On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:07:22 +0000 (GMT), John Cartmell
wrote:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
But many schools would be destroyed as a result.

This is a pessimistic view.

It's the downside of your proposal. It's rather a large and expensive downside
- and you expect the taxpayer and the individuals hit by it to pay the cost
whilst you and your mates pick up all those extra profits going into private
schools.


You're still missing the point and are using emotive arguments. I
haven't said anything about profits or extra profits, only the
separation of funding from delivery. I already said that the state
investment in education would remain the same.

The advantage would be that the users would have the opportunity to
choose between different schools of which the state might run some and
other organisations might run others.




--

..andy