YOUR article last week headlined “Private schools must do more for poor pupils” exposes a situation where some private schools have only one fully funded poor pupil on their school roll.
Presumably, as they are poor they would be unlikely to have skis to participate in ski week in the Alps, and as they are poor they will not be able to afford a horse to participate in equestrian events. And as they are poor the many school international cultural events would obviously be beyond their pocket.
Is this not a rather cruel way to treat poor children? Would it not be kinder and therefore more charitable just to stop kidding on that private schools are charities and send the poor kid back to his or her many poor friends at the local state school?
Kenneth M Baird, Edinburgh