Your funny and I love watching Labour slowly die.

I see the logic in how closing private schools would improve the chances of the equally gifted pupils in state schools. They will be among more children with non financial backing from their parents.

I’m not sure how it will improve the chances of the less gifted, but I guess there’ll never be impressive names on cvs again that mean a lot of the ones with comprehensives on get chucked in the bin as a way of filtering, even if they’d rather not filter that way.

It won’t reach perfection though as you’ll still get families moving into pricey areas to be among the families aiming for the same school. Inner city kids will be screwed for life still.

I see why Diane Abbott backs it for a few reasons.

Her kid(s) get free education around same kids in its initial stages.
It has to be a complete closure for it to work. One pair of parents can’t make a stand against privatised schools they disagree with if they’re in an area where if they put their kids in state schools there’s very little parental focus on education.

She is a complete idiot but you can still be against something even if you currently go along with it, especially if what you propose currently isn’t a good option because it needs what you propose (closing private schools) for it to be successful.

The people who would or should be worried are those in areas with lots of state schools and a very small choice of private schools who scrimp and save for private education and their kids win scholarships, or wealthy(ier) parents with not particularly clever kids at all (but benefit in life because they sound well spoken, clever, smart), which leads me onto a big big benefit of private schools or being around middle class children...

They sound the part most comprehensive children never will.

This proposal could work and be the biggest change in social mobility. Depends on if enough higher earning labour voters think or see the bigger picture rather than just the immediate wishes for their kids.

I wonder how it would affect the gentrification of London. Not a lot probably. Most office professionals take their kids to the suburbs away from the teenage problems in London.

COYP

That's how Labour conference works. Each CLP elects delegates who then can propose and vote on policies which can be included in Labour's manifesto.

It's obviously caused controversy, and you are entitled to disagree that this is the best way for a party to function, but it is undoubtedly democratic, and IMO much fairer than having policies decided by think tanks.

If punk ever happened I'd be preaching the law, instead of listenin to Lydon lecture BBC4

I see your point that he/it’s a movement for the future, because he’s not cutting it enough now is he, especially through austerity, May, Boris, Brexit (although therein lies another party voting 66/33% rough split is it?).

But what when a lot of these trend followers get a house, mortgage, children and make the gradual move across the political spectrum? A lot of people vote conservative for the one reason (personal finance) and not much more. Young people never think they’ll age but they do, and change their views, or their personal needs change.

COYP

Agree, but did the thousands at the festival all vote for it, or all privately educated adults around the country (would have) voted for it? We’ll see.

Many of them will value what they’ve been privileged with and how it has and will provide more opportunities, especially if they’re no different to state school educated adults apart from the private school accent. Or I suppose lots may think they’ll never afford the fees so they may as well vote to close them down.

The 7% in private schools who become voters is quite a lot in GE’s, especially as there’ll be quite a few in marginal constituencies.

COYP

Crack on you vote Labour! PMSL