Should state subsidisation of Irish private schools continue?

Rebelheart

Every year the government of Ireland redirects over €100 million of revenue from the state school system and hands it over to privately-owned bodies (usually religious orders) to run fee-paying schools. This is an astonishing amount of money which could do wonders if kept in our state education system. The transfer of this wealth is rarely highlighted in the media, despite the enormous cutbacks which state schools now have to endure. It is as if this subsidy is a sacred cow and in very many respects it is: a large number of the politicians, journalists and the like who could change this system send their own children to fee-paying schools and thus directly benefit from this (enormous) redistribution of wealth away from state-owned schools.

Like Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael (through its education spokesperson Brian Hayes) has made it clear it will continue to redirect this huge sum of money away from needy state schools (Should State payments to fee-paying schools be ended?)

Irish Times:
Fee Paying schools got €100 million subsidy from State last year.

TUI:
Taxpayer Continues to Subsidise Fee Paying Schools While Cutting Disadvantaged Provision


How can anybody justify this system in Ireland in 2010?

ejmaztec

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

If they can't survive without public funding, they shouldn't exist.

RobbieTheRobber

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

These schools all have the finest of facilities, which we as tax payers are subsidising through these payments.

I have seen numerous community schools struggle for ten years and more to get funding to take children from what are suppossedly temporary buildings into permanant structures, yet the government can pay €100 million to schools which do not need this funding to maintain them.


RtR

Outraged!

Minstrel27

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Absolutely not. Sea rescue in the South East is being limited to a daytime service because apparently the government cannot afford it so they shouldn't be able to afford this.

The_Minister

My understanding is that they get as much as public schools do, not any more.

They use this money as normal, to provide the basics, then use the fees to improve the facilities at the schools, to make sure the kids get as good an education as possible.

The state should finance each school to a minimum level, and if parents want to pay extra after that, it's their choice.

ChocolateSauce

For as long as the Irish state and by extension the Irish people mandate that the Catholic Church runs the overwhelming majority of the schools in the state, they must be prepared to assist people to send their children to a non-Catholic school so that their children aren't indoctrinated into a faith which isn't theirs. It's written into law that the state must assist, and it is the right thing to do under the circumstances.

Now, kick out the CC and secularise the schools, then you've a different situation; then private schools should be cut off. Until then....

Edit: for that matter, there's no such thing as a "public school" in Ireland; a public school would be owned and operated by the state. There's only private schools which the state pays for entirely, and private schools which the state pays for partially.

The_Minister

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

These schools all have the finest of facilities, which we as tax payers are subsidising through these payments.

We pay for the teachers - we pay no more than we would if these were public schools (in fact, overall, I think we may pay less).

The 'finest of facilities' are paid for by the fees of the parents.

Bonito

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

:eek: They're subsidised aswel as having private fees!!!!!

Well, you learn something everyday!

TheZohanS

The_Minister wrote: »

My understanding is that they get as much as public schools do, not any more.

They use this money as normal, to provide the basics, then use the fees to improve the facilities at the schools, to make sure the kids get as good an education as possible.

The state should finance each school to a minimum level, and if parents want to pay extra after that, it's their choice.

+1

If these private schools didn't exist the State would still end up funding the students and their education.

menoscemo

The state pay a certain number of teachers (less per student than in state schools), the secretary and the principal. They do not pay for cleaning maintenance, buildings etc, so Fee paying school pupils cost significantly less to the state than public school pupils.
If the state were to stop paying teachers in fee paying schools the fees would go from €3,000-€4,000 school per year to €15k+(as they are in England). The schools would then lose 90% or more of their pupils to the free education system and either close or become state funded schools themselves.

The point is that it is not a question of whether or not the state can afford to Subsidise private education, the fact is they cannot afford the alternative!

ejmaztec

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

TheZohan wrote: »

+1

If these private schools didn't exist the State would still end up funding the students and their education.

Yes, but they would be spread around the whole public system, so it probably wouldn't make an awful lot of difference, if any, to the cost to the state.

dvpower

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

The_Minister wrote: »

My understanding is that they get as much as public schools do, not any more.

They use this money as normal, to provide the basics, then use the fees to improve the facilities at the schools, to make sure the kids get as good an education as possible.

The state should finance each school to a minimum level, and if parents want to pay extra after that, it's their choice.

I wouldn't have a problem with this as long as it is the parents choice. So they shouldn't be allowed to refuse entry to a child if the parent chooses not to pay extra.
If you are getting public funds you should have to be open to the public.

sink

The state doesn't subsidise private schools. They get the same amount of state money per pupil as any other school in the country. The parents pay extra for improved facilities, extra teachers etc,. The parents of private school students are also tax payers and contribute their fair share.

amacachi

Why let the fact that having Fee-paying schools "subsidised" by the government actually saves the exchequer money get in the way of some good old-fashioned complaining about rich people?

Sleepy

I'd rather see private schools banned tbh.

ejmaztec

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

amacachi wrote: »

Why let the fact that having Fee-paying schools "subsidised" by the government actually saves the exchequer money get in the way of some good old-fashioned complaining about rich people?

We're trying to save people money. There must be a large number of parents who, thanks to their social status, feel compelled to send their children to private schools to avoid being whispered about by their equals.

They're probably in hock up to their eyeballs in an attempt to keep up the charade.:eek:

blackbox

The state doesn't really subsidise the private schools.

It pays no more for each pupil than it would if they went to a public school.

The fees go to pay for improved facilities (technology, sports) and sometimes for extra teachers.

It would be great if the state was able to pay for the higher standard of facilities/teaching for every child, but the fact is, it can't.

However, it is the right of any person to spend their hard earned (and taxed) income any way they choose. If a parent chooses to do the best they can for their children, then why shouldn't they pay extra for education.

If they prefer, they can instead spend the money on a new car or trip to Cheltenham or anything else. (Off topic, I'd prefer to see education subsidised than horse racing! - or than the importation of cars!)

Dudess

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

The_Minister wrote: »

The state should finance each school to a minimum level, and if parents want to pay extra after that, it's their choice.

I don't think private schools should get a cent from the state - they are not a necessity.

It's also naive in the case of private schools to believe "if you pay extra for it, it'll be better" - not necessarily true at all. First of all, teachers are the same anywhere - there aren't any extra qualifications required to teach in private schools, secondly, there are plenty of state schools with superb facilities.

Glenster

Let's look at the facts:

Blackrock, St Michaels, Belvo, Gonzaga, Rockwell, Holy Child Killiney, Loreto Dalkey, Mount Merrion

Community College Esker, Mount Temple, St Fintans, Castleknock Community College, Our Lady's Secondary Templemore

The facts speak for themselves.

If fee paying schools were abolished and absolute equality enforced your kids might be forced to go to one of these schools.

Rebelheart

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

amacachi wrote: »

Why let the fact that having Fee-paying schools "subsidised" by the government actually saves the exchequer money get in the way of some good old-fashioned complaining about rich people?

Have you got evidence for this claim? If the Department of Education had that €100 million, which is in fact a subsidy from the taxpayer to fee-paying schools, to invest in developing state schools and their human and physical infrastructure the state would have substantially greater economies of scale and thus be able to make that €100 million go much farther.

It's all about economies of scale.

As it stands, the government is handing money to fee-paying schools which allows those schools to remain in the hands of religious orders (in the vast number of cases). Take away that subsidy, and religious control of these schools collapses.

Dudess

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Glenster wrote: »

Let's look at the facts:

Blackrock, St Michaels, Belvo, Gonzaga, Rockwell, Holy Child Killiney, Loreto Dalkey, Mount Merrion

Community College Esker, Mount Temple, St Fintans, Castleknock Community College, Our Lady's Secondary Templemore

The facts speak for themselves.

If fee paying schools were abolished and absolute equality enforced your kids might be forced to go to one of these schools.

I don't follow you...

Rebelheart

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

amacachi wrote: »

Why let the fact that having Fee-paying schools "subsidised" by the government actually saves the exchequer money get in the way of some good old-fashioned complaining about rich people?

Reality check: If the parents of students in these fee-paying schools were genuinely "rich people" they would be paying for their own education - all of it, not waiting for handouts from the state for their "private" school education. The real fear of these supposedly "rich" people is of course that if the state withdraws this €100 million subsidy the parents of most students will not be able to afford the €20,000 p.a. fee for sending their children to a school which now has a fee of @ €5,000 p.a. In other words, they have not got the financial muscle to support their aspirations.

Dudess

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

amacachi wrote: »

good old-fashioned complaining about rich people?

That one's always thrown out on these threads - not true. In fairness, at least you didn't use the phrase "typical Irish begrudgery"...

El Siglo

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

This is why I love free market economics, let the state pull the plug and hope for the 'invisible hand' to take over!:D

dvpower

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Glenster wrote: »

Let's look at the facts:

Blackrock, St Michaels, Belvo, Gonzaga, Rockwell, Holy Child Killiney, Loreto Dalkey, Mount Merrion

Community College Esker, Mount Temple, St Fintans, Castleknock Community College, Our Lady's Secondary Templemore

The facts speak for themselves.

They're not facts. That's just a list of schools.
You promised us facts:mad:

landsleaving

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

But if they weren't subsidised we'd never have ledges the likes of Drico on the rugby pitch loike. I mean come on, everyone knows winning the 6 nations ended the recession last year. They clearly pay for themselves.











P.s. - if anyone takes the above seriously, it quite clearly shows that fee paying schools don't offer a better education.

amacachi

Rebelheart wrote: »

Reality check: If the parents of students in these fee-paying schools were genuinely "rich people" they would be paying for their own education - all of it, not waiting for handouts from the state for their "private" school education. The real fear of these supposedly "rich" people is of course that if the state withdraws this €100 million subsidy the parents of most students will not be able to afford the €20,000 p.a. fee for sending their children to a school which now has a fee of @ €5,000 p.a. In other words, they have not got the financial muscle to support their aspirations.

As I understand it the money "private" schools are given is certainly no more than any other, and I'm pretty sure it's a lot less. If they stopped charging fees it'd cost the government just as much, if not more to run them and the quality in those schools would drop.

RobbieTheRobber

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

These schools all have the finest of facilities, which we as tax payers are subsidising through these payments.



I have seen numerous community schools struggle for ten years and more to get funding to take children from what are suppossedly temporary buildings into permanant structures, yet the government can pay €100 million to schools which do not need this funding to maintain them.
RtR
Outraged!

Ha,your having a laugh.

During my time in a private school we had to do most classes in prefabs while waiting for permanant structures,the place was a kip.No doubt you have never even been on the grounds of a private school and your argument is based on the assumption that the facilties are great.

They are still waiting for government funding and im out of school 4 years.
Tbh I dont know what the fees paid for because if they had been used solely by the school then the building would be finished because they would have paid for it.

They dont pay for the teachers because Im pretty sure the government pays for them.

So I have no idea what the fees cover.

SugarHigh

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

The_Minister wrote: »

My understanding is that they get as much as public schools do, not any more.

They use this money as normal, to provide the basics, then use the fees to improve the facilities at the schools, to make sure the kids get as good an education as possible.

The state should finance each school to a minimum level, and if parents want to pay extra after that, it's their choice.

But are they not also operating as a business?

Dudess

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Alessandra Jolly Pekinese wrote: »

Ha,
During my time in a private school we had to do most classes in prefabs while waiting for permanant structures,the place was a kip.

Do you feel your private school education was beneficial and worth all the fees so?

Dudess

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Dudess wrote: »

Do you feel your private school education was beneficial and worth all the fees so?

Well I made good friends and had a good time so yes.
I suppose the main benefit is that the classes are usually smaller than a public school and this helps regards education.

Im in college and 99% of my year are.The school is in the top 20 on the Irish times leaving cert list,so clearly the education is better as the result of smaller classes,not better teachers imo.

Also you have to remember that rugby is associated with private schools in Dublin and alot of parents send their kids to the schools because they want them to play rugby and in many cases continue the family tradition.

Also the networking contacts you make in private schools are invaluable.Im sure that statement will be met with annoyance but its true.

Would I send my kids to a private school?
If I could afford to most definitely.

I think private schools get a bad rep because people think of Ross O'carroll Kelly type characters emerging,this is simply not the case.You obviously get a few arseholes but the majority of people are nice..

Dudess

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Alessandra Jolly Pekinese wrote: »

Well I made good friends and had a good time so yes.

In fairness, the above has nothing to do with the fact it's a private school and could be applied to a graduate of any school, but fair points otherwise.

Rebelheart

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Glenster wrote: »

Let's look at the facts:

Blackrock, St Michaels, Belvo, Gonzaga, Rockwell, Holy Child Killiney, Loreto Dalkey, Mount Merrion

Community College Esker, Mount Temple, St Fintans, Castleknock Community College, Our Lady's Secondary Templemore

The facts speak for themselves.

If fee paying schools were abolished and absolute equality enforced your kids might be forced to go to one of these schools.

Facts? Then there's Coláiste Eoin and Coláiste Iosagáin....or the fact that 33 of the top 50 "feeder schools" to university are not fee-paying....

melekalikimaka

the private system is subsidised by the PARENTS not the government... Just because you are required to pay the subsidy does not mean the funding should be cut, too many public school chip on shoulders here, alot of public schools ASK for subsidies from parents... do you think the government should take these into account and deducted the donated money from their grants?

I think not

melekalikimaka

Rebelheart wrote: »

33 of the top 50 "feeder schools" to university are not fee-paying[/url]....

what percentage of schools in the country are private, large but finite number of monkeys ring a bell

Fratton Fred

I am morally opposed to fee paying schools as I believe that all kids, regardless of their background, should have the best possible education.

However, if I am not happy with the school choices for my daughter, I will send her to a private school. Luckily the school we have planned for her has a good reputation.

Fratton Fred

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I am morally opposed to fee paying schools as I believe that all kids, regardless of their background, should have the best possible education.

However, if I am not happy with the school choices for my daughter, I will send her to a private school. Luckily the school we have planned for her has a good reputation.

What?
Contradiction much.

The_Minister

Dudess wrote: »

I don't think private schools should get a cent from the state - they are not a necessity.

So either parents pay every penny and the state contributes nothing, or they have to go fully public?

If parents are willing to 'top-up' the funds available for their child's education, why shouldn't they be allowed?

RayM

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

I'd much rather see that €100million (and a whole lot more) go to schools that genuinely need it. You know, the total shit-holes that have 40 kids crammed into prefabricated, damp, rat-infested classrooms, as opposed to the schools with their own private swimming pools, low class numbers and well-equipped music rooms.

It seems a bit shit (actually, it's totally unjustifiable) that parents of children going to disadvantaged schools are effectively subsidising the privileged few, who can afford to give their kids "that all-important head-start" in life.

As for banning private schools - perhaps if there was a bit of genuine equality in this country, and the rich and powerful had no choice but to send their kids to state run schools along with everyone else, the general quality of them would improve very quickly, thus negating the "need" for private education.

The_Minister

Alessandra Jolly Pekinese wrote: »

What?
Contradiction much.

Not really.

He wants, on principle, to send his child to a publix school, but recognises that if the only ones he can get her into are ****, he will shell out so that his ideals don't ruin her reputation.

Dudess

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

melekalikimaka wrote: »

too many public school chip on shoulders here

It's not necessarily because of having a chip on the shoulder at all. Why is that always assumed on these threads?

The_Minister wrote: »

So either parents pay every penny and the state contributes nothing, or they have to go fully public?

Yes - as I said, these schools are not necessary.

byhookorbycrook

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

Alessandra Jolly Pekinese wrote: »

.

Im in college and 99% of my year are.The school is in the top 20 on the Irish times leaving cert list,so clearly the education is better as the result of smaller classes,not better teachers imo.

The so-called top twentylist is so badly skewed it is almost funny. Well off parents send a lot of children to a nearby university. Define a good education??
Is a school that helps a child with special needs pass the Leaving a better school than one that sends a child from a background where there is support, money for grinds etc. on the minimum grades to some uni course?Which is of the greater worth to us as a society??

melekalikimaka

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

The so-called top twentylist is so badly skewed it is almost funny.

this is very true and has been brought up countless times... it means nothing... it includes repeats

byhookorbycrook

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

The so-called top twentylist is so badly skewed it is almost funny. Well off parents send a lot of children to a nearby university. Define a good education??
Is a school that helps a child with special needs pass the Leaving a better school than one that sends a child from a background where there is support, money for grinds etc. on the minimum grades to some uni course?Which is of the greater worth to us as a society??

All I said was I went and would send my kids to a private school because I feel they will get a better education and will emerge with alot more than simply an education once finished.

Im not getting into a debate on how they benefit society.

sagat2

Since the people who send their kids to private schools in general pay a lot more in taxes than those who don't then where is the problem exactly? You want to take the 100 million away from private schools then great. Lets make up for it by having the wealthy pay the same amount of tax towards education as the average peasant, that way they can afford the higher fees private schools will have to charge to cover the shortfall.

That 100 million is easily covered by the extra taxes the people who send their kids to private school pay above those that don't so it's not like Mick the toilet cleaner is personally paying for the private schools.

Rebelheart

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

melekalikimaka wrote: »

what percentage of schools in the country are private, large but finite number of monkeys ring a bell

According to The Irish Times on 29 September 2009, there are 28,000 students in 55 fee-paying schools in the state named Ireland. Yet out of the top fifty schools which supply universities, a mere 17 of these 55 fee-paying schools feature - i.e. most of the fee-paying schools cannot even get into that list. If, as you say, fee-paying schools are so substantially better than state schools, it seems odd that even a majority of the above list of "feeder schools" is not fee-paying.

And these are measurements which are designed to suit fee-paying schools. A far more accurate measurement of the success of a school measures how much the students have improved from the day they arrived in the school. There are far greater success stories under this measurement in the state schools.

Rebelheart

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

sagat2 wrote: »

You want to take the 100 million away from private schools then great. Lets make up for it by having the wealthy pay the same amount of tax towards education as the average peasant....That 100 million is easily covered by the extra taxes the people who send their kids to private school pay above those that don't so it's not like Mick the toilet cleaner is personally paying for the private schools.

Keep going ...:rolleyes:

melekalikimaka

Rebelheart wrote: »

And these are measurements which are designed to suit fee-paying schools.

how ya work that one out?

brianthebard

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

The_Minister wrote: »

So either parents pay every penny and the state contributes nothing, or they have to go fully public?

If parents are willing to 'top-up' the funds available for their child's education, why shouldn't they be allowed?

Most (I'm assuming all) parents are expected to 'top up' their children's schools funds because there is usually a shortfall. If the government took the private school subsidy away from them then it could be used to at least partially plug this gap.

melekalikimaka

brianthebard wrote: »

Most (I'm assuming all) parents are expected to 'top up' their children's schools funds because there is usually a shortfall. If the government took the private school subsidy away from them then it could be used to at least partially plug this gap.

and just because the parents of private school students are 'precieved' as being rich, they should foot the full bill?

Did you ever think parents maybe send the children there so the children have better opportunities, better facilities and smaller classes, I know alot of families that struggled to keep kids in private education for this reason. Its terribly ignorant of people thinking its all ok to drop the funding, and the private schools need it more, the government is obliged to pay per head an amount for education, if parents want to top up this amount to ensure the education of their child, so be it

Rebelheart

Yes, it is correct to direct this €100 million to private schools every year

melekalikimaka wrote: »

how ya work that one out?

Because, for starters:

1) they track academic-orientated schools, which is the type of education that all of the fee-paying schools were established to advance.

2) they do no take into account social disadvantage; it's easy to say a child with no financial obstacles who gets into uni is a "success". He/she had a lot of things on his/her side.

3) they do not define success in relative terms: if a pupil enters 1st year from a family which has been marked by generational unemployment and social problems but comes out with his Leaving Cert and acceptance into an IT he has unquestionably been more successful than the son of a barrister who gets into Arts in UCD. "Success", like most things, is relative. These measurements do not measure this.