Reading Mark Smith's article ("Let private schools do what they are best at," The Herald, November 26), I feel that the argument relating to these schools needs to go a step further.

Young people leaving state schools, even with excellent qualifications, have to overcome the "private school network" when it comes to careers. The Sutton Trust has shown how the professions in England are dominated by the privately educated. Only seven percent of young people in England are educated in private schools but the numbers far exceed this when looking at the "top" professions. The law, media, finance and civil service for example are all dominated by the privately educated. In journalism the Sutton Trust found over half (54 per cent) of today's top journalists were educated in private schools by 2006.

Young people from the private sector are six times more likely to enter Oxbridge than state educated young people. The Sutton Trust suggests that by the age of 42 some of those educated in the private education sector can earn £200,000 more than state educated pupils.

The numbers in the private education sector in Scotland are smaller overall than in England but what is the situation in Edinburgh (30 per cent educated in the private sector) or Glasgow? Do we have figures similar to those produced by the Sutton Trust for England, to have a picture of the career paths of the privately educated in Scotland?

I am sure that the usual counter arguments will be used to challenge these points: jealousy, class war, chip on the shoulder, parental sacrifice and "we give bursaries" are among the favourites used by supporters of the private education sector. Most of the arguments cannot justify the rewards such an education may provide.

More attention needs to be given to the "hurdles" the state educated young person faces on leaving school. Emphasis on improving qualifications in the state sector is of diminished use if the prospects and careers on offer are dominated by the privately educated.

People are entitled to pay for an education for their children if they wish but let us not pretend that private schools are charities or that they do not confer advantages that the majority of children in Scotland will never receive.

James Waugh,

Nether Currie Crescent,

Edinburgh.

Mark Smith is 100 per cent correct to recognise that in a modern, liberal society we should have the right to choice in education.

However, he makes the mistake, as many have this week, particularly in London, of assuming the issue of charitable status is identical north and south of the border and needs to be "toughened up".

MSPs debated long and hard in 2005 to introduce a test in Scotland for fee-charging charities (of which independent schools are a very small percentage) that is the toughest in the world.

The schools he talks of have spent eight long years meeting that test; some have required more than one attempt.

It was neither easy nor immediate. But the result is that tens of millions of pounds are disbursed in fee assistance - for example, the equivalent of a whole medium-sized secondary school of some 650 pupils receives 100 per cent funded places in Scotland - quite aside from a whole range of academic and community activity outlined in the Charity Regulator's reports.

Schools have embraced the opportunity to audit and update their relationships with local communities, schools and individuals and they have met the challenge presented to them by Holyrood.

John Edward,

Director, Scottish Council of Independent Schools,

61 Dublin Street, Edinburgh.