Much has been said over many years for and against school uniforms, but the emailed complaint that sparked my column in The Herald today concerns an aspect of school uniforms that may not be widely known. That is that some schools award what is effectively a monopoly for the supply of their uniform in return for a share of the sales. In this particular case it is Waratah Technology High School but it is a common practice among schools. The uniform is designed with a crest and stripes to force parents to buy from the preferred supplier, who slings the school a share of the proceeds. The company that offers the biggest sling gets the business. The other side is that the parents pay substantially more for the uniform because, one, there is no competition among retailers and, two, they have to cover the sling to the school. The bigger the sling the higher the price.

Schools will surely talk about crests and stripes and a unique uniform meeting the need for a school's identity and esteem and the students' pride in their school. And they'll waffle on about that for a very long time if they have a captured audience.

But we've quit the classroom, we're not captured, and I know a sling when I see one. So, am I fair in describing the uniform sling as a hidden impost on parents? It does seem to me particularly unfair because the cost of the sling is much greater than the amount of the sling, given the required loss of competition.