Who's to blame that school uniforms are absurdly expensive?
Mercifully, change is finally coming, via the Children's Wellbeing & Schools Bill, currently in the House of Lords. As well as introducing new safeguards to children's welfare and free breakfast clubs in all state-funded primaries, it will also limit the number of branded items that headteachers can require pupils to wear, to three (excluding tie).
As measures go, it is hoped it will bring down the cost of a school uniform and save parents £50 a year per pupil.
The price of kitting out a child comes to £442 for the average secondary school student, and £343 for primary-age pupils, and can be a struggle for a significant number of parents. The Department for Education has published analysis showing that more than 4m children will benefit from the simple rule change.
The Schoolwear Association is not best pleased at the prospect of its members losing some £70m a year in branded clothing sales. 'High-quality uniforms are durable and eco-friendly, lasting longer and reducing the need for frequent replacements, thus supporting environmental sustainability,' it said.
Back in the real world, one wonders if anyone working for that august organisation has ever actually had a school-age child? Fun fact: they grow. At an astonishingly rapid rate during the teenage years. About that 'high-quality, durable, eco-friendly' blazer with the school logo on the breast pocket… a growth spurt could easily put it out of use by the end of the autumn term.
It was the shoes that did it for us. The state of them at the end of a school year left us scratching our heads – it was as if they'd been pushed through a giant paper shredder.
The law of sod means it is inevitably the most expensive kit that gets wrecked first. The Schoolwear Association's apparent rejection of generic kit, and thus the free market, also ignores another inconvenient truth: low-cost doesn't necessarily mean low quality. Affordable school clothes from a Tesco or a Sainsbury's usually last just fine. Those supermarkets have a keen eye for quality, and tend to be reluctant to sell kit that falls apart in five minutes, notwithstanding the teenager's in-built appetite for destruction.
One of my proudest moments as a school governor was to enable parents to shop for uniform at Tesco, after having been restricted to a small and often obnoxious local supplier that charged through the nose and treated its customers like dirt. As it turned out, it wasn't a hard argument to win. The school took the point.
One can't help but feel that the fussiness some headteachers still display over logo-spattered uniforms is little more than a power trip, a means of keeping the parents in line as well as the children.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Evening Standard
12 hours ago
- Evening Standard
Auto-enrolling young people on voting register being explored
This came in response to Liberal Democrat peer Lord Rennard, who said: 'Will the Government now implement the unanimous cross-party recommendation of the House of Lords select committee and automatically include 16 and 17-year-olds on the electoral registers at the same time as they are given their national insurance numbers?'
The Herald Scotland
a day ago
- The Herald Scotland
Disabled could be helped back into work with new right similar to maternity law
They said such a right would 'would clarify and strengthen existing legal protections' under the the Equality Act and 'provide a much stronger message to workers about what they are entitled to'. The report warned that the Government risks failing to meet its aim to raise the employment rate to 80% without a 'serious strategy to shift employer behaviour' and argues employers must be incentivised to reintegrate existing workers back into jobs. The report comes in the same week as the Universal Credit Bill cleared the House of Lords, aimed at rebalancing the benefit 'to remove work disincentives', according to a Government minister, while giving existing claimants 'the security and certainty they need'. Separately during the debate, Paralympic champion Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who sits in the Lords, said disabled people have been portrayed as 'benefit scroungers and a drain on society' in the conversation on welfare reform. In its report, the Resolution Foundation said around 12% of disabled staff leave work each year – consistently 1.5-times the rate of non-disabled workers. It added that twice as many people move from work into inactivity due to ill health – around 304,000 each year – than those moving the other way (around 151,000). But the think tank said despite there being 'strong' legal obligations in place already on employers, they are 'simply not doing enough to retain existing workers', with fewer than half of disabled workers who request a reasonable adjustment – which can include a change to working arrangements or provision of equipment, services or support – having this granted in full. With 15% of disabled people reporting workplace discrimination relating to their disability in 2022, the report said this remains a 'pressing issue'. The think tank said: 'Boosting disability employment is not straightforward: it will involve improvements to the health system, benefits system and world of work. But action to incentivise and support employers is a vital piece of the puzzle.' Louise Murphy, senior economist at the Resolution Foundation, said: 'The Government should do more to incentivise firms to employ disabled people – especially those who have been out of work for long periods – but employers need to do more in return. 'A new right to reintegration could help disabled workers back into work in the same way that maternity rights transformed women's employment prospects a generation ago.' The foundation said the new right could be enforced through employment tribunals, but urged the Government to also consider 'more proactive enforcement mechanisms, whether via the Equalities and Human Rights Commission or connected to a new system of caseworkers that are expected to be covered in the forthcoming Mayfield Review'. Former John Lewis boss, Sir Charlie Mayfield, is undertaking a review to investigate how Government and businesses can work together to support ill and disabled people into work, with a report expected in autumn. The Government has been contacted for comment.
Spectator
a day ago
- Spectator
The best deer deterrent? Radio 4
Behind the latest push for recognition of a Palestinian state – even though there is no agreement of what it is that might be recognised – is a sort of impersonation of the story of Israel. Palestinian activists want their own Balfour Declaration. President Macron wants France and Britain to come up with their own Sykes-Picot agreement, but pro-Palestinian. You might think that the clamour would have been shamed into silence by the massacres and hostage-taking committed by Hamas on 7 October 2023. On the contrary, these have somehow empowered the mimicry in wilder and more horrible ways. The genocide, we are now told, is being committed not by Hamas, but by Israel's response. The 'concentration camps' are being set up by Israel in Gaza. And back here in Britain, where it might seem to the unprejudiced observer that anti-Semitism is now almost literally running riot, it is 'Islamophobia' which is being defined as an enemy so great that only one of our many religions must be protected by law, despite the cost to free speech. 'Zionists', by which is now meant Jews (note this change of nomenclature between the Hamas Charter of 1988 and that of 2017), are painted as the murderous classes, so Britain must be 'de-zionised'. Does David Lammy realise where his new rhetoric is leading him and his party? One reason why nothing gets done in this country is that bureaucratic power lies in delay. A business or a private individual needs to get on because his time is his money: the bureaucracy's time is our money, so it has all the time in the world. This is an acute problem in relation to payouts for infected blood, the Post Office scandal etc. A faithful reader, Keith Miles, has an idea. Reverse the process, he says. Force the civil service to pay out £1 million to each acknowledged victim within three months unless it can be proved in that time that the money is not owed. Then the boot will be on the other foot. On Monday, the House of Lords agreed that the bill to remove all hereditary peers from the House of Lords 'do now pass'. The thing will not be complete until the Commons has considered amendments in September, but the death sentence has now been pronounced on the practice of more than 700 years. One or two speeches noted the melancholy historical significance of the change. The House is becoming a rump, though admittedly a large one. But I was interested by a rather more basic point made by the departing Earl of Caithness. When he had first taken his seat 50 years ago, he said, the daily allowance for attending the Lords was £4.73, which is £105.14 in current values. After Labour got rid of most hereditaries and brought in more of its own appointments at the turn of this century, the allowances 'increased hugely', the maximum daily allowance going up by 50 per cent. Today, peers can claim an allowance of £371 a day. As many of us have complained, Labour is jettisoning the hereditaries without reforming the Lords on a new basis, but I think we can be perfectly confident that, as it becomes predominant there, the allowances will rise higher still. The Nationwide, by far the country's biggest building society, is trying to be like a bank, and its customers are unhappy. Its chief executive, Dame Debbie Crosbie, earns £7 million a year and board candidates proposed by its members never get chosen. I suspect the members' fears are well founded. In the market town near us, all the high-street banks have closed, but the Nationwide branch continues. I go there from time to time because my mother is now too frail to manage the journey and so I transact her Nationwide account for her. My visits have impressed me with the social utility of the place. Almost every customer is either old or, like me, acting on behalf of the old. There is a lot of fiddling with spectacles and hearing aids and struggling with forgotten passwords. Old ladies try to sort out their late husband's financial affairs or transfer money to their daughter in New Zealand. Everything moves slowly. The staff are completely patient and, unlike the computer, very rarely say no. I can see why Dame Debbie might feel she has bigger fish to fry. And I agree with the members who therefore suspect her. What is a building society building by paying £7 million to anyone? In the early 1970s, I used to stay with a schoolfriend whose parents lived in Old Church Street, Chelsea. In the same street was the rectory of Chelsea Old Church which was, believe it or not, occupied by the rector, and parish children could play in its two-acre garden. Not long afterwards, the Church Commissioners sold it off. Now it is offered for sale by its non-dom owner who is fleeing the Reeves-Starmer Terror. The reported price is £250 million. I sometimes wonder if anything has done more than house prices to damage our social fabric. Although for professional reasons I feel I must sometimes listen to the Today programme, I almost never listen to anything else on Radio 4. This is a wrench for me since it was the staple of my parents and my boyhood but, like so many, I cannot stand being preached at. However, I keep in touch with the station because my wife has erected a sort of alarm to keep deer out of our garden. As the fallow or roe jump in, they trigger a burst of whatever is playing on Radio 4. My sister's partner uses the same contraption in their garden, but he tunes the alarm to Radio 2 and has much less success in frightening off the marauders. I wonder why. When I go past the alarm myself, setting it off, I do notice that most snatches of dialogue are, even now, conducted in the tones of educated men and women. Perhaps the deer are more in awe of voices 'born to command' than of popular songs.
