Parents don’t see choice as 
a dirty word

YOU report controversy (Yorkshire Post, April 2) over ministers approving “Schools that are not needed”.

Surely that is for parents to decide? Not for ministers, as we do not live in a police state (yet). Not for teachers, as they are dedicated professional public servants there to serve us.

We professionals do have an unfortunate habit of forgetting who pays our wages, but choice is not a dirty word; it is only through choice that the customer can ever be king.

In the short term, choice involves oversupply. According to the theory, that corrects itself as the least efficient/popular suppliers leave the market, until the next new competitor comes along. That’s the way of the world!

The solution for the teachers/lawyers/whoever at the bad end of it is to sharpen up their acts. After all, if all of them were already as good as they could be there would be no incentive for anybody else to set up to compete with them.

From: John Watson, Hutton Hill, Leyburn.

SO our overworked teachers are wanting a cut in hours together with a pay rise? I bet there are a lot of people in the country who would enjoy that sort of arrangement but with the present state of the economy their consciences would stand in the way.

The teachers are wanting to teach only 20 hours in the week. That really is preposterous. When I was at school the masters were teaching over 40 hours in the week. Many of them, of course, had survived the war and had returned to teaching and were very happy to do so. We should not be bombarded with the present generation saying how hard it is, especially in this digital age and when they have computers to assist them.

We have learnt a lot over the last two years how much better the public sector is compared with the private sector, and they should try to appreciate that fact.

From: Robert Bottamley, Thorn Road, Hedon, East Yorkshire.

P RICKABY (Yorkshire Post, April 3) noted that teachers’ representatives agreed votes of no confidence in the Education Secretary and the head of 
Ofsted.

Apparently, entirely on the strength of this vote, your correspondent could “only conclude both men must be doing a splendid job”.

On two counts, the letter had merit.

First, it was brief. Second, it illustrated admirably how the right to express an informed opinion is corrupted by a perceived right to make assertions without understanding, and to draw conclusions without reason.

Had the editor insisted on the inclusion of teaching experience, I strongly suspect that your correspondent’s letter would have been no less brief.

From: Jack Brown, Lamb Lane, Monk Bretton, Barnsley.

Jayne Dowle (Yorkshire Post, March 24) is free to home-tutor her daughter if she wishes but it is doubtful if she will improve on Michael Gove’s curriculum as a spur for extra-curricular enthusiasm.

Her demand for continuation of the unscientific curriculum is a demand for perpetuation of uneducated masses with all their anti-social and political 
potential. Uneducated masses are cannon-fodder for Trotskyist union leaders and university education department 
employees who cannot plead ignorance.

Paying price for protest

From: Maxwell Laurie, Victoria Terrace, Cockfield, County Durham.

IS it not time to halt the waste of NHS resources being generated by protesters in Leeds because the city “lost” to Newcastle in the matter of paediatric surgery?

The technical point scored in the High Court does not in itself quash the decision in Newcastle’s favour.

Individual cases are referred from Leeds to Newcastle but, we understand, not the other way round.

The data on mortality rates may have been first raised some little time ago but provisional confirmation now correctly requires the appropriate actions of surgery suspension during investigation – a straightforward action apparently beyond local MPs’ mental grasp.

Meanwhile the Leeds protesters have succeeded only in disrupting Newcastle’s recruitment of urgently required staff.