Well it accords with my views so I am smiling...... Taking a state school place when you could afford to pay fees is immoral and like taking food from the mouths of the poor. I have always said so particularly to those rich parents who use state schools who think sending children to private schools is the worst moral wrong.
Quote below from the Sunday Times article on this:
"Dr Anthony Seldon, master at Wellington College, also argues that private schools should have to reserve a quarter of their places for children from the poorest families.
In a report to be published by the Social Market Foundation on Wednesday, Seldon says adopting the plans would save the country money at a time of austerity.
It would also help to close the huge, wasteful and “unfair” gap between the academic achievements and career prospects of the richest and poorest children in the UK because the money raised could be used to pay for more teachers and smaller classes.
“We have to end this unfair farce whereby middle-class parents dominate the best schools, when they could afford to pay, and even boast of their moral superiority in using the state system when all they are doing is squeezing out the poor from the best schools,” said Seldon.
He said he has discussed the plans with politicians from both main parties. Lord Adonis, the former Labour minister for schools, is due to attend the event on Wednesday.
Seldon said the principle of paying for state-backed education has already been established in universities, which now charge students £9,000 a year for degree-level teaching which was previously free. In his report Seldon says all families with an income of more than £80,000 a year — the average income of the top 10% of the population when combined — should be charged if their child attends an oversubscribed state school. “The more the parents earn, the more they should pay,” he says.
Fees would also be higher at the most popular schools under the proposals. “Grammar schools, popular academies and comprehensives would be the most expensive schools,” says Seldon, who points out that only 3% of pupils at the country’s 166 grammar schools come from the poorest homes.
Families earning more than £200,000 a year with children at the most oversubscribed schools would pay the most — up to £20,000 a year for a secondary school place and £15,000 a year for a primary school place, equivalent to the fees for a private school.
The move is needed, says Seldon, because social mobility has stalled in the UK as a result of the unequal educational opportunities offered to children.
He points out that privately educated pupils are much more likely to be accepted at a leading university and to land a job in one of the top professions, such as law or medicine, than state school pupils.
Twice as much is spent on schooling per pupil in private schools as in state schools and privately educated pupils are taught in smaller classes by better-qualified teachers.
The waste of talent is hampering the country’s economic progress, argues Seldon. The wealthy also cream off places in the best state schools by buying houses in catchment areas and paying for private tutoring to ensure their children pass the entry exams required for grammar schools.
Seldon says it is only fair that if parents can afford to pay for better schooling, which they have secured by using their sharp elbows to monopolise the best schools, then they should be made to do so.
“Instead of estate agents and private tutors getting rich, let’s put this money into the state system,” he says.
The report also suggests that more private schools should sponsor state academies and free schools and give them their name."
End of quote
we'll that's a stupid idea. Given that he's the head of a private School his motive for wanting all high earners to pay seems pretty obvious!
We all know, after all, that actual results have as much to do with family background and external help as superb teaching. I suspect it's Seldon's way of boosting the private sector.