Lets be honest about state education

"I find it very offensive that I can't find provision in the maintained sector for my child. I pay my taxes.
"Where I come from the maintained sector is very poor and my wife and I have made sacrifices to send both our children to the independent sector.
"There are hundreds and thousands of families like mine who have chosen to make that commitment both to their child's future and to the future of this country - and at significant expense, I might add."
And it's true. Parents across the land agonise over the standard of education provided by the state for their children. They will move area to get near a better school. Pay for private tuition.
Many feel their children are being processed by a system obsessed with statistics and measurements, rather than bringing out the best in their children.
And despite Mr Sheerman's protests that all parents pay for their children's education, the truth is that often those in the state sector are made to feel as if they are getting a free deal over which they have no right to complain.
It's the same with that other over-centralised area of public service, the NHS. To claim that those who use it are "customers" is laughable. Tell that to someone who has had to wait months for an appointment, been treated like an inconvenience and suffered the full brunt of its petty-minded bureaucrats.
To claim this is the same as the experience you get with private healthcare is to mislead. Which is something the Government consistently does. Take its response to Mr Parry's criticism of the quality of state education.
"The state school system is delivering for parents, regardless of their wealth or background," said a spokesman for the Department for Children, Schools and Families.
"The overwhelming majority of pupils attend state schools, where the hard work of teachers and record taxpayers' investment is resulting in the highest standards ever, with 45 per cent more children getting five good GCSEs than a decade ago."
More statistics. More pulling the wool over our eyes and insulting our intelligence.
I have been around a number of independent schools in the area and met their staff. What consistently comes across is an atmosphere of calmness and learning. Usually well-motivated teachers, good facilities and well-behaved children.
Now I'm no defender of private education. I think it's essentially wrong that kids are separated from each other and those from more well-off backgrounds can access better schools.
But I can understand why people pay for it. Independent schools provide a better education because they have less challenging pupils whose parents are interested in education; teachers have fewer social issues to deal with and they are not so bombarded with initiative after initiative from meddling Ministers.
There are, of course, some great teachers in the state system. And some great schools. But it's a postcode lottery. And if you live in the wrong area and are poor, you're stuffed.
Politicians who claim otherwise are trading in conceit and lies.
Take Schools Minister Jim Knight. Recently I asked him whether he thought we had a fair education system.
"Yes, I do think we have a fair education system" was his reply.
"We have made considerable efforts to make sure the admissions system is fair. When you look at the investment we have put into state schools, there will have been an increase of about two-thirds by 2011. Forty-thousand more teachers and more teaching assistants.
"The result is that we see more schools performing as well or out-performing most independent schools."
Quite a claim. When I queried this, he highlighted Thomas Telford School, which is regularly at the top of league tables of all schools - including independents - for its results.
But Thomas Telford is a city technology college sponsored by a London firm.
"What's wrong with that?" retorted Mr Knight. Nothing necessarily. And it is the direction in which the Government wants all secondary schools to go.
Perhaps it will work. In his swan-song to the education world, Tony Blair said the time was right now to allow schools greater independence to "chart their own course". To be, in fact, more like independent schools.
But they will never be able to offer the same standard unless they are given the resources. Having 30 pupils in front of a relatively inexperienced teacher at an inner city state primary school where many of the kids don't speak English as their first language will never compare to what you get at an independent prep school.
But if you cut the class size by half, as most people I speak to who have had anything to do with education apart from politicians seem to think is the way forward, you might have a chance.
In the meantime, all you Westminster wags, please don't patronise us with your lies about a fair education system.