Biggest chip on shoulder 2004

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by msr, Dec 30, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. msr

    msr LE

    Just when you thought the nominations had closed:,11494,1380957,00.html

    Famously, Harrow's students were the cream of England - rich and thick - and that was the problem.
    This was fine in the world before league tables, when the old tie network would pretty much guarantee a place in the City, at a good university or, for the truly dim, Sandhurst.

  2. Explain 'chip' - the journo who wrote the piece, or Harrow?
  3. msr

    msr LE

    The journo :roll:
  4. Sounds like an average public school to me, apart from wearing boaters and baggies and the price of course. What suprises me is that these places can apply for charitable status. The school I went to was expensive but instead of toffs, we were full of "poor" farmers' kids and overseas expat kids (like me).
    Our old school tie counts for naught, but brains and ambition do. I think that if there's a chip, it's with the charitable status, not the thickos.
  5. I see.

    Isn't it run as a business? So why should it qualify as a charity? Unless such status enables others (the 'skivs' in the article) to benefit from the presumably superb education? If not, channel the tax elsewhere.
  6. I see no chips!!

    To call Harrow or Eton 'charities' is frankly taking he p*ss.

    I speak of course as the owner of a secondary modern education :D
  7. Wasnt T Bliar a scholarship pupil at Fettes, in other words a genuine beneficiary of that particular "charitable foundation"?
  8. Up until New Labour, most Public (major and minor) schools had an Assisted Place scheme where if someone had the nouse for the education but the parents didn't have the money, the government via the school bursar would subsidies the fees. Hence charitable would be a fair call, And then unsurprisingly New Labour withdrew the scheme. The schools now work around it by approaching big businesses to support the scheme. Tax breaks for the companies etc etc.

    Having done a bit of recruiting in my past I know that these schools have all manner of students from "Posh Toffs" to "skivs". Father doesn't necessarily own ICI but is a mini cab driver or whatever it takes to get the money. If they want to send their Children to a public school, is it down to the government to stop them doing that by enforcing a rather solid barrier and not allowing a charitable status thus no support to fees?

    Does the Government stop you using Bupa or another private medical agency?

    Could this be viewed as another attack on the "privledged Classes" with the world famous accuracy of the Sceptics?


  9. There are genuine arguments both for and against these schools, but the present Govt is never going to eliminate them. (Human Rights laws for example, and the fact that private schools are common and spreading in many other countries).

    So if you increase the real cost of sending a child there, there will still be scholarship pupils ( as opposed to the Tory-introduced Assisted Places scheme) but the net effect will be to increase the 'exclusivity' of the schools.

    The effect on service families wishing to give their children a stable education also has to be considered, although this is less of a factor then in the days of more accompanied overseas postings.

    Incidentally, IMHO the fact that these schools are run in a 'businesslike' manner is not one of the genuine arguments against them. We expect any charity to be run in a 'businesslike' fashion these days. The point is, surely, that they are not run for profit.
  10. I would argue that all private schools deserve charitable status.Parents of children attending private schools massively subsidise the Department of Education in that they not only take the financial responsibility for their children's education and for those on bursaries but, through their taxes pay for other children to attend state schools.

    I'd love to see the response of the LEAs to being told they had to provide state education for all those currently being educated privately. Or maybe Gordon Brown would dig deep into his pockets and increase the education budget without a murmur.

    Private education isn't just about passing exams and until the state sector gets its house in order regarding discipline and respect (concepts unheard of in many, but by no means all, state schools) I don't feel it has room to criticise a system which has, on the whole, worked very well.
  11. there allways going to be votes in sticking it to the public schools. but i dont think that jorno had a chip on his shoulder
  12. Indeed...

    I was a beneficiary of the Assisted Places scheme 8) ... which coupled with the Boarding School Allowance covered the cost of me being schooled in England, rather than Germany.

    For a Government extolling the virtues of "education, education, education" scrapping AP showed a curious use of logic, IMHO
  13. Lots of people have got it in for public schools because of public schoolboys.

    Lets face it, they live among us like an occupying army. 6% or so of kids go to these places, but the vast majority of people with hands on any kind of lever of power are public schoolies. 9 times out of 10 they are no brighter than the average, but they still get all the breaks.

    This is partly envy (I'd like to have an easier life, I'll admit it) but it's mainly a sense of injustice, and resentment of the arrogant b'stards who so often seem to think they got where they are on merit. Buying privelige sucks. That's what public schools sell - unfair advantage.

    (walks off, whistling 'the Red Flag')
  14. And the fact that their parents have sufficient funds to send them to private/public school has nothing to do with it?

    If you come from a rich, stable background you're always going to have an advantage whether you go to private of state school. And many people who can afford it do privately educate their children which, inevitably, squiffs the figures.
  15. dear oh dear,

    another go at Public Schools.

    so who wouldn't send their kids if they could afford it?

    well, anyone on the front bench of the government certainly would!