andsome Posted January 8, 2007 Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 Yet another example of one rule for wealthy ministers and ex ministers, and another one for the rest of us. I am keen to see how government supporters on the forum will go about supporting Ruth Kelly on this one. At a time when the government is busy closing down special needs schools, with the argument that ALL children should go to their local state school for main stream education, yet another ex minister has chose to send a child to a private school. The excuse is that the child has special needs because of being dyslexic. Well so do thousands of other peoples children.Do as we say, NOT as we do. Remember that B'liar did the same thing, and his child was not even handicapped in any way.HERE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanHo Posted January 8, 2007 Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 So what?I would not blame anyone for trying to do the best for their child. I gave up nit-picking criticisms of the government long ago. You can't make a difference so why work up a fizz about it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thos Posted January 8, 2007 Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 Yet another example of one rule for wealthy ministers and ex ministers, and another one for the rest of us. I am keen to see how government supporters on the forum will go about supporting Ruth Kelly on this one. At a time when the government is busy closing down special needs schools, with the argument that ALL children should go to their local state school for main stream education, yet another ex minister has chose to send a child to a private school. The excuse is that the child has special needs because of being dyslexic. Well so do thousands of other peoples children.Do as we say, NOT as we do. Remember that B'liar did the same thing, and his child was not even handicapped in any way.HEREWhy on earth are you always inviting "government supporters" to comment. If you want a government point of view listen to what the government says and take it or leave it. If any individual broadly supports a left wing viewpoint, it doesn't mean they have to defend every action of every individual left wing politician.Thos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanHo Posted January 8, 2007 Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 What would really tickle my fancy would be an announcement that the government are standardising on Windows Defender to block malware from reaching them. That would get andsome going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted January 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 So what?I would not blame anyone for trying to do the best for their child. I gave up nit-picking criticisms of the government long ago. You can't make a difference so why work up a fizz about it?Of course people do the best for their children. It is surely though, rather two faced for someone who has been responsible with others in the government, for closing off access to special needs education for the children of those who cannot afford to pay, to pay for her own child. Special needs schools are being closed down, and we are told by the government that this is because it is their opinion that ALL children should be educated in the state system. I don't think that this is nitpicking. If you have a handicapped child then the ability to pay should not be the criteria as to whether or not that child has the best available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirley Crabtree Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Anyone who refers to our PM as B'liar is a twit...That's sooooo 90'sAndsome is just upset that his own "special needs" were never spotted 'til he hit 70 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.