There was no generational split to soften this one. From the youngest voters to pensioners, no age group came within reach of a majority for continued funding, a rare instance of consensus cutting straight across a divide that usually structures these results.
Gender told a mildly different story: men rejected faith funding by a wide margin while women, though still opposed, split closer to even, hinting that the "cohesion versus conscience" argument lands less starkly for women voters than for men. Neither group, though, offered anything like a rescue for the status quo.
The vote echoes a live tension in English education policy — between a national curriculum that binds all state schools together and admissions rules that let faith schools select on belief, sharpened lately by arguments over security funding for religious sites amid rising incidents. It is the same fault line that runs through debates on the 1944 settlement and the establishment's uneasy relationship with church schooling.
The floor's arguments mirrored that tension precisely. The top Yes case reasoned plainly that "if it's a school that has to follow the national curriculum, then why should it not receive state funding", while the most-respected No voice retorted that such schools "should support selves as private schools and pay VAT to learn".
A third of the room could live with faith in the classroom paid for by the state; the rest could not, and said so with unusual unanimity.
8 Opinions
Having attended faith schools throughout education I can say that they're not forcing children to be religious, the services in the majority of state funded faith schools are optional, not forced. We still covered the National Curriculum, and accepted students of all backgrounds within the catchment area, with students of faith backgrounds only having higher priority for acceptance into the school. Accepts all, teaches the same curric. Why wouldn't it get state funding?
Ban them and stop forcing kids to do religion, it should be voluntary.
If it’s a school that has to follow the national curriculum, then why should it not receive state funding. Would be very different if it was a fee paying school however….
Yes as long as gov recognises that this is a Christian country and the money don't go to mosques that preach hatred to kill all infidels etc etc
Why would we?
Should support selves as private schools and pay VAT to learn!! I love labour
I'd say yes if it was 'Should Christian Schools receive state funding' No other faith should get a penny...
As long as the standards are good, why not? So long as, of course, they aren't teaching any beliefs that fundamentally stand against Western principles and culture, of course.