I had an excellent public education. It was depression in the 1930s, and highly qualified people with a love for their area of knowledge taught school because other jobs were scarce. My physics, chemistry and mathematics teachers were excellent. My Latin teacher was wonderful, too, but that's another story.

We could have the same thing now if we would pay salaries to teachers comparable to those they could get in other areas.

So you're in favour of social segregation based on socio-economic class. At some point your shy daughter will have to face those people.

Then again maybe not, perhaps she'll do so well at university she'll be able to afford to live and work away from 'those people' for the rest of her life.

Grow up Houllebecq just as Suze's daughter has, mixing with a high number of students in the private system [interacting and socialising in abundance]given the high numbers within private schools over the years.

Severin et al,

Whilst I have shown that independent schools make economic sense, there are other benefits too.

As far as society is concerned, people have aspirations for themselves and their children. Having a choice to provide a different and mostly better education for their children is most independent parents a significant sacrifice, but one they make willingly. Without the subsidies this would be impossible for most.

Secondly the comparison of the public schools not only to the top private schools, but to the smaller more modest independent schools shows that with similar resources, the independent schools still out perform the public schools. This in turn forces the public schooling system to lift its game.

Finally, my opinion is that the performance of the public schools has more to do with the way they are run than the resources they get. The union stipulated promotion on seniority and other obsolete ideologies are a powerful disincentive to the teachers, and lead to inefficiencies and incompetence being retained and rewarded.

If you want people to start flocking back to the public school system, you need the carrot of improved public education, and not the stick of punishing excellence.

Fixing the public school system would be a huge plus for the voters, while punishing the independent schools would be an electoral disaster. Julia's problem is that she is beholden to the teachers' union which is the source of the problem.

unique,

'mixing with a high number of students in the private system [interacting and socialising in abundance]given the high numbers within private schools over the years.'

That homogeneous lot of middle class and upper class aspirationals as shadow minister says? She would never have to encounter any pikeys.

SM,

'If you want people to start flocking back to the public school system, you need the carrot of improved public education, and not the stick of punishing excellence.'

Punishing? That's a laugh. I suppose the governmnet is punishing millionaires when it means tests the Baby Bonus too?

I think the private school lobby would have zero problems justifying it's funding if it were happy to relinquish funding from the super rich schools who have school excursions to Paris and Olympic standard sports facilities.

I can see you're really interested in totally privatising education, which is fair enough, but why not be honest about it? It seems a bit disingenuous to assert you want public schools to be better, be against tax, and want increased funding to private schools.

You make a it zero sum game by your politics, then argue private schools should get more of the pie when public schools are struggling.

Besides, while ever the pikeys cant afford private schools, the end goal for SM is good schooling for the well behaved middle class, and all the 'problem' kids with unstable upbringings left in the zoo of public schooling.

I cant believe the middle class is so easily duped. If instead of supporting private schools they supported improving the public system, they wouldn't be forking out $20k per kid per year for a decent education for their kids. They could just pay $2K more tax a year and have free schools, perhaps without those Olympic swimming pools. Then the 'aspirationals' could afford to work less and enjoy more time with their kids. Maybe that's what they're afraid of.

Houellebecq,

The problem is not the money. For a couple of years, we lived in a small town where there were two schools, one public and one independent. The fees for the independent school were less than $1000 per child, which with the subsidy meant that the financial resources of this small school where less than the public school. However, the small independent school's results were consistently better.

The teachers were paid the same, the facilities were simpler, the difference was that poor performance would mean the closure of the school as all the parents could easily move them over to the public school.

For many countries, public schools deliver an education that is the equal of what private schools can deliver, Australia is not one of them. Countries like Finland strictly monitor students and teachers performance, and promotion is based on merit not seniority. A little more money is not going to fix the problem.

Also the vast majority of independent schools do not charge anywhere near $20k p.a. and what they generally offer is a far more rounded education including sport, music, Duke of Edinburgh etc.

The only reason to stop the subsidy is to bring everyone down to the same level.

But schools that charge $20k still get government funding. What is wrong with means testing it. Surely if people have a lazy $20k to splash around every year, and the school has such amazing facilities they don't need the money. Some of these rich schools make a handsome profit year on year.

What do you believe should be means tested? Anything?

'A little more money is not going to fix the problem.'

A little less money is not going to be noticed by some of these rich schools.

'The only reason to stop the subsidy is to bring everyone down to the same level.'

Nope, it's for governmnet funds to go where they are needed most. Which includes your country private school if it is struggling.

PS: The 'same level' of education is what should be the goal. It's the only way you can have equality of opportunity. After an equal access to education, I'm happy to go with your throw the pikeys to the dogs mantra.