Sir, – John Thompson (October 15th) said that the €100 million annual payment by the Government for teachers’ salaries in fee-paying secondary schools is “a wonderful cash gift” for the parents of children attending them.
The facts tell a different story. In a written answer to the Dáil on November 29th 2011, Minister for Education Ruairí Quinn stated that if the 26,219 students then in fee-paying schools were to enrol in schools fully funded by the State it would cost the Department of Education an additional €829.42 per student: €168.42 to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio from 20:1 to 19:1 and €661 in per-capita grants per annum.
It is certainly not, as Mr Thompson says, a “massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich”. By avoiding this cost, the Government is getting a €22 million subsidy every year from middle-class parents like me. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Whether deliberately or otherwise, Tony O’Rourke (October 16th) misunderstands the point that “fee-paying parents are subsidising the State”. No one is suggesting those parents are motivated by a desire to save the State money – Mr O’Rourke is obviously correct that their aim is to give their own children the best possible start in life.
However, regardless of their motivation, those parents are subsidising the State by choosing not to rely on the State to fully fund their children’s education. As Hugh Lavery pointed out (October 13th), if all State funding to private schools was withdrawn, then the fees would increase substantially and a significant number of parents would have to move their children to non-fee-paying schools. The result would undoubtedly be that the State’s total costs would go up significantly, rather than down.
I understand the argument that society may be more equitable without fee-paying schools. However, the question is how much more tax are people willing to pay so the State can fully fund education for everyone? Or maybe the answer is even more cuts to public spending in other areas? Or maybe just shoe-horn additional children into the existing infrastructure with no increase in funding, so that everyone loses out? Except the genuinely wealthy of course, as they will still be able to afford the fees at the few remaining private schools and/or pay for private tuition outside of school hours. – Yours, etc,