[Politics] Corbynite councillor sends daughter to Roedean

[BLOCK F]

Of course it is hypocritical and all the bullshit about the Daily Fail is just cobblers.
Can't believe some of the comments on here trying to make out it isn't hypocritical.........some have spouted waffle and one who shall be nameless is spouting venom, as usual!
Harrumph from Block F who reads the Times!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Which is fine by me, good on him.

I reckon a high percentage of posters in this thread have at some point slagged off a Tory MP for being privileged and educated at Eton.
People stick to their principals when it suits them

I would like to see this list of the high proportion of posters on this thread who are defending (I think this is what you mean) the labour MP for sending his kid to Roedean yet who have also slagged off tory MPs for themselves being educated at Eton. Your inference is 'we' think Boris, Cameron, Mogg and others shouldn't have gone to Eton. Show me one of my such posts.....

I think that if three leading tory (or labour) recent/current leading female MPs had all been to Roedean, and were using their position to undermine state education while supporting the charitable tax deductable status of private schools, it would be reasonable to cry 'foul'.

Slagging of a tory MP for sending his son to Eton, though....majority of posters on this thread have done that? I think not.

You are as guilty as the Mail of conflating unrelated suppositions to weave a pejorative narrative.

You right wingers are all the same All of you. Fact.

 

[BLOCK F]

I would like to see this list of the high proportion of posters on this thread who are defending (I think this is what you mean) the labour MP for sending his kid to Roedean yet who have also slagged off tory MPs for themselves being educated at Eton. Your inference is 'we' think Boris, Cameron, Mogg and others shouldn't have gone to Eton. Show me one of my such posts.....

I think that if three leading tory (or labour) recent/current leading female MPs had all been to Roedean, and were using their position to undermine state education while supporting the charitable tax deductable status of private schools, it would be reasonable to cry 'foul'.

Slagging of a tory MP for sending his son to Eton, though....majority of posters on this thread have done that? I think not.

You are as guilty as the Mail of conflating unrelated suppositions to weave a pejorative narrative.

You right wingers are all the same All of you. Fact.

Early on the Friday sauce, Harry?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Of course it is hypocritical and all the bullshit about the Daily Fail is just cobblers.
Can't believe some of the comments on here trying to make out it isn't hypocritical.........some have spouted waffle and one who shall be nameless is spouting venom, as usual!
Harrumph from Block F who reads the Times!

Mmmmm.....take a closer look. 'Labour MP sends child to private school' is the fact. The rest of it is . . . . venom.

Just for you, because I enjoy your posts and thoughts and think you deserve a civil reply....The only relevant facts in the article are that the MP has defended state education (in part by opposing the creation of academies) while at the same time sending his own kid to a private school. Irrelevant facts are he is on the Momentum 'slate' and supports Corbyn. This is supposed to constitute hypocrisy.

Personally I would expect all MPs, of all parties to support state education - simply because it is the means by which most kids are educated. Likewise I would expect all MPs of all parties to support the NHS and our armed forces. I would be suspicious of any MP in favour of privatising state education, the NHS or (heaven forfend) the military.

In the meantime, I would condemn any MP who wanted to bring in laws to take away the right of individuals to send their kids to a private school (that operated withn the national curriculum framework - that is a separate issue), take way the right of people to use private medical insurance and private clinics (as long unreasonable tax breaks were not offered as an incentive, and as they met acceptable standards - another story) or underfund the military while diverting state funds towards 'private security/secret armies' (this one is a bit far fetched but I include it for completemess).

Nobody would call a tory a hypocrite for supporting state education and the NHS while sending his kid to private school and using BUPA.

So where is the hypocrisy here? Does this bloke want Roedean and Eton to be closed? Obviously not. The academy issue has nothing to do with independent private schools. And it is quite possible to be in favour of existing private schools but opposed to the privatisation of all schools (the policy I would logically and reasonably pursue were I a right wing conservative). In reality most labour and tory MPs are in favour of a mixed public private system of education and health (albeit not military where 100% 'nationalisation' is favoured by all). Few wish to crush the state or private provision. Forgive me but I see nowhere in the Mail article any accusation that this MP wants to crush private provision.

I'm sorry if those of us who have rebutted this Mail article and the OP appear to be defending the indefensible, but really we aren't. And I speak as someone opposed to the clueless Corbyn and the sinister Momentum. Perhaps this MP does need to be beaten for something (I don't know anything about him other than this story and the way the Mail present it) but it would be better if people picked the right stick, and the right reason.

All the best.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Early on the Friday sauce, Harry?

Not had a drop!

 

[Murray 17]

Isn't it a general point that the Labour party has never supported private education, and that this man is a prominent figure in the local Labour party? So unless we assume that every member of any party can go against party policy, it must be hypocritical?

 

[Wardy's twin]

Indeed.

Largely because I've based mine on what he has actually said, and you've based yours on what you've chosen to believe he thinks.

words are cheap , surely you should base your comment on what he actually does which is to send his his daughter to a top private school whilst being high up in a political party that strongly believes in comprehensive education.

I have no antipathy for the labour party in fact i voted for them in last election. What i don't like is people saying one think and doing another.

I re-iterate he is high up in a political party which pushes comprehensive education yet he chose to sent his daughter to private so nothing to do with what i think he thinks more the case of what he has actually done.

As said you are entitled

 

[BLOCK F]

Mmmmm.....take a closer look. 'Labour MP sends child to private school' is the fact. The rest of it is . . . . venom.

Just for you, because I enjoy your posts and thoughts and think you deserve a civil reply....The only relevant facts in the article are that the MP has defended state education (in part by opposing the creation of academies) while at the same time sending his own kid to a private school. Irrelevant facts are he is on the Momentum 'slate' and supports Corbyn. This is supposed to constitute hypocrisy.
Personally I would expect all MPs, of all parties to support state education - simply because it is the means by which most kids are educated. Likewise I would expect all MPs of all parties to support the NHS and our armed forces. I would be suspicious of any MP in favour of privatising state education, the NHS or (heaven forfend) the military.

In the meantime, I would condemn any MP who wanted to bring in laws to take away the right of individuals to send their kids to a private school (that operated withn the national curriculum framework - that is a separate issue), take way the right of people to use private medical insurance and private clinics (as long unreasonable tax breaks were not offered as an incentive, and as they met acceptable standards - another story) or underfund the military while diverting state funds towards 'private security/secret armies' (this one is a bit far fetched but I include it for completemess).

Nobody would call a tory a hypocrite for supporting state education and the NHS while sending his kid to private school and using BUPA.

So where is the hypocrisy here? Does this bloke want Roedean and Eton to be closed? Obviously not. The academy issue has nothing to do with independent private schools. And it is quite possible to be in favour of existing private schools but opposed to the privatisation of all schools (the policy I would logically and reasonably pursue were I a right wing conservative). In reality most labour and tory MPs are in favour of a mixed public private system of education and health (albeit not military where 100% 'nationalisation' is favoured by all). Few wish to crush the state or private provision. Forgive me but I see nowhere in the Mail article any accusation that this MP wants to crush private provision.

I'm sorry if those of us who have rebutted this Mail article and the OP appear to be defending the indefensible, but really we aren't. And I speak as someone opposed to the clueless Corbyn and the sinister Momentum. Perhaps this MP does need to be beaten for something (I don't know anything about him other than this story and the way the Mail present it) but it would be better if people picked the right stick, and the right reason.

All the best.

Hi Harry, I enjoy your posts and thoughts too!
Thanks for your reply and this will be my last post of the day before I hit the Friday sauce. I am currently enjoying an excellent mug of P.G.Tips.
I understand where you are coming from, but to defend my position, it is not difficult to research and discover Momentum and the Corbynistas attitudes towards private education, let alone some strange organisation called 'Labour against private schools campaign', which has apparently been recently formed. One would suspect that the likes of Nick Childs, being an enthusiastic supporter of Corbyn, would share the views of his Supreme Leader.I may be wrong, but to me, a very left wing politician sending his daughter to a top public school, is just a teensy weeny bit 'Hmm' is it not?
C.B.A. to bang on, as the tea is nearly finished,but the fact that this article appeared in the ghastly Daily Mail, appears to mean to some that the paper's opinion is automatically bollocks. In this instance, I would say it isn't. Surely hypocrisy can be sniffed here, n'est-ce pas?
Anyway, the weather looks good and I am fast approaching my 71st birthday................have a good weekend, onwards and upwards!
P.S.Your posts are frequently amusing and never venomous!

 

[Guinness Boy]

Of course it's not hypocritical. Roedean is a private insitution and was set up as a private institution. What Childs is against is the forced privatisation of public assets. They're two completely different concepts.

I agree with Simster, this thread does show exactly why charlatans like Johnson and Farage are doing well. Too many people are ignorant of facts or are able to follow a coherent argument. I've argued before that philosophy (and logic in particular) should be taught in schools, there'd be a lot less loose thinking

Since education is part of this thread in more ways than one, I have to say I share the same concern. The Academy chain that runs my son's school promotes "entrepreneurial" thought and risk taking as part of its values but not philosophy and logic.

I'm not sure this genuinely sets up kids, especially from more difficult social backgrounds, with the tools to think properly or, necessarily, to get on in life Do we really want entrepreneurial train drivers or risk taking nurses or truck drivers? It might produce one or two who fail early auditions for The Apprentice and that's about it. But it will promote exactly the sort of thinking that says that a two line lie on social media to promote yourself is in fact a risk or that not reading something properly is a business decision. How in the hell is that education?

Then there is the other way that I also despair of (note Daily Fail readers, it's time to tune in again) which is the inability to deal with opposite viewpoints. To surround oneself with an echo chamber, to "no platform" in university and set up safe spaces where once there was debate. Equally obnoxious and arguably producing even more idiots than the first example.

If I had the money, I'd certainly send my kids to private school to escape these twin evils, but I don't have it, so I can't.

 

[BLOCK F]

Not had a drop!

Nor have I, yet!

 

[KZNSeagull]

There was a discussion about scrapping private schools on Politics Live this afternoon. The idea is being backed by Ed Miliband and they want to get the Labour Party to adopt it as policy. So this chap won't be very happy.

 

[Chicken Run]

Sorry. I don't understand your point at all.

To be perfectly honest It comes as no surprise that you don’t, honestly.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

words are cheap , surely you should base your comment on what he actually does which is to send his his daughter to a top private school whilst being high up in a political party that strongly believes in comprehensive education.

I have no antipathy for the labour party in fact i voted for them in last election. What i don't like is people saying one think and doing another.

I re-iterate he is high up in a political party which pushes comprehensive education yet he chose to sent his daughter to private so nothing to do with what i think he thinks more the case of what he has actually done.

As said you are entitled

Why are you ignoring that he sends his other child to a state school? Clearly he does 'believe in' comprehensive education. He obviously has his reasons to believe that this girl's specific needs are best served at a different school - information that we do not have.

Either way, he is entitled to that choice, and there is absolutely no conflict between that and opposing the privatisation of state schools.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

There was a discussion about scrapping private schools on Politics Live this afternoon. The idea is being backed by Ed Miliband and they want to get the Labour Party to adopt it as policy. So this chap won't be very happy.

Millipede. What a plum. Did he learn nothing from Mr Tony? Let people spend their money how they want, and meanwhile spend their tax £££s judiciously to support opportunity in health and education and widen access to life's rewards.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

To be perfectly honest It comes as no surprise that you don’t, honestly.

Well, let's recap.

The man in question sends a child of his to a state school.

You edited my comment about his stance on the privatisation of state schools, to suggest he held that because it 'didn't affect him' - when clearly it does, as much as the rest of us with children in that system.

Perhaps you can explain better, now I've made clear why I'm confused at your point??

 

[Chicken Run]

well, let's recap.

The man in question sends a child of his to a state school.

You edited my comment about his stance on the privatisation of state schools, to suggest he held that because it 'didn't affect him' - when clearly it does, as much as the rest of us with children in that system.

Perhaps you can explain better, now i've made clear why i'm confused at your point??

im suggesting that he holds his stance from a position of safety and Roedean isn’t a state school last time I checked.

Before you answer I’m aware he sends the other to state school

 

[Leekbrookgull]

Absolute rubbish.

You telling me that a Corbynite Labour councillor sending his daughter to Roedean isn’t hypocritical?

I don’t care if this was reported in the Daily Mail, Guardian or Tommy Robinson Weekly, it is hypocrisy of the highest order.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thank-you. Bang on the button.

 

[Leekbrookgull]

There was a discussion about scrapping private schools on Politics Live this afternoon. The idea is being backed by Ed Miliband and they want to get the Labour Party to adopt it as policy. So this chap won't be very happy.

Ed Miliband i believe is a Doncaster M/P,yet i can't understand why he lives in Primrose Hill (the last time i looked) don't think you can call that area natural Labour territory ? Mind you didn't Ed give us no compatible smart meters ?

 

[Wardy's twin]

Why are you ignoring that he sends his other child to a state school? Clearly he does 'believe in' comprehensive education. He obviously has his reasons to believe that this girl's specific needs are best served at a different school - information that we do not have.

Blimey its even worse than i thought

Either way, he is entitled to that choice, and there is absolutely no conflict between that and opposing the privatisation of state schools.

He is a prominent member of a party that promotes comprehensive schools and wants to scrap any existing Grammar schools because of selection. Tell me how do you think kids get into Roedean.

 

[zefarelly]

Daily Mail . . . Fascist racist scum rag.