General Chat

Thank you for all the replies, its nice to see an interesting debate on here.

Very true Teresa, thanks, Caz xxx

If they didn't try to 'pretend', there would be no grounds to sue. Where would your friend be if the government only provided the basics or even nothing at all. While I have every sympathy for your friend and his autistic child, I think we're treading on dangerous ground if we try to have a society that requires the government to meet every percieved need. 'Statutory requirements' are many-edged swords. Please don't misunderstand me here - I'm sure that there's far more to your friend's situation that be said in a paragraph. I'm making a very general point here.

The only hypocrisy is this government trying to 'pretend' that state schools can offer facilities for special needs children. My friend, who has an autistic son, is suing the local authority for the cost of having to send his son to a private school because they were not able to provide the necessary support.

I agree with Paul (Chunky) and think the whole thing has been blown out of proportion. Does this constitute 'news', or is it just an opportunity for the media to have a go at a minister. Hypocrisy? Perhaps, but do we really expect it never to occur? The press are very fond of shouting the odds over things like this, whilst they are guilty of hypocrisy all the time.

Yep! Certainly is! :-) or :-( depending on one's perspective.

True Felicity! You cant please everyone,I dont live in the U.K ,but my family do. I havent voted for a long time(in the U.K) and to be honest if I ever went back I would be stuck to pick a party that I felt would achieve anything,Oh well thats life!lol

The education system could be wonderful and still not be able to meet every child's needs. Judged on their choices? - of course, Roxanne, but my point was that every single politician is going to upset more than a few of the population. That's the way it is and they can't please everyone. Let's be realistic here - the more political parties there are the more people will not have voted for the one in power and the more people who will potentially dissatisfied with political decisions. (Given that anyone bothers to vote at all and there is an argument to say that non-voters have no grounds for complaint.) Not that I'm necessarily in favour of a one-party state but just looking at the issue from more than one point of view.

Well,I still think shes hypocritical! If your a politician you have to expect to be judged on your choices,if they dont like it then Im afraid they should not be in politics! The point is felicity that this women was education minister,she was the one saying how wondeful our state schools are,how they are improving! why then has she not practiced her so very strong beliefs!lol its a joke! Im so glad I dont vote,theres not one party I would vote for,they all lie to suit themselves!

Has she violated something in her contract of employment, Brian?

I said the other day that any parent would do the best for there child, and what should be taken into account is her husbands veiws as well he maybe the one paying the fee's or at least contributing to them, and that would only be a benefit to state benefit a bit extra in the pot, Also just cos your paid to do a job does not mean you should feel it ness to promote or implement such in your own private life, i dont think its that hard for a Mother to judge who comes first, it should be your child we all know that and thats what shes done, if i had to choose i know which one whould be my choice, Lilxx

If all politicians really were working for 'the good of the people' to everyone's satisfaction, there would only be the need for the equivalent of a benevolent dictatorship - ie one person running the show. Fat chance of that happening, and unlikely that as a society we'd want it, so all the complaining, back-biting, criticism and so on is a bit pointless. Even politicians are human beings, living their lives as best they can and flawed like the reast of us. To expect them to be anything special is unreasonable.

So whats the point in having new labour,when we have the old conservatives! No difference is there??

Just to add - the State system can't be all things to all people, any more than the private sector can be. Specialist requirements need specialist solutions and education is just the same. I taught in both the public and private sector and frankly don't think much is better anywhere abroad. I'd be moving away from here to keep my children out of the USA system if I was making that choice just now.

She also managed to have all four children after 1997 whilst serving as an MP. That should rate an entry in the Guiness Book of Records.

Labour aren't supposed to be 'against the private sector' no matter what. If that were the case they'd be nearer communism politically. The fact is, a capitalist society needs both public and private services and it's good that the politicians avail themselves of both, no matter their political colour. It's right to do what's best for each individual child, and that can be any of the available options. I have known people to send their children to a state school, even though they could afford a private education, because they believed the state school to be the best in their area. It's all a matter of choice and there's no point castigating someone because they make that choice, politician or otherwise.

oh come on ! Labour haven't been 'against the private sector' for a long time, otherwise they would have renationalised the rail service etc, and they wouldn't be involving private companies in health care. The labour party are now just a watered down conservative part - hasn't that been blindingly obvious over the last 8 years or so ?

Roxanne, I think you are getting New Labour mixed up with the Socialist Labour party of the old days. This party bears no resemblance to it,and never has done.

I am working class and I am sure infact I know my parents did their best for my me.. But if I had the money or ( would of had ) the money to send my children for a better education I would of done. I have always tried and aimed that my children would have better and more chances in life than I had. As I'm sure thats what my parents wanted for me.

I think people are getting the wrong idea here!! Shes A labour minister!! Labour,Labour,Labour!!! arnt labour surpose to be against the private sector!!?? I have No problem with anyone sending their child for private education,infact im for it,but this is extremely hypocritical from one who promotes state education,if shes changed her politics then fine,she should go over to the other side,with my blessing;-))