Education. The right to learning and personal development to which every human should have access. This right forms a key part of the backbone of Britain and its democratic values. However, why does access to a better education, and often a better future as a consequence, tend to corroborate with spending more money? We only have to look at the education of an overwhelming majority of our present and former ministers to see why a private school education is widely associated with power, wealth and ameliorated prospects. A majority of the current members, benchers and peers that constitute the House of Lords have - for the most part - received their schooling from institutions like Charterhouse, Winchester, Westminster, Eton, Harrow, St Pauls, Tonbridge and Radley, to name a mere handful. So what is it about these revered institutions that make them so synonymous with the upper class and the highest societal postitions? More importantly, is it a system in need of re-work? The Old Boy network. This is perhaps the most prominent feature of a public school education that catalyses routes into positions of power. Being part of a cohort who go on to securing the most priveleged places is an obvious pull factor for those who can afford to attend such schools. A prime case in point is the network that Eton is renowned for glueing together. Boris Johnson and David Cameron both attended Eton during the same period, and both subsequently attended Oxford, where they famously (or perhaps infamously) found a mutuality in the Bullingdon Club. Is it therefore any surprise that the members of this club, including Cameron, Johnson and Osbourne, are now working within the same Conservative government? Quite literally, the country is being run by former classmates. Whether or not these three would have had the same fortune had they not attended Eton or St Paul's is a subjective debate, however, what cannot be denied is the huge role their schools have played in their ascension upon the rungs of power. The fact that most of the regional, national and international decisions affecting the UK are adminstered by and large through former Etonians, Paulines and Harrovians should give one an idea of the sheer dominance that the public school network affords. Evidently, the "who you know" card that is strategically played by Old Boys has a huge amount of socio-economic power. Nevertheless, Boris, Dave and his pals haven't only secured their power through being dormitory buddies. The values that a private school education cultivates inevitably go a long way in developing individualistic confidence and an adoption of a superiority complex that results in future success. The academic rigour, internal structure and the extra-curricular societies that these schools foster make it a perfect playing field for power and confidence. As an example, look at the boarding traditions that are still upheld by the likes of Winchester, Rugby and Uppingham. One learns from an early age to exert ones authority and compete with other boys and girls amongst house systems and the internal ranks of age such as Grecians and Erasmus (a system adopted by Christ's Hospital). The result is a microcosm of quasi-parliamentary power that parallels the external society and promotes climbing the ladder of power through self-achievement and healthy rivalry. The effect is a well-rounded individual who posseses a self-confidence that allows him or her to effortlessly assume a position of dominance in work and other areas of life. So it is clear that paying for a public school education can be a shiny passport to success and power, but is this fair? More importantly, what are the alternatives? Firstly, a fee-paying private education is generally only available to the wealthy pockets of the country. Of course, there are increasing numbers of bursaries and scholarships available, but they are still in an overwhelming minority. This becomes apparent when an economically disadvantaged child is accepted on a scholarship to Eton or Harrow and makes front page news; if these cases were more common - as they should be - they wouldn't be making it to Page 1 of The Telegraph. The result of the fee-paying monopoly is that many of these institutions are saturated by the same sort of families gaining the same sort of income. Arguably, this engenders lowered social mobility and a worrying lack of economic diversity in the schools. If a large percentage of these schools are still largely constituted by the sons and daughters of Stock Brokers and Company Directors, how can we expect there to be a shift in social amelioration and raised standards of living? Unfortunately, the words "the rich get richer..." spring to mind as a corollary. To briefly return to Christ's Hospital, a traditional Bluecoat school situated in Horsham, a huge emphasis is placed on widening access to capable students from underprivileged backgrounds. The result is a larger socio-economic demographic that catalyses economic mobility and the betterment of the individual. Other traditional boarding schools could, and should, take valuable lessons from such a system. A viable alternative which has served the county well for centuries and created huge improvements in social mobility is Grammar schools. In any democracy, meritocracy should be the prevailing fuel of achievement and social mobility, rather than one's bank account. The fact that Grammar schools foster similar values to private schools means a pupil is getting access to an excellent academic environment and an opportunity for personal growth, minus the £30,000 a-year price tag. This promotes the idea of meriting success, reward and achievement through one's own capabilities. The fact that Grammar school attendees come from a vast range of social demographics means the unifying quality is intelligence and talent, rather than family income.
Unfortunately, the focus on Grammar schools has become less pronounced during recent years, and there is a worrying lack of them when compared with private schools. It is about time we began investing more into grammar schools, and stop existing ones changing into fee-paying private schools. Alas, public schools still remain the somewhat fetishised institutions associated with the ruling members of society. Of course, few of us would turn down the rich experience they offer, however, what many of us would refuse is the hole that this educational privilege burns in one's current account. The solution? More scholarships, more grammar schools and above, all more meritocracy.