Faith-based school admissions are state-sanctioned discrimination

The debate about the role of faith in education has been plunged into the spotlight in recent weeks following the revelation of the alleged “Trojan Horse” plot to take over schools in Birmingham.

Conor Pope has written passionately here in support of faith schools. I admire his conviction, but he’s completely wrong. Here’s why.

Let’s confront directly the issue of the Birmingham schools at the centre of the current furore. The real problem is not that the “Trojan Horse” schools were faith schools – most of them weren’t – but that had they been faith schools most of what went on in them that has been condemned by Ofsted would have been perfectly within the rules. This stuff already goes on perfectly legally in other schools run by different faith groups.

The British Humanist Association, of which I am proud to be a trustee, received complaints about several of the Birmingham schools in question long before the (almost certainly hoax) Trojan Horse letter appeared. These concerns were communicated to the Department for Education.

Never mind that Michael Gove had approved three free schools run by Christian creationist groups. Never mind that a Jewish faith school in north London had been condemned by Ofqual for censoring exam questions they deemed inappropriate. It was only when the question of Islamic extremism arose that anyone started questioning the role of faith in our education system.

So let’s look more broadly at the arguments advanced in defence of faith schools.

Supporters of faith schools frequently highlight that they achieve better results than non-faith schools. Yet this is highly misleading.Research from the BHA has demonstrated conclusively that faith schools, regardless of which faith they belong to, take fewer children from poorer socio-economic backgrounds than non-faith schools compared to the local average (note: local average, not national average).

Non-faith comprehensive secondary schools take 11% more pupils eligible for free school meals than would be expected given their local areas. Comprehensive Church of England secondaries admit 10% fewer, Roman Catholic secondaries 24% fewer, Jewish secondaries 61% fewer and Muslim secondaries 25% fewer.

It is well known that many middle class parents pretend to be religious to get their kids into a church-run school. One practising Anglican recently told me “you don’t see any kids over the age of five at our church. Once their parents have got them into the local church school they stop coming.”

I found this line in Conor’s piece particularly troubling:

“It is not difficult to see why faith schools produce good results: they place a greater importance on the idea a shared ethos in school based upon mutual respect, and they stress the role the students have to play in the wider communities.”

I’m sure he didn’t mean to insult those of us with no faith, but his words imply that values of mutual respect and community involvement are exclusively the preserve of the religious. Does he really mean that? I’d urge him to read about Humanism, which stresses the importance of treating others with dignity and respect, promoting freedom, celebrating human achievement and working together to build a better world. We don’t believe you need to “do God” to do good.

Turning to the question of admissions, shouldn’t faith schools be allowed some say over their admissions given they receive funding from religious organisations? Although in 1944 church schools received half of their funding from religious groups, these days they receive 100% of their running costs from the state. Are we content for schools that receive most or all of their funding from the taxpayer to discriminate on grounds of faith in their admissions? A significant number of faith schools can select 100% of their pupils from one faith background if they are oversubscribed.

What those who believe in discriminatory admissions have to explain to me is why, if I had children, it would be acceptable for them to be barred from their local school purely on the grounds of my beliefs. If children were barred from a particular school based on their ethnicity there would rightly be howls of anger. Why no such abhorrence at schools which discriminate against those from different religions and the non-religious?

In practice atheists tend to be at the bottom of the pile when it comes to faith school admissions. Many faith schools allocate spare places to children with parents from other faith groups before they will admit the children of parents with no religious beliefs.

I’m opposed to the whole idea of schools with a faith character. I believe that children have a right to attend a school where they will receive a broad education about a wide range of religious and philosophical beliefs, not a blinkered “confessional” religious education focusing wholly or mainly on one religion. But in a system where faith schools do exist, surely as Labour members we can agree that they should not be permitted to discriminate on grounds of faith in their admissions? Allowing faith-based admissions runs totally counter to Labour principles of equality and inclusion. It is state-sanctioned discrimination. We should oppose it.

Tom Copley AM is a Labour London Assembly Member. He writes in his capacity as a member of Labour Humanists.