"Reigning government" - that says it all really doesn't it? We used to have SERVING governments.Originally posted by krizon@Jan 8 2007, 12:14 PM
It's the government which provides State facilities, and as a member of the reigning government, Mrs Kelly is demonstrating that she doesn't have the levels of confidence that the government has in providing these services.
It makes me larf when I see friends - or their children - who still vote Labour tying themselves in knots about schools for their kids. Any parent who fails to send their kid to the very best school they can find/afford, on ideological grounds, is failing in their duty to their child, imo. Children are not the property of the state - yet. Btw I fully supported comprehensive education when it came in, and voted accordingly - I now think it's been a disaster. It's also hugely augmented the class divide - eg my parents were just about prepared to let me go to a grammar school; they would NEVER have sent me to a comp. I might have finished up as narrow minded as my sister...
In this case, as I understand it the local council recommended this school to Ruth Kelly [for whom I normally have no time at all] on the grounds that they could not accomodate her child in a mainstream school. We must all remember that there is a terrible culture of bullying in schools now [it was rare in my day] and this impacts most of all on the disabled, esp 'slow learners'