Envy is the reason for the bad-mouthing of private schools and government supportof . Understandable but pointless.

Understand this: if it weren't for private schools, governments could not cope with the need for state schools. Also,in South Australia, while the federal government gives money to privates schools and state schools, the state governments give money only to state schools. I assume this is the same in all states.

State schools are useless to all but the few kids who really want to learn and are capable of doing it on their own. Private schools try harder because parents have to put up large sums of money too. They are customers needing satisfaction. State school parents are treated like crap, as are the students, by public servants.

Afraid of being accused of dumbing down universities? Don't worry, they were dumbed down years ago because the products of state schools couldn't cope, couldn't even read and write properly and needed remedial English before they could start work on a mickey mouse BA or the like just to say they, "When I went to uni.."

My wife has worked in both systems, and she wouldn't send a dog to a state school to clean up the scraps in the filthy yards.

if state schools are so bad, then clearly they need more money spent on them, to bring them up to scratch.
State funded schools should be just as answerable to parents as private schools.
Isn't is marvellous how so many laissez faire free marketeers hate gov. intervention, except when it involves handouts to business and private institutions like schools, that only the rich can enjoy.

Dear Leigh,

I guess you can only speak from your own experiences.
However ours differ greatly to what you or your wife
describe. You have to be selective - of the quality
and reputation of the school you choose - no matter
whether its private or public. In our area we had a
choice of three excellent schools - and we chose the
best.

My children began with private preparatory schools
and went on to private high schools. However
we found the bullying, the strong emphasis on sport
and religion,
rather than academic subjects, and the
wrong attitudes that they were learning, as well as
preferential treatment of the wealthier families -
disturbing.

As a result, in the second half of their high school
years, we transferred them to a public secondary college
in the suburbs, with a resultant recognition by the school
of their individual potential and a broader circle of
friends. The end result was a balanced preparation for
adulthood and success in their chosen careers.

Of course, it has a lot to do with the example and the
upbringing that the parents and family give no matter
what education the schools provide.

My husband went to a private religious school who had the
largest percentage of inmates at Pentridge jail. But also,
the highest achievers in research, medicine, law, and
business.

While I do have issues with private school funding that is sidetracking the debate. My issue is not with full fee paying places, which the wealthy can access regardless, but I just want our sector to receive an allocation, based on our numbers, of publicly funded university places that cost the government about $10,000 per year per place from our taxes.

If a public school student, through their efforts and with the resources available to them, manages to be in the top 5% out of 200 students of their year then I’m not sure how fair it is that they would have to compete with 30% of a private school year who have enjoyed vastly superior resources for a publicly funded top-end university place. That sort of an imbalance has nothing to do with IQ or effort.

I recall a Fin Review article discussing the financial implications of parents either paying for an expensive secondary education (to raise ENTER scores) or a full fee based university place for their children (needing a smaller point requirement). My issue is more with the first rather than the second. This a clear example of using wealth to gain greater access to public funds.

If my calling for a fair share of the pie is seen an envy thing then so be it, but that’s like saying Medicare is an attempt at envy mitigation.

The current system is entrenching inequality, something Australians should be constantly striving to combat.

Dear foxy,

Thank you for the support. I’m getting a disappointing sense that Rudd is going to fall well short on this issue. It took me quite a few days to ensure my kids school was going to receive the $200,000 Federal_Schools_Pride money and not the $50,000 that seemed to be in the offing. This was weeks after the local member had proudly announced three of the top private secondary schools in the area were getting the full $200,000. I would love to see stronger parental lobbying power returning to the public system and this initiative might help.

It would of course be best if the government were able to build an education system that met the requirements of all Australians.

Rich or poor. Aspirational or laissez-faire. Intelligent or slow. Willing to learn or simply marking time. Cooperative or disruptive. Placid or aggressive. Pliant or stubborn.

And that's just the parents...

It would of course be best if the government were also able to build health system that met the requirements of all Australians.

Rich or poor. Genetically blessed or genetically vulnerable. Smokers and drinkers or total abstainers. Extreme sports fanatics or couch potatoes. Young or old.

The reality is that each task is beyond the wit of man to design, without allowing an element of personal choice to intervene. A universal system is inevitably open to abuse, unless it is so primitive as to be unusable

The main reason, I would suggest, that people are motivated to work hard and "get on", is to earn money to increase their ability to choose. Whether that choice involves holidays, hummers or hospitals is irrelevant. The motivation is not bragging rights, but choice.

And... guess what?

Once you introduce choice, you let in the forces of envy and destruction.

If I can't have it (choice of school, hospital, teacher, doctor) then no-one else can. So there.

I would personally be very upset to invest heavily in the education of my child, only to find that the standards at university level had to be reduced, in order to cater for a proportion of the less clever.

The question comes down to a simple one. Are we prepared to reward individuals on merit, and allow choice, or must everybody be reduced to a single level, and have no choice at all?

Dear csteele.

Did your public school originally apply
for the full amount - listing how they
were going to use the money?

Our school was told that they had to list
the projects on which the money was
going to be used and it was on that basis
that the amounts given were based.

They ended up getting the full amount.