Monday, January 08, 2007

The cross Labour politicians always have to bear.

It has been announced that the former Education Secretary, Ruth Kelly, is to send her son, who has dyslexia, to a private school where he will receive concentrated attention to help him overcome this handicap.





No one would begrudge the right of any parent to do the best for their children but, unfortunately, when you commit your professional life to serving the Labour Party, there is inevitable public scrutiny - no matter how unfair - whenever private decisions appear to conflict with public aspirations. Tony Blair has expressed his support - well he would, having sent his own children to private schools on religious grounds, and he has never been a creature of socialist dogma anyway - but unfortunately Ms. Kelly will have to face the spotlight of intrusive media 'digging' for that whiff of hypocrisy which the Press likes to throw at Labour politicians.

It has been said that its so much easier to be a Tory. Your beliefs revolve around the rights of the private individual to better him/herself within a capitalist economic system which has minimal interference from the state. So if you have the money what's the problem? "There is no such thing as society, only families" as Margaret Thatcher once famously said in defence of her 'God helps those who help themselves' philosophy.

Labour politicians with sick children and ailing grandparents may feel unfairly stymied by the fact that they are judged by different values - but they are values the Labour Party has embraced since its inception - that we produce a system of state health and state education which provides the finest standards that taxpayers money can afford. The truth is that special needs departments in schools, including that where I used to be a school governor, have been closing at a rapid rate. 117 Special Needs schools have been closed down by the Labour Government since 1997



If, for all the taxes we pay and the billions that go to fund our health and education systems, the service the State provides is NOT good enough for our political masters and mistresses who were in charge of developing these policies, particularly when they are closing schools for the needy, then maybe, despite the distress such pressure obviously places on the likes of Ms.Kelly, we are all entitled to ask - 'Why not?'

No comments: