I hear that in Scotland, all local authority music services will now waive their tuition fees to address perhaps the main reason there isn't as much take up as there might be in having instrumental lessons at school. Whilst it is a good thing to encourage instrument tuition (of course) and musical activities and to address inequalities in opportunities due to economic imbalances, I wonder why it is that the local authorities should have the monopoly on this. Oh I dare say that those who are part of said music services have their arguments intact for why this is the best possible arrangement a nation could have...I have a different viewpoint. As a private/independent provider, I would like to see schools - both their headteachers and heads of music - have a say in who supports their music departments with visiting instrument teachers and alike. As things stands, that does not happen in Scotland as the music services have a stranglehold on that provision. This I feel is not right because it stifles competition from other providers who could arguably do the job just as well, if not better. As for the financial aspects, it is not true to say that only Government-backed music services can offer instrument tuition at little or no expense: just as private schools can offer bursaries to talented individuals...the same thing can apply here. Perhaps this comes down to an argument about the private sector versus the public sector - an ideal world is one which has both. IN my world, I have to accept competition as a fact of life and I accept that with the attitude that the 'best man' should win in any situation. So long as there is a level playing field then I have no issue with that. Yet, the provision of music education and opportunity in Scottish schools is not conducive to fair competition.The financial argument aside, I'm sure that the private sector can do just as good a job as the public sector.
Music education provision
