Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education

HenryG Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:34:11 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

Most people remember Harriet Harman causing controversy when she as a frontbench spokeswoman she sent her children to a selective grammar school school when Labour's policy was at the time against them.

In an interview today she argues that Labour politicians should be free to use private healthcare and send their children to private schools.  Is this a worrying statement from someone aspiring to be Labour's Deputy Leader, or is she reflecting the values of 'middle england'?  Does it matter that our leaders' life decisions are not intune with party's policy and values, or is she again open to charges of hypocrisy?






FROM THE SUNDAY TIMES TODAY: ‘In an interview in The Sunday Times she argues ministers should be free to use private health insurance and send their children to selective schools if they wish, saying that politicians are no different from other parents faced with such decisions.


“Parents make their own choices, whether they are politicians or not,” she said.


The MP for Camberwell & Peckham in London made it clear she had no regrets over how, under the Tory government, she had sent her children to schools that had opted out of local authority control.

She said: “We’ve got a policy for free education, and that’s what we’re in government to do. Parents have got to make their own decisions. No government dictates to any parent what choice they should make.”


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1813812

Is she right?

tags: , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education | 34 comments (34 topical)

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#1)

by grimupnorth on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:57:49 AM GMT

It just gets worse.....well I wasn't going to vote for her anyway.What a bunch of hypocrites...


Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#2)

by otware on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:35:58 AM GMT

She's just blown her chance at being deputy leader. She must be a mental defective if she thought saying this during her deputy leadership campaign would do her any favours. Idiot.


Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#24)

by grassrootsgal on Tue May 22, 2007 at 04:51:12 PM GMT

She didn't say it at all, so put your knives away - see my reply to HenryG below. Read the article itself and you will see she argued no such thing.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#3)

by Glass House on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:43:36 AM GMT

When I was very small, my Mum (my more lefty parent) apparently discussed whether to send me to a private school until my Dad (the Thatcherite Tory) said that his son wasn't "going to a bloody private school".

Funny how these things defy the Left-Righ spectrum.


Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#4)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:02:55 AM GMT

what a way of defying the stereotypes! I must admit here that i go to a private school, and I get a scholarship to go to this school, namely i go there because I have an ASD, and state schools cannot provide for that. I would prefer to go to a state school, so would my parents, but there is a shocking amount of provision for children with ASD's and SEN 'learning disorders'. I must say that it upset me to find out that it was the way Ruth Kelly had sent her dyslexic son to a private school, as it proved to me that up and down the country, there is a lack of provision for children with 'learning disorders' like myself.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#5)

by Glass House on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:14:09 AM GMT

With your private schooling and my Thatcherite Dad, I can feel the LabourHome hordes sharpening their pitchforks and lighting torches as we speak.

;-)


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#6)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:22:58 AM GMT

i know, my message wanted to include 'Please don't throw tomatoes and whisky bottles at me'


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#9)

by HenryG on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:32:59 AM GMT

Luke Akehurst raises interesting questions and finds himself attacking her from the left. Yes, the left. 'Er... aren't there a couple of other principles involved like politicians using the services they preside over rather than opting out of them, and democratic socialists being opposed in principle to selection in education or queue-jumping with private health care?' http://lukeakehurst.blogspot.com/2007/05/words-fail-me.html#links As he says there are some choice comments in the full interview entitled 'Because I'll Make Gordon Look Good'. The whole article is linked below. Brace yourself and decide for yourself. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1812932.ece


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#10)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:39:32 AM GMT

Luke is occasionally very sensible. (He doesn't read this does he? I wouldn't want to upset him!)


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#7)

by otware on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:25:26 AM GMT

Well my dad's a communist and my mum wanted to send me to a private school. I'm glad we didn't have enough money, I didn't like the private school =) Private schools alone aren't the real issue - it's why people feel the need to send their children to them. Why aren't state schools good enough for everybody? These are the issues that need to be addressed.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#8)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:27:53 AM GMT

I feel we need to heavily invest in SEN education for state schools. And I want to go to a state school, but Merton Council bypassed this, and said it would be cheaper to go to a private schoo, (don't ask me, the Tories run the council)


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#11)

by HenryG on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:41:09 AM GMT

Yes I think there is a bit of a difference between Ruth Kelly's decision to send her child to private school (because of his special needs) and the Harman decision (the school was just better). Still a sad reflection on the last ten years. But what about the decisions around private health? That's just queue jumping and widens health inequalities.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#12)

by grimupnorth on Sun May 20, 2007 at 12:02:16 PM GMT

Yes it does. Harman is toast......she was anyway but this makes her burnt toast.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#25)

by grassrootsgal on Tue May 22, 2007 at 04:53:44 PM GMT

Yes, but Harriet's kid was sent to a grammar school when the tories were in power. I wonder how other (catholic) deputy leadership candidates feel about sending their kids to schools such as, say, The London oratory?


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#13)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:19:19 PM GMT

Oh this has to win the prize of the greatest LabourHome thread ever! It sums up the Labour party to a tee.

Is there actually anybody on here who either hasn't been to a private school or hasn't had their parents comtemplating them going to a private school? Did doctordunc go to Harrow? Was Mikael at Rugby? Next you'll be telling me wiseman went to Eton!

Isn't it astonishing how many lefties went to either public school or Oxbridge and yet they still think they have the right to know what's best for poor people and still think they are ambassadors of equality and anti-elitism?

I'll tell you now, my parents would have never been able to afford to send me to public school in a million years and I'm the one who doesn't patronise the poor with stupid outdated old-socialist policies. Considering I've actually come from a poor background myself, I'm certainly never going to be lectured again by any leftie whose was even considered for a private education.

I for one, am fundamentally against private education and private health care (unless it's for cosmetic purposes). That is the fundamental belief of the Labour party - grammar schools are certainly not a problem in my book, but public schools are - it's a case of 'I'm alright Jack' - I can afford to send my kids to a good school, everyone else can go to the slums. I'm a firm believer in the free market and once people reach adulthood, reasonably large inequalities between incomes don't really bother me - but all children are equal since they haven't earnt any money themselves. Education is a right, not a privilege. They should all recieve an equally excellent education and nobody should be able to get an elite education simply because mummy and daddy have a sizable bank balance.


Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#14)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:28:05 PM GMT

Well (apart from your grammar school stuff) mostly people here would agree with your last paragraph. Not sure I understand the first one! At least, not sure I know what you're getting at. I didn't go to Harrow, if that helps?


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#15)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:35:09 PM GMT

Just making a point about how many lefties went to private schools? You're not one of them then?!


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#16)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:37:49 PM GMT

Err... no. I haven't read of many who did on this thread. One, indeed, because a Tory LEA sent him/her there rather than pay for SEN support in the state sector, as far as I've been able to glean... Have I missed something?


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#17)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:21:44 PM GMT

exactly duncan. I'll remind you JR that i'm not from a privelaged background, but the Tories have cut the SEN budget in half in my area, and instead spend it on school vouchers. I find the state sector patronising to SEN/ASD students like myself. I encourage inclusion, but SEN/ASD children are put into seperate units within schools, and the maxim from Animal Farm seems to ring in my head 'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others' , enforcing a form of apartheid in state schools, while not giving the 'mainstream' children any education about the matter, meaning the 'inclusion' turns into 'exclusion'. I had to get rid of a certain Clause 4 in my manifesto too (my statement), getting rid of OT provision, Language therapy, social skills lessons, so that some old, white, men in Merton could save some of their money. I do not need to be patronised by every other student, every school governor, every teacher, and to top it off, Society, by thinking that i think 2+2=3, that i am less important than the 'normal students', that Dyslexia is Asperger's Syndrome, that because i am differnt, i am somehow less acceptable.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#18)

by otware on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:52:34 PM GMT

I would like to add that my mum tried to send me to a private school not for any political reasons. She's just a crazy person who should be in some kind of home. It was a total waste of time because there was never any chance of paying the fees anyway. I wouldn't use the fact that my crazy mother got some strange idea that state schools are shit (because she has a problem with the UK) as 'evidence' that the left are all Old Etonians.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#21)

by edwardgrey on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:14:34 PM GMT

People's parents choose to send them to private school. It wasn't their choice. It does not make their arguments invalid. Arguments should be judged on their merits and your one here is pretty weak. You are relaxed about Grammar Schools (judging children at 11) but anti- Oxbridge (judging adults at 17 or 18). Yet later in your post you say you are relaxed about inequalities amongst adults. This doesn't seem to make a great deal of sense. Note: Just to deny you the opportunity to ascribe the above to my jolly hockey stick's days at Jolly Super Boarding School I went to my local comprehensive school; not that that actually matters.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#28)

by HenryG on Tue May 22, 2007 at 08:58:46 PM GMT

JR how do you put line breaks in your comments? The new format is great, but my oomments just ends up with one block of text.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#29)

by jkitleft on Tue May 22, 2007 at 09:25:23 PM GMT

same here!


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#31)

by Glass House on Wed May 23, 2007 at 09:17:51 AM GMT

You have to put <.p.> (without the dots) in between each paragraph


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#34)

by ComradeNorton on Sat May 26, 2007 at 03:38:01 PM GMT

Having grown up on a council estate and went to a rubbish comprehensive I must confess that I would have loved to have gone to a decent school (private or otherwise). Whilst I appreciate the sentiment behind a distaste for private schooling and healthcare, there are two key points against that: 1) we live in a free society, which includes the freedom to buy yourself or your offspring education or healthcare. You have to take the rough with the smooth in my opinion and it is not for us to dictate. 2) From a pragmatic point of view, if there are resources freed up for everyone else by some buying these "products" then the overall nation is in a better position. Ultimately I would just prefer to see better state schools and don't particularly have any hangups.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#19)

by swatantra on Mon May 21, 2007 at 09:44:52 AM GMT

Well she would wouldn't she? having sent her own son private! Talk about hypocrites in the Party! Dianne Abbott is another classic example.


Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#26)

by grassrootsgal on Tue May 22, 2007 at 04:54:35 PM GMT

Her kid didnt go private - it was a state run grammer school.


[ Parent ]

Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#20)

by MacArthur on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:45:28 AM GMT

Don't forget Cherie's dad Tony Booth and that doyen of the Labour left, Arthur Scargill!! - the list is endless. Hypocrisy is beyond their ken. I work in the NHS. Labour has done its bit by providing record investment, yet waiting lists continue to rise. Unsurprising really, given that those responsible for the rise are also behind some of the "companies" who are drafted in to reduce it, after hours/weekends, and at considerable cost to vous et moi.


Re: Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education (#22)

by grayee on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:09:15 PM GMT

Elfed High school (Buckley) got me into university. Say no more?


HenryG - Fooled by the right wing media (#23)

by grassrootsgal on Tue May 22, 2007 at 04:48:37 PM GMT

HenryG - I know you are a Cruddas supporter, but I think this is a little below the belt. Read the quotes - Harriet did NOT say what the article claims, she merely refused to comment on other Ministers choices. This appears to be a hatchet job - Isabel Oakeshott had clearly decided what she was going to write before setting foot into the office. We have to read the right wing media with a little more discernment than you have shown or the bad guys will win. All the candidates in this election are Labour and care about our Party - I am getting a bit worried that the hard left and right in the campaign are beginning to sling mud around, and it is pretty ugle.


Re: HenryG - Fooled by the right wing media (#27)

by HenryG on Tue May 22, 2007 at 07:38:19 PM GMT

Hi grassrootsgal, I didn't aim to be below the belt, but health and education are issues I and many others in the party feel very strongly about. I remember clearly how much damage Harriet did the party just over ten years ago. I also feel very strongly about lone parent benefits and I remember her cutting them when she go into Government. That's why all this family-friendly policy stuff rings hollow for me. So I'm not a natural Harman fan, but alarm bells ring when I see politicians slipping and sliding around issues that are important to me. I've pasted the bit of the interview down that's relevant. It could be that there was a hatchet job done on her, but if she wants to be deputy leader there will be tougher interviews than that. Anyway here's the section of the interview and people can make up their own minds (as they always do on Labour Home!). 'She may want to close the subject down, but I press her on whether it is okay for politicians to preach one thing in public and practise another in private. After all, such dilemmas go to the heart of what it means to be a government minister. "I would simply say that parents will make er, er, er, choices for their children, and politicians are accountable," she replies falteringly. "We've got a policy for free education, and that's what we're in government to do. Parents have got to make their own decisions. No government actually dictates to any parent what choice they should make. Parents make their own choices, whether they are politicians or not." This sounds like carte blanche for government ministers to do exactly as they please for their own families, whatever their public policy. Where does she draw the line - private health insurance? Apparently that's okay too. "It's not for, you know, the government shouldn't be dictating. I can't really go any further than that. What the government does is decide on policy and try to make sure there are good hospitals and schools. That's what the remit of government is." Given her bitter experience of being labelled a hypocrite, and her lawyer's training, it's strange that she will not, or cannot, articulate her position better. It will be seized on by critics as evidence that she's just not up to the job of deputy leader.'


[ Parent ]

Re: HenryG - Fooled by the right wing media (#30)

by CitizenAndreas on Tue May 22, 2007 at 10:47:49 PM GMT

In this case, Harriet is clearly being put on the spot and was hence unable to be more eloquent with the answer. The journalist is then turning the knife by including the "er, er, er" in the article.

As for the main question, I think she is right. Belief in a parent's right to send their child to a private school is not opposed to a belief in good quality state education for all. After all, a person sending their child to a private school is still going to have to pay the same taxes as a person who sends their child to a state school.

As for private health insurance, I would say the same applies. There will always be limits to what the NHS can provide. Should people be denieds the choice of taking private treatment? Or just Labour politicians.


[ Parent ]

Re: HenryG - Fooled by the right wing media (#32)

by Glass House on Wed May 23, 2007 at 09:19:43 AM GMT

I agree. I certainly wouldn't want to band private schools or hospitals.

The trick is to make schools and hospitals so good that no one would want to spend additional money to go elsewhere.


[ Parent ]

Re: HenryG - Fooled by the right wing media (#33)

by grassrootsgal on Wed May 23, 2007 at 01:00:35 PM GMT

I read the piece in full - it looks like Harriet couldn't find the right form of words to tease apart the choices that individuals make and the choices that Ministers make - but to claim, as the Funday Times article (in the news section) did that Harriet pro actively argued it was ok for Labour Ministers to use private health and education is runnish IMHO - failing to give a clear answer and clearly arguing in favour of something are very different things!


[ Parent ]

Harman Says OK to Private Health and Education | 34 comments (34 topical)