How hypocritical am I? Let me count the ways...

Hypocrisy is a strange thing. Being hypocritical is often considered evidence that one is a dreadful human being and should be punished as such. The shout of outrage at the hypocrisy of the politicians is often loud and heartfelt. The truth of the matter as I see it however, is that most people are in some ways hypocritical. The most hypocritical are the ones that complain loudest about others hypocrisy while trumpeting their own lack of it. I know when conservatives are championing smaller Government while crushing average people to protect corporate interests they are guilty of hypocrisy. A brief look at myself, however, will reveal that I am a bubbling cauldron of rank hypocrisy, and I suspect the same would be true of most people.

So, how am I a hypocrite? Let's see. First off, I think animal welfare is important and I support organisations that are passionate about it. I will genuinely be heartbroken if the coalition Government succeeds in re-legalising foxhunting. And yet, I am a meat eater. I know in some ways it's possible to eat meat and still support animal welfare - buy organic and free range, donate to charities and other things, and I do all of them. But if I truly support it, shouldn't I come off meat altogether? Yes, I should, and yet I don't. Blatant hypocrisy.

Another? Okay. Although it's not exactly possible for a man to be a feminist in the truest sense of the word (it's the penis) I do support the fight for equality and believe that women should be considered fellow humans of equal worth before they are considered women. I have many female friends who are much more than walking vaginas to me - they are people. Having said that, I have been guilty of allowing sexual attraction to over-ride most other considerations (not that I've ever acted on that (much), having married my college girlfriend). Again, blatant hypocrisy.

The most obvious one is that I know how to save our species. I know how to reduce our effect on the environment, how to reduce waste, greed, war and other things. We simply need to stop having so many kids and over-running our planet like cockroaches. There are already far too many of us, and in the not too distant future when fresh water, oil, living space and other things start to run out there will be even more of us, virtually guaranteeing a dreadful, near-apocalyptic future for all. And knowing this, I've had two kids. One might have been justifiable. Two is hypocrisy. Three, I know beyond all doubt, will never happen. I hope.

The most recent evidence of my hypocrisy came when we decided on which primary school to send Katie to. There are two local schools - the St. Georges Church of England Primary School (our catchment area) and Priorslee Primary School (just outside our catchment area). We've had a look around both of them, and they both seem really good. A look at the Ofsted reports on the two of them show that at both schools the children are largely happy, confident and eager to learn, which are the most important considerations - Katie being happy is first priority, always. Looking at it in further depth shows that Priorslee (outstanding Ofsted) has high expectations of the children and almost all of them achieve above average academically. However, some formal lessons do begin as early as the reception year and homework starts almost immediately (although it's mostly child-led play). When Katie starts school she won't long have turned four - will she really be old enough for that? A check of St. Georges (good Ofsted) reveals a first and second year that are not nearly so punishing, and it's biggest strength isn't high performing students, but it's helping under performing students improve up to the national average. How do we know whether Katie is going to be academically competent or not? So how can we decide which school is best? The crux of the matter is that the children are happy at both, so both are good enough, and the higher performance of Priorslee naturally causes us to lean in that direction.

Here's the hypocrisy. Recently, Priorslee was offered the chance to convert to academy status. Academies were started by the previous Labour Government to help poor performing schools. They are funded by the Government and are freed from Local Education Authority (LEA) control, allowing them to set their own curriculum, their own admittance procedure and manage their own budget. Money kept back by the LEAs to provide facilities for disabled access and other things for all local schools would go direct to the academy. It was a fairly controversial decision back then, but a look at the once-dreadful-now-fantastic Madeley Court School, granted academy status under Labour, shows that it can work well. When the coalition Government came to power, the focus was shifted away from poor performing schools and outstanding schools were invited to apply for academy status and all the benefits implied (although that offer is now open to all schools, provided they have the support of an outstanding one). The difference between the two ideologies is clear - Labour intended to help the schools having difficulties, the coalition want to offer the highest performers the chance to improve further. I can see both sides - help for those that need it and help the best be all they can be. There's no getting away from the idea that the former is designed to bring things closer and give everyone an equal chance, while the latter runs the risk of segregating communities. As most people know, I'm fairly left-leaning, so putting my daughter into one of the coalition's academies doesn't really sit well with me, and yet we applied to Priorslee anyway. More hypocrisy. However, this time I don't think it's my fault. We've objectively weighed up the strengths and weaknesses of both schools, visited them, talked to Katie and each other about it, and come to the conclusion that we prefer Priorslee, but we'd still be happy for her to go to St. Georges. So, because of my own principles I'm supposed to put my daughter into a school that I don't think is the best one in the local area? I'm not supposed to give her the best chance I can? The coalition Government has put me in this position, and although it makes me feel a little queasy, I've made what I think is the best decision for my daughter, but a decision which runs counter to my left wing ideology. After all, it's not her left wing ideology, and she deserves the chance to make up her own mind without being indoctrinated into anyone else's mindset, and it's education that will eventually allow her to make the choice for herself.

Now all I can do is cross my fingers and hope everything turns out okay...