To ask if anyone is clued up on the challenge this week to VAT on school fees?

The law says an ehcp needs assessment should take 20 weeks from request to issuing final.

@Lookslikemeemaw - did you pass your GCSEs?!

I think it is simply a question of real lack of talent in Government. If you look at the top CEOs of certain companies who have the brains and management skills to run a huge international business - that is what we really need at the top level of Government.
Instead we get those claiming to be serious economists with a bit of retail banking experience. It is a joke. They go into politics too early with no real exposure to how things actually work in the real world, at the top level, waving their Oxford PPE degree - which is most definitely not proof of competence, far from it. It increasingly appears to be the opposite.
It must be because it is difficult to get elected and a hassle to be there. So it attracts a certain type of person, who unfortunately judging by the last 15 years is seriously and fundamentally lacking in talent, moral compass, common sense and actual proper brains.

the right to education IS a human right. The right for your mummy and daddy to save some cash on tax for the service they pay is NOT a human right.

That was an example of modern unseriousness. Others are available.

Liz Truss was prime minister in 2022.

It is almost like no matter who you vote for, the government always get in.

I suppose many of us thought that the debacle of Tory rule: Rwanda, brexit, Liz Truss etc had come to an end....but no ...Keir is elected to great relief and announces "hold my beer" (excuse the co-incidence) " but I am going to erode your human rights further & drive an even harder brexit by imposing a tx on education"....the debacle is just continuing

Some further irony in the matter - Bridget Phillipson is also

“Minister for Women and Equalities
The Minister for Women and Equalities has responsibility for:
promoting equality of opportunity for everyone, and reducing negative disparities
strategic oversight of the government’s equality policy, for women, ethnicity, disability and LGBT+
overall sponsorship of the Social Mobility Commission and Equality and Human Rights Commission
overview of the overarching equalities legislative framework”

How does that sit with single sex girls independent schools?

Human Rights Commission?!

I don't know how this would stand up in a law case but surely if it can be demonstrated that the theoretical alternative to In Sch is an EHCP and associated support but that acquiring one is too costly / time consuming and drawn out (especially given the time critical nature of a child's educational years) then it would be a pretty weak argument. The whole point is that parents have seen those crucial years running out fighting the system and so they have felt they had no choice but to jump ship where they could.

This is 2024. I have no idea about serious or not anymore. In a land of Rwandan asylum and Liz Truss as Prime Minister, who knows what is comedy anymore ?

Surely this is not a serious suggestion?

But they are without an ehcp as they have never applied for an ehcp (or parents have and have given up on the process), if they are without an ehcp they can still apply for one of their needs can’t be met in mainstream without support. Paying for independent isn’t their only option as regards the sen system do they aren’t being denied an education because of that. As I said before I know in practise the situation is very diff as the system is broken but fundamentally they can apply for an ehcp

While true, it doesn't change the underlying fact.

I can't help but be reminded of the equality that women had to suffer when pension ages were made equal across the sexes.

@SerendipityJane I don't think even Labour hate Ind Sch that much that they would apply it to nursery, university, music and sports lessons, wraparound clubs etc - not because they don't want to just, because it would suddenly affect far more voters and be deeply unpopular. Bit like an income tax rise which would have been a far more effective and fairer way of raising a much larger and useful sum of money across all service users. That might actually have rasied enough to address some of the issues with CAMHS and SEND in state that causes parents to opt out in the first place.

It penalises independent education by imposing a tax that applies to no other form of education.

Suggests a way to comply with the law is to apply the tax to all forms of education then ?

Here you go @Morph22010

https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/our-news/press-releases/isc-to-pursue-legal-action-over-vat

“Further to the release here today from the Independent Schools Council regarding their proposed legal challenge to the Government's decision to apply VAT to independent school fees, Kingsley Napley partner (and Head of Public Law), Sophie Kemp (who is advising the ISC) comments:
“Removing the VAT exemption strikes at the heart of the right to education protected by Article 2 Protocol 1 of the ECHR. It penalises independent education by imposing a tax that applies to no other form of education. Levying a financial penalty on independent schools will make it impossible for some children to attend the school that meets their individual needs, undermining the freedom of choice the Convention guarantees.
"It is also discriminatory, and will hinder access to education for pupils with SEN who are without an EHCP, those attending independent faith schools, and female pupils who attend single sex girls' independent schools. They are all at risk of being left without provision in the State sector." ”

Quite a clear summary of the grounds.

If I had to guess, I would say as to the principal litigation by the ISC, they have probably sent an initial letter or whatever that first process is in judicial review cases, to the Government's lawyers who then respond and then litigation starts - www.law.com/international-edition/2024/11/01/kingsley-napley-and-lord-pannick-spearhead-private-schools-challenge-to-government-vat-policy/?slreturn=2024112652536

Ideologically & politically, we also need to remember that freedom of choice to educate your own children, as you believe, without state interference and concepts of free speech are linked - and we have Elon Musk and Trump to contend with now. Musk has set up his own schools. It is worth bearing in mind.

@Morph22010 - the State has to meet a child’s SEND needs, regardless of EHCP, even in a state school. It is needs based, rather than paper evidence based? So I really cannot see them being able to use the EHCP get out as a complete defence. If they actually wanted this policy to go through, they would have surely approached it completely differently. Certainly not introduced it half way through the school year, applied it to tons of children with SEND (regardless of EHCP) etc. They would have worked with the independent sector etc etc.

It almost looks like they wanted to lose in court and knew full well they were going to lose in court. Unless it is sheer incompetence, which is perhaps even more worrying.

But for Sen if you take a step back in the process it’s not the vat that’s denying a child an education it’s the fact that the Sen system isn’t working well and some parents understandably bypass the Sen system by paying for independent. If those parents can’t afford vat then they still have the option of what all other Sen parents have to do, request an ehc needs assessment, potentially appeal to tribunal at various points, if a particular independent school is truly the only school that can meet needs it will get named in the ehcp the la will pay the full fees not just the vat. Obviously you and me know this process is not straightforward and the reality is a parent will spend years fighting through tribunals to get to the end point with damage to the child in the process, which is why some parents go for funding the independent option themselves. How can it be a breach of human rights if there is another legal option available to technically get to the same result.

Income and wealth are completely different things though. As you say you only need a salary of about £180k to be in the top 1% of earners but you need assets of £3.6 million to be in the top 1% of wealthiest households.

An income of £180k by itself would barely be enough to get a mortgage on the average property price in London.

Somehow I don't think you're going to get good-faith engagement on complex issues of law, policy and ethics with anyone who unironically ends their post with "simples"! (with an s😱)

However, if there really are a significant number of Labour supporters who hate private schools so much that they would rather sacrifice the importance of the human rights act, at all cost - then I really do not think there is any hope for this country, whatsoever.

@Lookslikemeemaw - you are not answering the question. If the Secretary of State loses in court on Human Rights grounds and the policy is a breach, what do you think they should do? Breach the Human Rights Act? Do you actually think they should do this? Really? A Labour Party? It would certainly be the biggest hypocrisy of them all.

This thread is just about the court case and what advice they will have been given and do not actually even need, as their leader is an expert in the Human Rights Act and knew all along, full well, there is a material risk they may lose on human rights grounds.