Private schools, times a changing?

[TownIdiot]

DonkeyApple said:

Basically the nationalisation of these schools for pennies?

If it comes down to it, this would make sense.

[M1AGM]

TownIdiot said:

DonkeyApple said:

Basically the nationalisation of these schools for pennies?

If it comes down to it, this would make sense.

Sure, the government (of any colour) are really good at running the education in this country.

FFS.

[okgo]

TownIdiot said:

Is it odd? It's been a while since I looked but is there such a thing as a "state nursery"? From what I can tell from the outside that's a fked up market full of price gouging.

I asked if it would impact whether his child could remain as I am genuinely interested in how many people will have to remove children from school as this is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Well from 3 years old, yes, there are state pre-schools, usually attached to state schools. Nobody bats an eyelid at folk throwing £k's a month at private nursery, but if they dare to do it past the age of 4 and it's a 'school', suddenly they're the 'rich' and 'elite' all very silly.

You asked if his attitude had changed, I doubt its changed at all, why would it? But affordability will change for many, they won't have a choice. Their attitudes won't have changed I doubt?

[TownIdiot]

okgo said:

Well from 3 years old, yes, there are state pre-schools, usually attached to state schools. Nobody bats an eyelid at folk throwing £k's a month at private nursery, but if they dare to do it past the age of 4 and it's a 'school', suddenly they're the 'rich' and 'elite' all very silly.

You asked if his attitude had changed, I doubt its changed at all, why would it? But affordability will change for many, they won't have a choice. Their attitudes won't have changed I doubt?

I asked if "this" would stop him being able to send his son to private school.
By "this" I meant VAT on fees.

Will be interested to see where they draw the line in respect of VAT in terms of age.

[TownIdiot]

M1AGM said:

Sure, the government (of any colour) are really good at running the education in this country.

FFS.

Better to let them go bust then?

[okgo]

TownIdiot said:

I asked if "this" would stop him being able to send his son to private school.
By "this" I meant VAT on fees.

Will be interested to see where they draw the line in respect of VAT in terms of age.

If he says yes, what is your response?

[TownIdiot]

okgo said:

If he says yes, what is your response?

That it's a terrible shame on a personal level.

[Zolvaro]

TownIdiot said:

okgo said:

If he says yes, what is your response?

That it's a terrible shame on a personal level.

There will however be many kids in the state system with similar issues who parents already can't afford to send them to a private school. It's no more of a shame for his kid than it is for any of them. They all deserve a proper education .

[okgo]

Zolvaro said:

There will however be many kids in the state system with similar issues who parents already can't afford to send them to a private school. It's no more of a shame for his kid than it is for any of them. They all deserve a proper education .

The disruption is the difference. The state children won’t be facing that.

[DonkeyApple]

M1AGM said:

TownIdiot said:

DonkeyApple said:

Basically the nationalisation of these schools for pennies?

If it comes down to it, this would make sense.

Sure, the government (of any colour) are really good at running the education in this country.

FFS.

But it's a quick patch for the State's long term failure of the nation's children. They get to announce that they've increased the number of schools, increased the number of children and this will make the adults very happy and those adults will ignore the fact that the generation that is destined to spend their working life paying taxes to support the legion of non workers and retired are all more fked than they were.

They've locked people out of university education and will now start locking children out of the best secondary education and get one step closer to the ultimate goal of ruling over serfs with no one able or even willing to question them.

Anyone who doesn't by default favour increasing the education of every child to the best of that child's possibilities is evil. Pure and simple. Any attack on education is a direct assault on civilisation.

[Zolvaro]

okgo said:

Zolvaro said:

There will however be many kids in the state system with similar issues who parents already can't afford to send them to a private school. It's no more of a shame for his kid than it is for any of them. They all deserve a proper education .

The disruption is the difference. The state children won’t be facing that.

Kids have always been pulled out of private school because of change in circumstances, as I said earlier I would have tapered the VAT relief over a number of years to ease the burden.

The simple fact is private education is buying your child an advantage over their peers, I have no issue with that at all in fact my kids are about to go private, but the tax break is a bonus not a right.

[Swervin_Mervin]

Zolvaro said:

okgo said:

Zolvaro said:

There will however be many kids in the state system with similar issues who parents already can't afford to send them to a private school. It's no more of a shame for his kid than it is for any of them. They all deserve a proper education .

The disruption is the difference. The state children won’t be facing that.

Kids have always been pulled out of private school because of change in circumstances, as I said earlier I would have tapered the VAT relief over a number of years to ease the burden.

The simple fact is private education is buying your child an advantage over their peers, I have no issue with that at all in fact my kids are about to go private, but the tax break is a bonus not a right.

It isn't a bonus, and it isn't a tax break. It has never been subject to VAT.

[TownIdiot]

Zolvaro said:

There will however be many kids in the state system with similar issues who parents already can't afford to send them to a private school. It's no more of a shame for his kid than it is for any of them. They all deserve a proper education .

That may be the case but it wouldn't be something I'd say to someone who was affected by this change - it's still a personal issue for them and discussing the wider policy isn't going to help them.

[Zolvaro]

Swervin_Mervin said:

Zolvaro said:

okgo said:

Zolvaro said:

There will however be many kids in the state system with similar issues who parents already can't afford to send them to a private school. It's no more of a shame for his kid than it is for any of them. They all deserve a proper education .

The disruption is the difference. The state children won’t be facing that.

Kids have always been pulled out of private school because of change in circumstances, as I said earlier I would have tapered the VAT relief over a number of years to ease the burden.

The simple fact is private education is buying your child an advantage over their peers, I have no issue with that at all in fact my kids are about to go private, but the tax break is a bonus not a right.

It isn't a bonus, and it isn't a tax break. It has never been subject to VAT.

VAT is on all goods and services unless exempt, it was given an exemption which makes it a tax break.

[Hard-Drive]

TownIdiot said:

Will this stop you sending your son to the independent school?

To answer your question, no, not right now. At the moment I am in a well paid role, my new wife is similar, between all of us we will continue to make it happen. I have a toy car in the garage, if it came to it I'd sell that or other things including the shirt on my back if that was the difference between my son actually getting the educational support he needs at this critical stage of his life, or just failing via the state system.

Or, in Sir Kier's view, as a posh middle class person, I will continue to use my enormous wealth and privilege to pay for "an unfair advantage" for my son, after all the British Dyslexic Association quote a mere 10% of the population as dyslexic, with a tiny 5% of the school population having Developmental Dyscalculia. But it's OK, as long as Sir Kier keeps quoting that just a teensy weensy 7% of the school population are at independent, sorry "Private" schools and ignores the other facts, that's all that matters. Don't worry about the "unfair disadvantages" Sir Kier, just the "unfair advantages" matter.

But don't worry, Sir Kier and the Labour party has the back of the working class, that's why in 2009 when the very large corporation I was working for folded, the Labour Government at the time allowed EY to not pay all of the staff any statutory redundancy pay, as EY had done the sums and worked out it was actually cheaper to pay the fines for breaking the law to the Labour government, than to actually pay the workers! Here we are in 2024 and I'm still owed money!

But...I work in tech, all I hear is AI this, tech layoffs that, and LinkedIn is full of stories of those over 50 (like me) struggling to find new employment if the worst happens (as it did to me in Covid...no furlough, just a couple of months of volunteering to take a salary cut and then being made redundant). If something similar did happen again, then yes, the 20% increase could make the difference between my son staying at his current school or not. There is no doubt that this absolutely will make a difference for families everywhere, especially those right on the borderline now, or those with more than one child, where the fee hikes will be a huge sum.

Right, just jumping in the Range Rover to collect my son...oops my mistake, my 10 year old 110,000 mile family estate. Toodle pip!

[TownIdiot]

Thanks for replying.

In terms of the wider policy - as people are making assumptions as to the overall effect of the policy mine is that it will be watered down before implementation - more or less like everything else this current iteration of Labour is offering.

[Sway]

Zolvaro said:

Swervin_Mervin said:

Zolvaro said:

okgo said:

Zolvaro said:

There will however be many kids in the state system with similar issues who parents already can't afford to send them to a private school. It's no more of a shame for his kid than it is for any of them. They all deserve a proper education .

The disruption is the difference. The state children won’t be facing that.

Kids have always been pulled out of private school because of change in circumstances, as I said earlier I would have tapered the VAT relief over a number of years to ease the burden.

The simple fact is private education is buying your child an advantage over their peers, I have no issue with that at all in fact my kids are about to go private, but the tax break is a bonus not a right.

It isn't a bonus, and it isn't a tax break. It has never been subject to VAT.

VAT is on all goods and services unless exempt, it was given an exemption which makes it a tax break.

There isn't an exemption for public schools. Public schools are able (in the vast majority) to make use of broader exemptions as long as they meet the criteria.

Somehow, Labour is going to have to untangle those wider exemptions in order to levy VAT on public school fees, but not (for example) a charity billing for first aid courses.

[TownIdiot]

Sway said:

There isn't an exemption for public schools. Public schools are able (in the vast majority) to make use of broader exemptions as long as they meet the criteria.

Somehow, Labour is going to have to untangle those wider exemptions in order to levy VAT on public school fees, but not (for example) a charity billing for first aid courses.

They aren't just going to target the public schools though are they?

Would make it easier if they were.

[Sway]

TownIdiot said:

Sway said:

There isn't an exemption for public schools. Public schools are able (in the vast majority) to make use of broader exemptions as long as they meet the criteria.

Somehow, Labour is going to have to untangle those wider exemptions in order to levy VAT on public school fees, but not (for example) a charity billing for first aid courses.

They aren't just going to target the public schools though are they?

Would make it easier if they were.

They're not going to want charities or universities falling foul. That will cause uproar.

So they're going to have to do some detangling!

[TownIdiot]

Sway said:

They're not going to want charities or universities falling foul. That will cause uproar.

So they're going to have to do some detangling!

Yes - I can definitely see this being unwound or at least seriously diluted.