With an election coming up, we'll probably find all parties promising more funding for education.
However, there are even more unfair funding situations in education that, in my book, should take priority over more money for grammars. For example, there are an estimated 80,000 children in home education in the UK. Their parents save the government roughly £5,000 a year for each child. There is no funding for HE. And most HE parents want none. There is no funding even for those HE children to take GCSEs @ circa £100 per exam. Again, most HE parents ask for none. But the government won't even impose on LAs the obligation to make 2-3 exam centres available for HE children. It would cost peanuts (about £5 per child) and save parents in some cases dragging their children halfway across the country to stay in a hotel overnight just so one child can sit one GCSE exam.
Then there's the funding for buildings issue. And the complete shambles of governor funding - cuts to funding have imposed more work on governors and is causing many to leave (bear in mind they are volunteers). We can't forget academy funding: schools converting to academies were promised a seven year funding formula. The govt has reneged on this promise and some outstanding academies are on the verge of closure because their original costings are now not being funded.
I don't know if David Cameron is backing the expansion of grammars. The Kent case is an unusual exception, but even if the Conservatives weren't sharing power with the Lib Dems I doubt they have the stomach to fight for grammars, there's too much opposition. Labour/Lib Dems etc. are dead against more grammars and so are the teaching unions (and some Tory MPs!)