Ruth Kelly is sending her child to a private school.?

Question

This labour government has ploughed billions into eduacation. They say everyone should have the same chance. How can everyone have the same chance if Ruth Kelly is sending her child to a £15,000 a year private school, just because her child is dyslexic. There are millions of kids out there who are the same, they can't afford to go to a private school. So tell me how are these other kids having the best education?

Answer 1

Her parental instinct to do what she considers best for her children is admirable; I just don't like the fact that as a taxpayer I have been helping to pay a goodly salary to someone so wrong-headed. But this is a problem that has afflicted many, probably most, socialist politicians, the world over, they are never short of fine vote-winning rhetoric and just can't see the hypocrisy. Stelios Haji-Ioannou, soon-to-be billionaire founder of easyjet, waits in line with his customers to check in when he travels, an interesting contrast in behaviour between the public servant devoted to the good of the people and the business entrepreneur devoted to making money.

Answer 2

As somebody who had to struggle in a state school with dyslexia myself i can sympathise with Ruth Kellys desicion to an extent. I was unlucky in that my school refused to recognise my problems, and we had to find help elsewhere, only once i was in uni did i get any additionaly help fromt he education authority, and even then it was a fight. I can aay with some good qualifications despite this but it was a strugggle.
If we could have afforded it im sure we would have looked to paying for private tuition or additional help. there are certainly people i know who are dyslexic who have been let down byt he state system. Ruth Kelly is simply doing what thousands of other people wish they could do.

What i see as a problem, is that it is a direct criticism of the party she works for and the policies she once stood for, effectivly admiting that the system they ry and sell to the public is not standing up to the test. Perhaps this controversy and open admitance of failure by the former education minister will be a catalyst for the gov't to actually look at how the current education system works from a realistic stance.

Answer 3

I sympathize with your viewpoint. But here are some cold, hard facts. In both the US and the UK, children with special needs are getting inadequate help. Policymakers and politicians talk a lot--butwhen it comes to actually funding the needed programs, they have lots of excuses--and damn little real action.

So if a child with a disability goes to public school--they are NOT going to get that equal chance you're talking about. Not unless they are very lucky. That's especially in this case. The US and the UK each have their strengths and faults in special education--but one of the UK's real weak points is children with dyslexia (to check this out, google the Times Educational Supplement and "dyslexia"--they've had a number of stories on this).

So here's the bottom line--if I were Ruth Kelly, I'd do exactly the same thing--because theory is fine, but the bottom line is MY kid won't get that equal chance the public schools promise. I'd also try to work to fix the problems--but I'd also take care of my own to the extent I could afford it. The fault here is a government and an educational system that has failed to keep its promises--not just in the UK, mind you--we have the same problem in the US. Don't blame Kelly for the system's failure.

Answer 4

People in the field of education are undoubtably more likely than the average person to be aware that the public school system has serious problems. I think that the fact that there are major problems is something pretty much everybody can agree on, although we may disagree as to what exactly those problems are or how to fix them. ... Regarding the suggestion that this implies that public school teachers are overpaid: I'd tend to think that if that were the case, the percentage who send their kids to private schools would be much larger. It does take two parents to have a kid, and its becoming increasingly common for both parents to work. I don't know where my high school biology teacher sent her kids to school, but I do recall her saying that her husband was a chemical engineer, so I'm betting that they could have afforded a private school if they wanted to.

Answer 5

Don't really care as they are all a bunch of self serving ****'s. Interestingly Ruth Kelly is a active member of Opus Dei, the secret Christian organisation mentioned in the simple persons book, the Da Vinci Code. She has also managed to change her accent from what should be a strong rural N. Irish to something alien, as befitting her face.

Answer 6

I would send both my son to a private school if i could afford it they both have dyslexia ,but i don't hve the money she has so the education system should give all dyslexic kids the same chance .

Answer 7

Well, I guess she doesn't trust her own education policies... best leave it to the professionals... As for the other families who can't afford private school, well, I don't know what they can do as the government hasn't set up a system for them. I know that the government believes that segregating children into good, average and poor groups in terms of teaching is not good but in practice that's what should happen. Schools should assess their pupils according to their abilities and put similar children in the same group so that teachers can give them the help and support they need.

Answer 8

It's 1 rule for politicians and something entirely different for the people they are there to represent. have you not worked that out yet?

It'sone of the many perks they get from the hidden mandarins behind the scenes yanking thier chains - who rule and govern the country - leaving our "democratically elected representatives like Ruth Kelly, Tony Bliar (sic) and all the rest of them sitting in Westminster" !!

However, it IS VERY ENCOURAGING to read this report because for years, it's been well known that most heirarchies were established by men, who now monopolise the upper levels (eg Tony Bliar (sic); George W Bush; etc etc etc), thus depriving women of thie rightful opportunities to acheive incompetence !!.. until now ... and we have Ruth Kelly to thank for redressing the balance !!

Answer 9

its no surprise really but may make people realise a little more that these government employees just do as there told take there check and then when they come out into the real world they do the oposite as to what they were pushing or implementing .

i dont blame her for wanting the best for her children but to be a government official who implemented it and then took the money from doing that job and puting it into the total oposite says it all.

the governments a sham and just plays with statistics .

Answer 10

Of course it's politically hypocritical, but every mother wants what is best for her child. No doubt we would all act in the best interest of our child if we had the opportunity. She is only following the example of her boss Tony Blair who had his children educated outside the state system. Remember the mantra, Education, Education, Education? We get the government we deserve (vote in) In answer to your final question, the other children will NOT get the best education !!