My daughter is going to weatherhead school in September and we have just found out that some of the children in the class have been offered to go to weatherhead in the school holidays in August so they can get to know others see what the schools like and do all sorts of activities, I phoned up to see why we had not been offered this chance and was told that unless you are in care or your parents are on benefits you can't go. Where is the logic in this I pay taxes why does my daughter lose out on this because I work surely this is wrong. The school said its government funded and they can see why I'm not happy but there is nothing they can do, why are we not offered this chance for our children even if we have to pay for it as it helps with the transition into secondary school. Is this just me or do other people think this is totally wrong that children miss out on a chance due to parents having employment. I know some people have no choice of being on benefits but why are the children being treated differently because there parents work.

Sounds very unfair. All children should have the same opportunity regardless of personal circumstances. Sorry to hear this

I suppose you could argue that in this financial mess, money has to be targeted for the best use. Perhaps from experience it has been observed that children in care and children from families where benefits are required , may have,for obvious reasons, a more stressful basic lifestyle , and so don't emotionally settle as quickly as children from an already settled,confident balanced environment. Maybe it follows that unsettled children tend not to achieve as well academically , and so the Government is compensating for this ,at the very earliest opportunity by giving them just a little bit of a head start.

I think the more stressful life is the parents workingjuggling minding kids making mortgage payments paying all the bills where people on the dole have more time with the children and less worries about losing the roof over there heads and so on in this day and age with equal rights and opportunities this shouldn't happen I can agree with children in care yes but not ones that are on benefits and why are the working parents not offered this and be told to pay for it there is just no option for my child to take part as I work and don't claim benefits it's totally unfair and how do you explain to a 10year old that the system is wrong and you will grow up to learn how bad the system is as you get older. There's people on benefits who go abroad every year and the average working person can't afford to because they have bills to pay

Yep, you have some excellent points there.

That is a total disgrace and has to be illegal, surely? (not just wrong...)

Any available funds being used for this cannot possibly be intended to be used for any one group (or groups) of kids, surely?

Wonder what the press / TV would make of this?

I have sent my points to Angela eagle so we will see what her reply is before I go any further

As someone else said, "don't hold your breath..."

Wish I could be more confident that a Labour MP's going to be all that interested in this; now, if it were the other way around, I'm sure she'd be all over it "like white on rice"!

... but then of course, maybe I'm just an old cynic... hope I'm wrong, tbh...!

I've gone to her as she has links with weatherhead school so hopefully she might reply

Interesting. Keep us posted as to how it pans out.

Some very intersting points on this topic.

I find it a remarkable situation and wonder if it is government initiated or if that has just been thrown in the mix, for good measure by the council. These activities weeks, many schools have every summer holiday but I never knew they were restricted. The council must pay the staffing, so why not give the education department a call?
Council switchboard 0151 606 2000.

To be honest Wetherhead is a shocking school anyway in my opinion. The way they have treated two of my cousins, one who was bullied to the point of refusing to go back to school. One teacher from Weatherheads response was 'I've got plenty of other students I could be talking to rather than wasting my time with you'

Now I'm pretty sure schools these days are all anti bullying but their response was disgusting. Infact another teacher actually said that the girls who had done it (bearing in mind my cousin hadn't mentioned any names) had been told to not say anything. So the teachers were obviously fully aware it was going on and did nothing to stop it.

I wouldn't expect too much from Weatherhead I'm afraid.

Absolutely a disgrace and I would challenge this tooth and nail until you get answers and hopefully a result in your favour.

It's grossly unfair and in my mind is just as discriminatory as refusing students due to gender, colour or religion

maybe, just maybe, they have found that kids from the sort of background they are offering it to have a harder time settling in to a new school.

I thought it was all about everyone being equal in a school and all get treated the same why would someone who's parents be on benefits be different from someone who's parents work the children whos parent are on benefits get to spend more time with there children for a start I can agree with children who are in care as they don't have a parents around, but my point is why are we not offered this even if there was a charge I wouldn't mind paying it but we are not offered because we work in my eyes this is discrimination

Excellent Venice. And while I slightly disagree with the children of people on benefits being offered this too, children in care or from very troubled backgrounds should be given as many 'leg ups' as possible. BUT if they were the only pupils who were offered this, it would make them feel even more 'different' don't you think?

I know posters on here have offered to pay for this, but there are lot of working people who just couldn't afford it and this may create an even bigger divide?

I have no answers

Anyone any other ideas where I can go with this as Angela eagle has not replied yet

Cheers neil

there'll be fewer students with parents on benefits than all new students combined, that is a given, the school would have to pay teachers/support staff/security/bills etc and maybe they don't want to, so are saying its for kids with parents on benefits to keep their costs down.

It's discrimination, pure and simple. And that is not legal. You can take them to Court if you feel that strongly about it. Normally if you feel this aggrieved about something then it's a good indication that you are probably quite justified.

<disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.>

Quick update Angela eagle is going to write to weatherhead to see why this is happening