from leaving things as they are.
It is possible that gradually phasing out the subsidy might not actually save any money in the long-term, but the money isn’t the issue for some people. They just object to the subsidy on principle.
And I’m aware that people who pay lots of tax end up paying for lots of things that people who pay less tax aren’t capable of paying for themselves, but there’s nothing to stop you from campaigning for a tax refund because your children don’t use States schools.
I just want people to be honest, and admit that they wish to have their children privately educated because private education is exclusive, and because they think private education is better (because it is exclusive).
The exclusivity of private education confers all sorts of potential benefits onto the children fortunate enough to get it; if those benefits didn’t exist, then no rational person would beggar themselves in order to get their children into a private school.
Let’s have no more of this “I’m not saying that one is better than the other” talk.
Report abuse
Bound to want the handouts to keep coming.
Report abuse
“The States schools will simply hoover them up”
What like finance does?
The plain fact of the matter, whether you like private schools or not, is that they keep taxes down for everyone. If there were no private schools then the education budget would need to rise by at least 25%. Who do you think will be paying for this extra cost? What about the new schools required to take these children?
Conversely if everyone had to pay for a private education then general taxes would fall.
Things are not as black and white as some seem to think on here. This idea could end up costing all of us more money.
insignificant “Because that it what happens elsewhere, presumably.”
A bit of a lame excuse to me.
“Whether they should get a refund or not is an argument for another time.”
Why? What is the reasoning behind this comment?
Report abuse
@Warren J
‘For every child that defects to the States schools from the fee paying sector, there is a COST to the taxpayer, so as Sarah has said, taxes for all will rise.’
What cost? Where is the extra cost incurred?
Will a new teacher have to be employed to teach the ex-fee payer? NO – there are enough teachers already in employ.
Will a new classroom have to be built to accommodate the ex fee-payer? No, there is room enough already.
So where will this extra cost be incurred?
Indeed for every child LEAVING private education the States will be SAVING money to the tune of several thousand pounds a year paid by way of subsidy into a PRIVATE organisation (from which we the tax-payer see no benefit)…
…which is why the cuts are being made in the first place.
I just don’t understand how you cannot see this.
CHILDREN LEAVING PRIVATE SCHOOLS WILL INCUR NO EXTRA COST TO THE TAXPAYER. Period.
Report abuse
Have to say looking at some of the ignorance and hostility in some of these comments makes me realise why i made the decision to send my children to a fee paying school. You really do need to get your facts straight. Do you not realise that 1 child n a fee paying school saves the tax payer £4,500 per year !! thats just 1 child ..Parents paying fees Subsidise The education system.. what part of that do some people find hard to understand ? It really is a no brainer. Dan we back you all the way.. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
Report abuse
@KA
KA do you not realise that the private education model followed by the UK and most other places worldwide involves NO subsidies whatsoever for PRIVATE education.
The fact that you have been subsidised for so long over here is an anomaly.
Do you also not realise that the shortfall brought about by those students leaving private education will simply be made up by those parents who keep their children on and decide to pay the increased fees?
Hence no extra cost to the tax payer, who is actually better off by dint of not having to contribute via the subsidies they are currently paying, once these subsidies have been scrapped.
Your comment about how reading some of the comments on this board makes you glad that you sent your child to a fee paying school is rather petty, by the way. Please don’t bring this down to the level of common school yard squabbling.
Report abuse
24, no KA I think its your ignorance about the level of subsidy you receive. A decent senior private day school (13+) costs upwards of £15k a year on the mainland and those parents also have the arguement that they don’t cost the state for educating their child while paying taxes as well. How much do parents pay a year for our senior private schools over here? That from my figure above is a good estimate of the level of subsidy from general taxation per child to parents who send their children to these schools. You could also add the arguement by the likes of Fiona Millar that the sharp elbowed types who send there kids to these schools damage the state sector as the pushy parents who would pressure to get the weaknesses in state schools addressed have gone elsewhere.
Report abuse
Adrian, my reasoning was simple:
The question/debate being discussed/had at the moment is about whether the subsidy given to some of Jersey’s fee-paying schools should be removed or not.
Nobody is actually proposing (yet) that people be given a tax rebate if they opt out of taxpayer funded education or healthcare or whatever (although this is what the subsidy is to some extent), so discussing that isn’t entirely relevant.
Hence my comment about it being something for another day; the issue at hand is the Education Minister’s announcement.
Report abuse
@ KA
I have to say that the repitition of some posters on here who lack the imagination and knowledge to present a new and different arguement is rather sad. Please change the record and try and come up with something new. The whole tax arguement has already been proved to be flawed! It really is a no brainer!
Report abuse
Well said KA (COMMENT 24)but I’m afraid this debate has little to do with education and a lot to do with with bitterness and envy.Some of the posts on these forums have been truly amazing-the assumption that ALL fee paying parents are wealthy and drive flashy cars when very often the total reverse is the truth but then the commenters aren’t actually interested in the truth but want to vent their fury against people whom they perceive to be better off than themselves!I had the “pleasure” of this attitude for some years when I worked with a woman who held these views.Our sons were the same age but mine went to VC and hers to Le Rocquier.She constantly moaned about shortage of money yet bought designer everything for her son,a car for his 17th birthday and very lavish Xmas/birthday gifts whilst I did none of these things (no spare cash for me after scraping up school fees which was my choice obviously)My son worked a weekend job in a shop but when I told her there were vacancies there she was horrified-her sons mates would laugh at him if he worked there apparently!So I have first hand experience of this nonsense and it will never change.Inverted snobbery is very much alive in Jersey.
Report abuse
WB 23 – Your absolutely correct, this whole tax issue pumped out by the prawn sandwich brigade is preposterous. The fact is that the cost of the teaching and buildings of states run schools are FIXED! They do not change depending on the number of students…what, do you think someone sits there every year and thinks “well, we have 1001 students this year, that costs £100 per student, we need tax everyone £X”. No, and they will not need to employ more teachers or build more schools to cope with the private school movers. Yes, there will be a per student cost for materials etc but this would be dwarfed by the saving per student of the subsidy.
Report abuse
@Julie
Staggering post there Julie!
You accuse people on this thread of stereotyping fee-paying parents as all being wealthy and driving ‘flash cars’ (when NO-ONE on this thread has said that)…
…and then promptly proceed to stereotype all non-fee paying parents by comparing them to a friend of yours with a shortage of money bought ‘designer gear’ etc
In future save yourself the public embarrassment and just leave a post-it note on the fridge criticising yourself for your own hypocrisy – that way none of us have to suffer it.
Report abuse
It is hugely disappointing that – as ever – politicians can’t think creatively. The key issue here is that over 40% of kids in Jersey go to fee-paying schools. In the UK, the figure for independent schools is around 7%.
There is a huge gulf between the fees of JCG, VC, de la Salle etc and those of St Michaels and St George’s. There are some parents who could move their kids from the “fee-paying” schools to the “independent schools” but the majority could not: if you have 2 children it would mean an extra £15-20,000 per annum.
So the real issue here is fairly simple. It is whether Jersey wants to continue with a system of fee-paying schools or whether it wants to move the fee paying schools to the States sector and allow the independent schools to increase in size a little.
But it is an ideological issue, not a financial one. In his letter to parents, Deputy Reed said that he did not want to disturn the “balance” between the fee-paying and non-fee-paying sectors. That was clearly incorrect, as if he did not want to disturb the balance he would have proposed a reduction in the payments per pupil to all schools: with the fee paying schools still getting 50% of the amount paid to States schools.
No, the issue is an ideological one: whether we should remain with the existing system or move to a UK style comprehensive system.
It is to the discredit of Deputy Reed and the States of Jersey that not one States member, to my knowledge, thought fit to include their views on such an important issue in their election manifesto.
Democracy demands that politicians be honest with the electorate and seek a mandate for significant changes. While I am not a fan of party politics, it is almost impossible to see how the sort of difficult decisions that the Island faces can be made effectively without the context of a government programme that has some democractic legitimacy.
Report abuse
Sensible and WB,
Roughly 60% of pupils are educated in the States sector and 40% in the fee-paying sector.
It is pleasing to know that, in the event that the number of pupils in the States sector was to increase by 50% there would be no additional costs involved beyond “materials etc”.
I had assumed that new classrooms would be built, new teachers hired, new desks, computers and chairs required etc. It is good to be corrected andI thank you for your detailed analysis.
Report abuse
To WB |(COMMENT 31)I was speaking generally about “SOME of the posts on THESE FORUMS” of which there have been numerous examples of comments about 4X4 vehicles for some reason! I also spoke only of one example of a person (not a friend) whose hypocrisy I had to suffer on a regular basis for several years.I did not stereotype all non-fee paying parents as being like her because I know they are NOT!! I have friends from all walks of life and I prefer to choose my friends on personality rather than where they send their children to school or how much money they have as this is of no importance to me.Hope this clarifies things for you!
Report abuse
@donald pond
The number of pupils in the States sector will NOT increase by 50%, so your point is moot.
Grainville, Haute Valle and Le Rocquier have all had major rebuilds over the past few years and all three schools are bigger than ever and able to accommodate the relatively small number of previously fee-paying students that will arrive at their doors. Class sizes may increase slightly but teachers will deal with that.
Talk of a 50% increase is just scaremongering on your part. it just won’t happen.
Report abuse
Sensible @ 30: my understanding was that the subsidy was calculated on the basis of 1/2 the cost per child if they had to be educated in the States system. Presumably therefore it is possible to place a cost on each new student in the states system?
How you do you know that no new teachers or schools would be required? Presumably that would depend on how many pupils need States education and as one post above indicates, there is very limited space.
I can see the argument that the tax payer should not subsidise private education, but if the subsidy is calculated as it is supposed to be (ie. 1/2 the would-be cost if the child went to States school), then it makes no difference to the taxpayer: what we pay in subsidies, we save the same amount in reduced States schooling costs. So what is all the fuss about?
Report abuse
35 WB – And there you have it, (although Le Rocquier is full)you as a taxpayer should be questioning ESC unnecessary expansion of Grainville and Haut Vallee, capacity that is not needed, they clearly didnt do market/demographic research, and have wasted yours (and mine) and taxpayers money and are now trying to cover that up by forcing children from fee paying schools into these schools to utilise this capacity.
As the fee paying schools are oversubscribed the entry to these schools should be made easier to allow everyone who wants to attend them more of an opportunity. It is this that would save your precious taxes! I bet you if you lowered the cost of entry you would have many parents from states schools switching to fee paying
Report abuse
Incidentally congratulations in advance to all fee paying parents – Reed is putting the decision to the States and you can bet your bottom dollar that with elections looming and middle Jersey votes to win the majority of States members will be voting against Reed’s proposal.
Back to the drawing board on this one methinks…
Report abuse
Re #35, in the UK 7% are educated at fee paying scholls, in Guernsey it’s 13 % and compared with Jersey of 40%.
Read Dick Shenton’s letter in tonight’s JEP. If the faith schools close, and a fall on 15% of their pupils may make them unviable, where are they going to go ?
It’s a big gamble, which the taxpayer will have to pick up the fallout.
Report abuse
Tim at 11:
“the public schools have students with equal skill and talent.”. I agree. As someone who went to public school and then oxford, I can vouch from first hand experience for the skills and talents of those at public schools such as Eton etc.
Report abuse
WB,
Why won’t 50% happen? Middle income Jersey is being squeezed. Most parents of kids at the fee paying school have 2 or 3 children. The proposed fee increase will be £1,500 per child.
40% of the Island’s kids are at fee paying schools. Look at the wage charts in the island and if you assume an average distribution of children among income groups, the average wage of a family at a fee paying school is unlikely to be above £50/60k.
If these changes are brought in it is quite feasible the fee paying schools would end: the very wealthy would send kids to St Michael’s, everyone else to the States schools.
Report abuse
See WB wants to follow the UK now! Ok lets pay 50% income tax, capital gains tax, IHT and follow everything they do!! haha thought not.
fact is Jersey has a unique long established and very successful education set up that works. With an overall states budget of in excess of £500mill the £4.5m is nothing and should be preserved to ensure continuation of the excellent schooling and achievements of the fee paying schools
Report abuse
I believe that the proposals will harm children already at country primary schools and Hautlieu. These are the schools that parents will want their children to attend instead of private schools; schools they are entitled to send their children to if they so desire. Parents who have been faithful to their local States school and Hautlieu will see their children in larger classes through no fault of their own.
In time, parents whose children have attended States primary schools may feel less reticent about sending their children to States secondary schools for Years 7 to 9, especially if they believe their child is likely to fulfil the entrance requirements for Hautlieu.
These foolish proposals will cost the States more, and will damage the education of children in the States school system’ Why should they be squeezed by children who had previously been in, or who would have gone to, fee-paying schools?
Report abuse
@steve
‘With an overall states budget of in excess of £500mill the £4.5m is nothing.’
What planet are you on mate? The reason these cuts are being implemented in the first place is because the island is facing a £100,000,000 deficit per year. Education has been asked to make cuts of 11 million, of which the reduction of subsidies to fee paying schools is a part.
The £500 million in the Rainy Day fund does not constitute the island’s ‘budget’ ffs.
In light of the 11m reductions being attempted by Education across the WHOLE island, to state that 4.5m is ‘nothing’ is an utterly preposterous thing to say.
How do you feel about the proposed closure of the Alternative curriculum, Steve?
How do you feel about proposals for a merging of Highlands and Hautlieu?
Or doesn’t this matter so long as you aren’t left personally out of pocket…?
Giving back £4.5 million to the private school fraternity will only mean £4.5 million of cuts to the public education infrastructure. You would be happy for this to happen?
Did you attend a fee paying school, steve? Just curious…
Report abuse
One only has to read some of these comments to realise just how important a choice of education is .. Well done Dan, you are making a strong case in a democratic way – good luck.
Report abuse
#40.
Nice one Darren.
They’ll never get it right, though. They just haven’t got a clue what the difference is between a state school and a public school (USA etc. excepted).
The sad thing is that ever since the end of the second world war the opportunity to learn and get things right has existed for all. Yet we seem to have more dumbos around nowadays than ever. Heaven help the world of the future.
Report abuse
wb – the states annual budget is in excess of £500m, this is not the rainy day fund, this is the amount they spend in total each year.
Education are not making a cut of £11m, in the proposal they also have a “growth proposal” of £4.15mill, so the net effect is only a reduction of £6.9mill (6%).I am not happy about any cuts to education budget, education cuts should be last resort and held off for now. The minister has very cleverly pitted the public against each other, and deflected the real issue of states mismanagement and divided us when we should all be defending the education budget. We should all be opposing all of the cuts but are now fighting over this issue.
Have you read Shentons letter in last nights JEP, very true what he says.
However that said if there have to be cuts then I accept everyone has to bear the pain, but I dont agree with 1) the extent of the cuts, they are too much (over 60% of ESC total cuts) and 2) the timing, it gives no time whatsoever to allow parents to manage their finances to cope. It needs to be implemented over a longer period than two years! I hope you would agree with that.
And yes I did go to De La Salle, hence know how good a school it is and how well it served me and many others by providing a fantastic education and installing high moral ethical and social values
Did you attend a states school, just curious!!
Report abuse
I would rather my children went to a school where there are none of the chavvy riff raff that we see hanging around at all hours.
Not all parents at fee paying schools are wealthy middle class, its just that some of us sacrifice holidays and new cars etc to make sure that our children have the best start in life.
I will find the extra money to keep them at the school rather than subject them to some of the horror stories that I hear from non fee paying parents e.g. disruptive children spoiling lessons for the majority, swearing at teachers, no recognition for high achievers, drinking in school hours etc. But hey lts pretend that State schools are great.
Report abuse
We seem to be getting hung up on arguments surrounding cost, labelling/stigma and the quality of education on each side etc etc and forgetting about what should really matter – the impact that any decision made will have on the children of Jersey.
If the impact of this decision is that children are forced to change schoolds, this is bound to be disruptive and is likely to have negative consequences for the child.
Similarly, even if children are able to be absorbed into state schools at no extra cost to the state, an inevitable result will be larger class sizes, which is bound to have a detrimental impact upon the educational experience of all children in the state system.
As to a couple of comments that I cannot resist commenting on:
To Number 20 Insignificant:- You are quite incorrect. To many, it is not about the quality of the education or even about snobbery. There can be a whole host of reasons why a parent might chose a fee paying school.
For instance, it may be about control and influence. Parents have much more direct influence over school decisions than with Government schools.
Not sure about Jersey but in other jurisdictions some fee paying schools are particularly strong in non-academic areas and go to particular lengths to discovery your child’s non-academic talents and develop these. This may be in the areas of music, art or even sport. There are many talented individuals who only discover their during their schooling.
It may also just be that the parent likes the religious or moral philosophy of the school. If you are not religious (like me), this is unlikely to be important. However, I have it on good authority that this is of fundamental importance to many.
As to No 13 Scouser: – Sorry but the government system produces some idiots as well. As a society, in the absence of sound statistical data, we need to resist the temptation of labelling. Indeed, many would label no 40 as a snob just because he went to Oxford, never mind that he went to a government public school. (Don’t worry Darren, we know its not true)
Report abuse
#48 peddler: – Couldn’t agree more.
Cannot get over the reverse snobbery which exists over here. Where I grew up, o/seas, around about 1/3 of all kids went to non-gov schools. Most went to some form of religious schools and for most was not viewed as being a snobbish choice. Was still a limited amount of backlash but not like there is here.
People – get over yourselves. Just because people make different choices to you or are given different opportunities in life, does not mean that they are looking down their nose at you or that you should try to take their opportunities away from them.
Report abuse
#50 ‘and another thing’ – you raise a valid point regarding the harmful separatist consequences that can arise where the options of private and public educatation coexist.
However, I disagree that Jersey suffers to any great extent in this regard. In fact, the snobbery and ‘reverse snobbery’ problem is far worse in the UK. Importanly, I think this is largely due to our current subsidised system which actually gives most parents real choice, because relative to most private systems it is not expensive.
The proposed changes to the system actually increase the risk of creating a more apparent divide in Jersey and therefore might create the harmful atmosphere that you rightly criticise.
Report abuse
#49
‘…never mind that he went to a government public school.’
Victoria College? It fits that description extremely well!
Report abuse
My point still stands though. People choose private education for their children because they think it is better.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with that (choosing something because you think it is better), but I do think there is something wrong with intellectual dishonesty.
It’s harder to empathise with someone’s predicament or take their arguments seriously when they’re either in denial or being deliberately mendacious.
Report abuse
#52 C Le Verdic
Sorry – My Bad. Where I come from the non-government schools are the public schools. Very confusing.
Report abuse
i.e. #49 – Could have been an intended fantastic pun – but was not intentional.
Report abuse
Private education is a reflection of the British obsession with the class system.It is our duty to maximise the potential of each child as an individual. As long as there is a divide in the education system then this will not happen.
Report abuse
56 Red/Black flag – States schools do not maximise the potential of each child as an individual and it has absolutely nothing to do with any divide in the education system.
It has everything to do with the reasons I listed in point 48.
Your argument is flawed at the basic level, your facts are wholly incorrect and you have no idea what you are going on about.
Report abuse
Where I come from, we don’t have this system and I don’t see why we have it here. Although I haven’t been here long, our education system seems to me not to be right. Why shouldn’t they pay for private schools? Where I come from, they would. Is it snobbery? They would say that it is where I come from. I like living here but i don’t like all this private school malarcy. I went to public school where I come from and it didn’t do me any harm so maybe it should be the same here as it is where I come from. I don’t really know the system over here yet, but I am happy to express a view because I don’t like the idea of private schools. I’m no snob, don’t get me wrong, but it wouldn’t be tolerated where I come from.
Report abuse
Where do you come from, Kevin? (58)
If you had included this vital information it would have helped us all to ‘know where you’re coming from’, so to speak.
Report abuse
Peddler 57
I did not in fact read your posting 48 but have now done so. This whole subject has been going on for a few weeks under different headlines and the Chavs vs 4×4 debate is a complete waste of time.
My statement was “It is our duty to maximise the potential of each child as an individual”. I made NO comment at all as to whether the States or Private schools achieve this objective!
You say “States schools do not maximise the potential of each child as an individual” – that is a statement which is pretty unequivocal.You would seem to believe that the Private schools achieve this objective. No problem for me – you could be right.
However you also state “it has nothing to do with any divide in the education system”. Well clearly it does, otherwise a divide would not exist.
Finally I didn`t think I had put forward any arguments or stated any facts – but merely made a statement(last paragraph of your 57 refers), but as I have no idea what I am going on about I may be confused.
Report abuse
Here’s an idea for how the States could save a bit of money in the education department. Last night in the JEP there was a large advert on page 6 or 8 advertising admissions to Hautlieu for 14 year olds. The advert was in Portuguese.
Presumably there are large numbers of people why buy newspapers in languages they don’t understand on the off-chance that there will be an advert there in their native tongue.
Report abuse
Kevin 58 – If you don’t like then I suggest you go back to where you come from -
Report abuse
to WB. You appear to have an extremely large chip on your shoulder and are very cutting with your insults. Can i ask you, did you want to go to a fee paying school as a child but never had the opportunity? If you have a point to make fine.. a more educated person wouldnt be flinging insults left right and centre..This is a debate where feelings are running very high. your insults and sarcastic comments achieve nothing.
Report abuse
@KA
Apologies if I have in some way offended you – I really don’t see any examples where I have got personal in my responses…show me where I have insulted anyone unduly?
Pointing out flaws in peoples’ arguments and hypocritical statements is the very nature of debate…
…whereas casting aspersions on peoples’ level of education and accusing them of having a chip on their shoulder (as you ahve just done) is just downright nasty.
Report abuse
One alternative that would be worth considering is giving an education allowance to parents for them to use as they wish. Then let schools compete for children: this would allow faith schools, single-sex schools, academic schools, vocational schools etc all to focus on what parents want/what suits children the best. Such schools could charge top up fees (or not) as they wished, provided that there were sufficient school places available for those who did not want to pay top-up fees.
Also, as the proposal would be based on giving exactly the same allowance to each child, nobody would be able to argue that it was unfair or that anybody was subsidising anyone else.
The problem with Reed’s proposal is that it leads to less choice for most people. And that is generally regarded as a bad thing.
Report abuse
What absolutely beautiful dichotomies Jersey creates for itself…James Reed now is apparently without sufficient clout to make these decisions…as the cherubs parents and the posing brigade do not want to pay for a service they are happy to benefit from…Yet..Constable Mike the menace Jackson can alter the flippin speed limit on a whim..is he more powerful…more well in with someone…who knows but a glaring mismatch of powers exists…not a good example of organisation government,leadership or democracy..If they were kids in a playground you’d knock their flippin heads together…sorry not allowed to do that anymore some ponce in an office would take issue..world’s gone potty round here.could we not have David Cameron sub manage the island from Whitehall.he’s kicking out the quango’s, no job wallers,and freeloaders.
Report abuse
Dan I AM IN SUPPORT OF YOU!! By having children in fee paying schools is SAVING the taxpayer money. The fact that I choose to send my child to fee paying is saving the tax payer £4000 a year.
By making changes now will not only affect the fee paying but also the states schools as how will the states schools accomodate all the extra children. More teachers – bigger buildings etc etc and the tax payer pays as we are legally obliged to educate all children.
I personally think all parents who
have children in fee paying schools should apply for a place in the states schools for September and then lets see what happens.
The States have missed the point on savings here. Deputy Reed and the rest of the States Members need to get in the real world and make the difficult decision to cut the final salary states workers pensions (like the private sector have had to do) and maybe there would not be this debate at all plus we would all not need to suffer GST and social security rises.
Report abuse
WB”s apology at 64 sound somewhat less than genuine
Report abuse
For the comments relating to ‘high earners or civil servants sending their children to fee paying school – I would thank you to do some homework before making a generalisation such as that. My husband is neither a high earner, civil servant nor in the finance industry. We have both worked hard to save for our child’s education and he in turn worked hard to pass the exam, so please don’t insult us by categorising everyone the same. I am fed up of reading so many ridiculous comments from people who have not taken time to actually attend one of the meetings that were held by PFC or to study the effects of a cut in subsidies yet blatantly post rubbish on a public site serving only to prove their lack of intelligence!!
Report abuse