Funding? He needs to go back to school

"We should be united over issue of schools" is proof positive of this. He needs to go back to school on the issue of school funding - studying basic maths - since we know he doesn't want to remember the history of Worcestershire school funding.

While at school, he may also learn that standards have been improving significantly since 1997 so apologising to teachers may also need to be on his curriculum.

He asks me whether I support "changing the basic funding formula to value each child more equally across the country".

Does he still not realise that the basic entitlement (Primary £2006.14 and Secondary £2659.16) is already the same for every pupil wherever they live? How can we have a more equal basic entitlement figure than one that is already equal?

What Peter wants - that is why he supports school vouchers - is a system of funding that does not address need.

Roughly speaking, if a child is from an economically disadvantaged family, or speaks English as a second language, it will cost a school more to help that child achieve the same standard as one from a well-off family whose mother-tongue is English.

Schools should be given extra cash to pay for the extra costs they incur in boosting the performance of these children. It is what the Local Education Authority (Conservative-run) does locally with their funding formula, but Peter is turning his back on this.

Is his blind support of the divisive school voucher really worth it?

Should he be supporting a system that penalises the neediest in our society? How can a right-minded and reasonable person sign up to this agenda?

It will betray generations of children who, through no fault of their own, have English as a second language, or are born into challenging circumstances not with a silver spoon in their mouth.

So yes Peter, my approach is different to yours. I'll continue to support the vast majority while you continue to defend the elite few.

MICHAEL FOSTER MP,

Worcester.