Forum menu
Labour are going to have to be very careful they aren’t a 1 term gov. Squeeze the pips too hard & you’ll send voters back to the Tories…& I think we can all agree that would be a bad thing..
How many of you here have kids a University?
University fees are currently tax exempt.
How would you all feel/cope if they suddenly had VAT added?
How many of you would then have to either pull your kids out or not send them at all?
"So please don’t think by financial impact/sacrifice I mean I’ll have to use the Lambo and V8 Range Rover less – we aren’t all loaded."
Understand and wasn't trying to imply that. Fundamentally, I believe (and other opinions are available) that if the parents that currently send their kids to private school had to send them to a state school, then standards and funding would fairly rapidly improve (rich articulate folks who know how systems work). I believe every child should have the same start in society, and whilst that's impossible given wealth inequality, education seems a good place to start.
Labour are going to have to be very careful they aren’t a 1 term gov. Squeeze the pips too hard & you’ll send voters back to the Tories…
If I was thinking of being the Tory leader at some point in my political career I'd be doing everything in my power to win it this time around.
Can we be clear, if you can afford a mortgage and to send kids to private school you do not have a “modest income”, unless of course you are independently wealthy.
thisd ..,So much this
Well thanks Rachel Reeves……
Hhhhmm ... I wonder if she perceives private schools as profit making business entity but I am not sure of her rationale.
The way I see it is that the concept of levelling the playing field by imposing VAT on private school fees will affect some of the future generations. How it will affect the future generations I don't know as I am just guessing.
In China, parents send their children to state schools but then back them up with private tuition after school, then the govt steps in to stop private tuition centres because they think that the practice will harm the children and give some them undue advantage over others. However, parents would go "underground" to send them to private tuition.
Abolition of private schools would lift the standards of education in this country and would help tackle the bias society has to the success of those who by accident of birth were lucky enough to have rich parents. The least that should be done is adding VAT, removing charity status, and paying full business rates.
That's a rather optimistic sweeping statement. All parents want to do is to give their children a chance in life and education is the starting point, which is the least parents can do.
If you send your children to the private school then you just have to hang in there for a while longer if you can still afford the VAT. Your children will thank you for that.
Here’s novel idea to plug the £22bn hole – don’t give Ed Miliband £11.6bn to give to foreign climate change aid…… Let sort our own $hit out before we pi$$ money away to other countries.
I wonder who the money will actually go to ... chums and buddies or to buy favour? Someone really need to audit the funding trail. It does not make sense when the govt is saying there is a budget "hole" yet "freely" give money away.
All parents want to do is to give their children a chance in life and education is the starting point, which is the least parents can do.
And what if those with no money also want to do that? See what the problem is....
Some numbers.....
Average UK private school fees are 15200 net of burasaries and scholarships. ( https://ifs.org.uk/publications/tax-private-school-fees-and-state-school-spending)
So if you have the standard two children that's 30400 year.
Average UK mortgage payment on a house is 1400 quid or 16800 / year https://www.unbiased.co.uk/discover/mortgages-property/buying-a-home/what-is-the-average-monthly-mortgage-payment-in-the-uk
Then you need some money for non-accomidation costs etc, so let's use the minimum wage (11.44/year) for that (obvs the mortgage would be taken from this if you were actually on the minimum wage, but they're not sending their kids to private school!) - £22k a year.
So that gives a total of £69k (nice) a year that you'd need to be earning after tax ( https://www.thesalarycalculator.co.uk/lifestyle.php).
For a single income that would require £101k assuming you don't put anything into pension.
Obviously joint income is different as you both have tax allowances.
£101k isn't mega bucks anymore, but it's certainly top 2% of the population.
I wonder if she perceives private schools as profit making business entity
eh? Private schools are clearly for making a profit, there's little point otherwise.
besides who better to get to re-build council housing stock?
Back in the years whe4n we built loads of council houses direct works created better and cheaper houses. It would take time to rebuild the expertise mind you
kerleyFree Member
Labour should have got rid of private school all together as they have no place in an equal society but then that would be the sort of thing an actual Labour Party would be doing and not a pretend one.
How many Labour governments abolished private schooling, or were they all pretend Labour?
A Conservative education minister did abolish fees for state secondary schools in 1944 though.
Oh sure, after WW2 when suddenly there was a huge surplus of labour suddenly looking for work; building houses must've been a god-send. I think Labour would struggle to get "lets have a massive global war to kick off a house building surge" to get past the sniff test of public opinion.
🙂
No one likes the house building corps for sure, but if labour are contracting house building , there'd be no problem with putting a localism clause in them. But if you want a bunch of houses built quickly...
@Ewan some interesting figures there - my daughters fees are not that high, our mortgage is small in comparison to others, and I can also assure you that our joint income isn't anywhere near £69k even BEFORE tax!!
So @anagallis_arvensis please stop making out that I'm asking for sympathy (which I'm not - just pointing out that Labour aren't just screwing the rich with their ill thought out policy) whilst booking an all inclusive trip to Dubai...... as I said we have made financial, personal and lifestyle sacrifices to be able to afford an education for our daughter which we feel that the state cannot provide but she deserves, as do all children.
@nickc
eh? Private schools are clearly for making a profit, there’s little point otherwise.
Believe it or not they aren't......
My Daughters school (listed as a not for profit organisation) uses the money from fees to pay staff, maintain the building, minibuses etc.
Additional funding for extras is raised by the PTA just like a normal school..... including gym equipment, musical instruments and iPads for the prep school.
Stop tarring all "private" schools with the same brush, as said earlier they aren't all like Eton and Repton with the 'old boy' network - there is no leg up, no preferential treatment even if you attempt to throw money at the school - just the same standard of education for ALL pupils regardless of their parents.
If anyone is interested (but guessing not) there is a petition HERE
as they have no place in an equal society
The thing that's wrong with some public schools is the leg up they give to the pupils, not the schooling itself. If you banned them, then the criteria by which the old-boy network operates would simply shift to something else (university or club, regiment, perhaps) The thing that we need to move away from as a nation is to collectively stop the system that the "establishment" use to keep out hoi polloi (see what I did there?)
That's probably beyond the remit of the first few weeks of first Labour govt in 14 years
Stop tarring all “private” schools with the same brush.
Sorry, Your chosen school excepted, the sector makes profits of about £98 million according to this report. Its clear that profit is a major motivation, to say otherwise is obfuscation.
"@Ewan some interesting figures there – my daughters fees are not that high, our mortgage is small in comparison to others, and I can also assure you that our joint income isn’t anywhere near £69k even BEFORE tax!!"
Interesting - would you mind saying which bit of the country you live in? I only ask as the numbers for the fees i've given above do seem fairly representative (cheap tbh) of the private schools round here (near Newbury).
How many of you here have kids a University?
University fees are currently tax exempt.
How would you all feel/cope if they suddenly had VAT added?
How many of you would then have to either pull your kids out or not send them at all?
What an interesting attitude to the education of young adults at university- “pull them out” “not send them”! I may be wrong but I expect most parents don’t pay their children’s uni fees so your hypothetical question is a dilemma for the same people who pay school fees / tutors / buy houses in areas to get in better schools to give their kids an extra leg up.
<quote>Sorry, Your chosen school excepted, the sector makes profits of about £98 million according to this report. Its clear that profit is a major motivation, to say otherwise is obfuscation.</quote>
did you read the article you linked to ? that £98 million profit is the profit made from overseas satellite campuses (most located in china,hong kong and middle east) of UK private schools , not from their UK schools themselves.
It also states that most* of the profits made from these satellite campuses are used to fund bursaries for pupils at the uk schools whose parents cant afford the fees direct .
*5 schools (out of the 40 schools with a charitable status and overseas satelites campuses, there are about 1350 independant schools in the UK, so a tiny fraction are currently making a profit from their overseas campuses) made profits that exceed the bursaries they give out.
Looks like a none story to me - I know the private school we use just plows any "profits" back into the school in the form of bursaries and improvements to facilities etc
Schools are crumbling (RAC), teachers are leaving, population is increasing – where do you start?
I’m guessing not by stuffing a load more kids into overcrowded inadequate, under staffed and under funded schools?
The local school my two went to is finally getting a new building, and the government look to be settling the pay dispute with teachers, and plan to increase staffing. Oh, and pupil numbers are set to fall.
Thanks @dirkpitt74 - guess it makes sense that south east is the priceist bit.
I don't really agree with "there is no leg up, no preferential treatment even if you attempt to throw money at the school – just the same standard of education for ALL pupils regardless of their parents."
There must be a benefit to sending a child to the private school otherwise people wouldn't do it - even if that benefit is only that they get a better education than a peer in a state school. That is a leg up, and it's 100% determined by whether the child is lucky or not - either their parents make huge sacrifices or they're rich - nothing to do with the child (excepting perhaps some scholarships, but even then...).
So @anagallis_arvensis please stop making out that I’m asking for sympathy (which I’m not – just pointing out that Labour aren’t just screwing the rich with their ill thought out policy
No they are also screwing the very well off, let's face it you can just make some more "sacrifices" and stump up for the VAT. I'll bet the proportion of kids in private education hardly changes in the next few years
"I’ll bet the proportion of kids in private education hardly changes in the next few years"
A useful data point that supports this is that in real terms the price of private schools has increased by 20% since 2010 but the % of all pupils attending private school has stayed the same.
https://ifs.org.uk/publications/tax-private-school-fees-and-state-school-spending
@Ewan, a fair point - but is it any different to a state selective Grammar School?
I’ll bet the proportion of kids in private education hardly changes in the next few years
Reading some of the 'chat' in some of the groups on Facebook there is a surprising number of people who have already pulled their children out of independent education before the term starts/fees due - they are now struggling to get places at state schools.
@dirkpitt74 true, and I'm not a massive fan of those either, tho for the more nuanced point that there isn't a provision across the country. My dad went to a grammar, but that was when every town had one, now a lot of parents effectively buy their way into those as well - moving to the catchment area etc.
Reading some of the ‘chat’ in some of the groups on Facebook there is a surprising number of people who have already pulled their children out of independent education before the term starts/fees due
Must be true then if it's on Facebook.
they are now struggling to get places at state schools.
My heart bleeds.
The benefit for a private education is, in my view, the fact you aren't for the most part with a bunch of difficult / can't be arsed kids that take 90% of the over stretched teachers time. I can't say I witnessed any 'old boy' network in action when I went to private school, there was however a lot more opportunities to get involved with clubs / sports and try things out with support
My fees were mostly paid for by the army and an academic and sports bursary. I was a boarder due to family being posted all round the country (and Hong kong). I think it was actually cheaper for me to be at school given the amount I ate.... Its not just the fees you need to factor in, its all the other stuff as well. Being the poorest kid in private school is not a nice position, and one I was constantly reminded of, still overall i think the standard of my education and overall development was much better than the few state schools I went to
My 9 year olds state school class has a very high % of 'challenging' kids, so he is largely ignored by the teachers and just gets on with stuff. No one there to push him or encourage him to excel. We've looked at private schools, without this change we could only just about send one child, not both. And that would be with pretty much everything 'nice' cut out of the budget. There would be no wiggle room for a jump in fees or the like so I'm glad we didn't make the commitment. If we could afford it I would be sending both my kids no questions,
Ive heard schools are offering parents the opportunity to pay up front to avoid some of the increased cost, at least short term. I'm sure there will be other ways to avoid paying extra.
Out of curiosity I had a look at the fees my old school now charges.
Years 9–11 day £30,495 pa (£10,165 per term)
Years 9–11 boarding £46,455 pa (£15,485 per term)
Sixth form day £31,080 pa (£10,360 per term)
Sixth form boarding £47,175 pa (£15,725 per term)
I don't know how typical that is - when I went there it was certainly not a top tier public school - but that's pretty spicy. I'd be struggling to feel much sympathy for people who can afford that kind of money. I'm also really surprised that there are enough people around who can afford that, given that apparently 7% of children go to fee-paying schools.
the fact you aren’t for the most part with a bunch of difficult / can’t be arsed kids that take 90% of the over stretched teachers time.
This is currently due to underfunding in state schools. If our state system was properly funded and streamed as it should be to give everyone a comprehensive education tailored to their strengths and skill-set.
(comprehensive adjective - including or dealing with all or nearly all elements or aspects of something."a comprehensive list of sources")
Ive heard schools are offering parents the opportunity to pay up front to avoid some of the increased cost, at least short term. I’m sure there will be other ways to avoid paying extra.
Won't do any good as the new regulations/law make VAT payable on all fees for education from January 2025 onwards no matter when they are paid. (The lessons of pre-paying for energy have been learned).
That’s a big ‘if’ about funding and from what I can see not one that will be sorted during my children’s time at school. So my son will be stuck with that group of kids throughout primary, my hope is senior school is better. My younger son doesn’t have the same % of difficult kids in the same school 2 years down. I’m told it’s to do with Covid, so maybe it’ll be the same whatever school
if the VAT can’t be avoided I wonder why they are offering payments up front described as reducing the impact of the costs
Nothing to stop them offering reduced rates if you pay in advance, with the schools soaking up the VAT increase. In fact, if charging 30k a year for a sixth form day pupil, they could probably soak up the VAT costs for all pupils in the long term… considering that is SIX TIMES what a state school or sixth form college gets per a child doing a-levels.
Years 9–11 boarding £46,455 pa
Funny really, that's pretty much my salary as a teacher with pushing 20 years experience.
Years 9–11 day £30,495 pa (£10,165 per term)
Would leave me with about 3k to live on if my son went. Still just need to make a few sacrifices and such.....
I did wonder in the election thread whether it'd have been fairer (in the smaller context) to allow already enrolled children to complete their studies VAT-free. There's no need to cause individual level difficulties while making a transition to reduce systemic unfairness.
People made decisions about their kids' education, then the government changed things so those decisions were no longer viable to continue. But it was obvious to anyone thinking thoroughly that it had been and would eventually again come under scrutiny.
Governments have previously pulled larger rugs out from under people and business, including those less able to absorb the impact. They had to suck it up. You could say now it's someone else's turn, there was no protection for them and there isn't for you either. However I'm uncomfortable in general with the nastiness of people not caring about perceived government unfairness on the basis that there was previous perceived government unfairness to themselves.
I don't think it's unfair. I'm supportive of the move.
My point is about government changes which affect life decisions people made for their kids a couple of years ago.
I'm trying to think of all perspectives here. I think too often some people are keen to raise their hammer for laudable societal causes but forgetting (or not) that there are impacts on individuals.
e.g. we equalised the retirement ages for the sexes a while ago, and there were some arguments about moving the goalposts on which people had already made life decisions based on.
People made decisions about their kids’ education, then the government changed things so those decisions were no longer viable to continue. But it was obvious to anyone thinking thoroughly that it had been and would eventually again come under scrutiny.
Something does not sound right there for some reasons, I mean the govt sounds desperate with their priority.
It is the right thing to do and should have been done years ago and it is a very easy thing to do so not so much a priority as a thing that can be done with little effort. Be stupid not to do it.
As for education for 'normal' people, what additional funding is on the cards for that, what radical changes are to be implemented to deal with the issues stated in this thread meaning some people go out of their way to ensure their kids don't have to go to state school?
Got to be a top priority surely given these are the future working generation but guessing we can't afford to do anything until the massive growth kicks in?
Some facts.
There's about 10.3m kids in education in the UK
6% are in private education = 600k, so 9.7m in state.
The average class size is 22.3 in secondary schools and 26.7 in primary ( https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2022-12-20.114749.h)
IFS modelling based on surveys suggests 17-40k children will move from private to state as a result of VAT. At the top end that means 9.7m becomes 9.74m, that's a 0.4% increase in state school numbers. Which will turn a primary school class from an average of 26.7 kids into one of 26.8, and a secondary school class 22.3 -> 22.4.
All this fearmongering of the state school sector being overrun is bollocks. And a facebook page of parents all saying how they can't get into their chosen state school - I'm sure is true - but you don't always get your first choice and I'll bet my own money there's space at the other schools in the area. Plus a FB page of moaning parents isn't an unbiased survey.
**
And over the top of all of this:
UK birth rates are low and dropping, to the extent that it's being predicted schools will have to close for lack of numbers.
the IFS report also says that pupil numbers across England are due to decline by at least 100,000 per year on average up to 2030, due to falling birth rates. This figure is broadly supported by Government education statistics, which show an expected drop of more than 625,000 pupils between 2023 and 2030 in state primary and secondary schools
For those that are interested - particularly in respect of Reeves and many other Chancellors. Here is a nice and simple primer of gov spending v taxation.
Everything starts with this logic. It's bang up to date too.
It's important to note that Murphy is not an MMTer as such but does reflect certain elements of the banking system correctly.
The average class size is 22.3 in secondary schools and 26.7 in primary
I'm surprised at that - they were easily 30+ in my secondary schools back in the 80s!
And a facebook page of parents all saying how they can’t get into their chosen state school
Those parents will also have a large chunk of money spare to spend on private tutors. So will still have an advantage.