“Only through education can the doors of countless possibilities be opened”
Nitin Namdeo, creative writer and blogger
An egalitarian approach will always be challenged by education. The UK Labour Party has struggled throughout its existence with the challenge of educational choice: several of its leaders, including Tony Blair, had the benefit of a private school education, and their attempts to introduce a universal comprehensive educational system have been steadfastly unsuccessful.
It's not just an issue of parental wealth: good parents will always seek the best for their children, and they will move home as necessary to make sure that they’re in the right catchment area for good schools.
So in our Thought for this week, after a quick look at the educational background of our current political leaders, we put forward some ideas on how to reconcile the need for opportunity for all with the need for individual freedom, particularly that of parental choice.
The era of Eton-educated prime ministers might have ended for now, but the educational pedigree of current leaders of both Conservative and Labour Parties remain strong. Rishi Sunak had the benefit of a Winchester education before going on to Oxford and then Stanford University in the United States, while Sir Keir Starmer benefited from education at Reigate Grammar School, then a voluntary-aided selective school, before going on to Leeds University and then Oxford.
In both cases they benefited from strong family interest and, although finance was clearly a strong factor for Rishi Sunak, good parental choice had much to do with building their life chances. And so it should be: utopian socialist ideas about uniform blanket comprehensive education simply don't work.
The challenge for young people today is that family structures are becoming increasingly unstable, as we commented on 15th August. The fact that the majority are growing up outside traditional family structures means that insufficient parental attention is being given for so many, and life-spanning opportunities are being lost as a result. This may explain why the numbers of looked-after children and young people have risen over the past two decades, with all its associated educational and social instability.
How might a more egalitarian form of capitalism respond to this challenge? There is no doubt that its focus on the future, long-term as well as short-term, would help by identifying issues such as social breakdown, and showing how respect for others must include respect for our children and grandchildren in addition to our own contemporaries.
The issue of finance could be solved relatively easily by the issuance of educational vouchers for those unable to contribute for their own children’s education, on the basis that they could be redeemed at any educational establishment, whether public or private.
The challenge of geographical selection is much harder, however; parents will always seek the best catchment area for good schools. It illustrates why a fair education system must be considered from an inter-generational perspective, not just looking at the young people themselves.
The changes and chances of life will always impact educational opportunities; individual choice and particularly parental guidance will always play the major part. The main focus must remain to break the cycle of deprivation to which Sir Keith Joseph referred in the 1970s, and which was so graphically described in the epilogue to Antoine de Ste-Exupery’s book ‘Wind, Sand and Stars’
In the meantime, let's hope the combination of Winchester, Oxford and Stanford provides the basis for wise and strong servant leadership from Rishi Sunak.
Gavin Oldham OBE
Share Radio