Maybe Private Schools are just Better.

Today I read in the Sunday Times, under an article headed "Elite Public Schools Tighten Grip on Oxford", that last year, Oxford admitted twice the number of students from private schools than they had in 2001, while the number of state school admissions had barely increased. This revelation caused outrage in certain quarters. Of course, it must be the "old school tie" network at work once again, those damned private school people must be receiving preferential treatment, Oxford can't be encouraging state school children to apply as hard as they should be. These are the only explanations.

Well, I'm going to say something here that, while it may be unpopular, and may cause some people to brand me as an upper-class, public school elitist, I should say anyway, for balance:

Private schools might be better than state schools. True, there are many good state schools, St. Olave's, for instance. However, most of the top schools in the country are private schools, private schools are the ones that prepare their students the most for the interviews and the rest of the admissions process.

This is not to say that talented state school pupils shouldn't go to Oxbridge. Of course they should, everyone who can cope with the workload and benefit from it should go, and they should be encouraged to do so. However, there are two problems.

The first is that there are many people in state schools that just aren't up to it. Yes, it would be wonderful if our state education system made everyone good enough for a place at one of the country's top universities, but they don't and we should stop pretending that they do.

The second is that you can't force people to apply to Oxford or Cambridge. If they dont' think they can do it, or they don't want to, they won't. Now, perhaps more should be done to convince the ablest state school pupils to apply, but ultimately, the choice is up to them.

Ultimately, it isn't the universities fault that large numbers of privately educated people get places. To say so is ridiculous, of course there isn't this conspiracy against state school pupils to keep them down-trodden and enslaved to the bourgeoisie, or whatever Marx would have said. No, it's the governent's fault for cocking-up the state education system so badly while trying to encourage positive discrimination in universities. University places shoudl be offered on ability and ability alone and, to their credit, I believe that this is generally the case. We should stop caring about where the students come from.

As a final note, as a public school pupil, perhaps I'm a little biased, but I struggle to see how my socio-economic background means that I don't deserve a place at Oxford. In short, why the hell shouldn't Etonians go to Oxford?

SHAME!

Well, in the last post we covered financially bankrupt, so I suppose it was only right to look at morally bankrupt as well. Today, I read the headline

"UKIP Bars Disabled Candidate from Prime Seat"

Could this just be the Independent going on about positive discrimination? No, it turns out that the reason was that the man, a Mr. Jack Biggs, was indeed rejected by UKIP because he was disabled. The local UKIP chairman, Vicki Sharp, wrote the following to Mr. Biggs:

"In view of your being registered disabled you will not be able to stand as a full candidate for Ukip." She went on to say that they would welcome him as a paper candidate (that is, a candidate whose name is on the ballot paper, but is not expected to win or campaign). Paper candidates are usually only used in unwinnable seats, but this was (tragically) a winnable seat for UKIP.

Now, had Nigel Farage, UKIP's leader, had half a brain, he might have said "Yes, this is a disgrace, I apologise on behalf of the party for the awful treatment of Mr. Biggs etc. etc." But he didn't, did he?

No, what he said was:

"He was trying to get us to say that he couldn't be a target candidate and to use that, and to try and blackmail the party into not standing against his daughter, who was a current serving councillor. I don't think he has behaved very honourably."

Honourably? What the hell does Nigel Farage know about honour? Not only does his party reject a candidate on the grounds of disability without so much as a murmer of dissent from him, he then goes and slurs said candidate's name in yet another pathetic attempt to portray UKIP as the long-suffering victims of other people's malice.

Please, could the Electoral Commission and the Courts hurry up and make them pay the £300,000 they owe so we can be rid of this shameful excuse for a political party.