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

Ok so speaking as one of the 93% not in the position to do so I’ll say again your choice, the vast majority are not able to do so and have to get on with it. You takes your money and makes your choice but now you will need to pay VAT for it.

Mine will cope, because they won’t have to move. They are staying exactly where they are. Many children will not cope though. I can’t understand how a civilised society can intentionally seek to make some children unhappy, when that doesn’t improve the lives of anyone else. No one is gaining. Some children are being harmed.

My child couldn’t cope in mainstream school, he is autistic, private wasn’t an option for us so we had to battle through the Sen system which is a shambles and eventually for a specialist school, this included a tribunal for refusal to even assess his needs by the la. It took us from year one to year four to get specialist and during this time he got worse, was having big meltdowns at school as he couldn’t cope in the noisy chaotic environment and got to the point where the meltdowns were so bad he was throwing furniture which is obviously unsettling for other children too and outside of school he was saying he wanted to die and tried to throw himself down the stairs and out of windows. I can totally understand why parents if the option is available to them choose to send their child to private, small nurturing schools rather than have the inevitable years long battle to get support in mainstream or a specialist school, sometimes just muddling through isn’t an option

I work in the state education sector and I agree that this is absolute rubbish.

Believe me, we already have plenty of "vocal" parents. A few more won't make any difference.

Well they’re not- speaking as somebody who sees kids moving schools countless times. It’s life, 93% of kids don’t have the luxury of parents able to buy them out of less favourable situations. They cope, yours will too.

Of course they don’t care, they don’t care about Sen( which so many now proclaim their kids to have) and they don’t care about the state sector- all they care about is their kids getting a private education which causes huge inequalities amongst the rest of the population. That’s fine but you will now have to pay VAT for it.

Forcing happy children from the private system isn’t going to help those many kids already in the state system and finding the environment hard though. Who gains? No one. But some happy children are harmed.

The irony is that they want us sharp elbowed parents to move our kids to state so we can somehow miraculously improve the state sector yet they are shocked when we use those elbows to challenge this punitive policy.
The expectation was that we would just roll over meekly?

This is a theme that comes up again and again - that if you get vocal private school parents into state schools they'll somehow improve them?

Not only is it nonsense - you're never going to get a majority of private school parents to move into the state sector - but also it's so damning to suggest that state school parents - all 93% of them - have such an ineffective voice that they need the other 7% to speak to make any difference.

And an.afterthought after enriching Chinese companies selling cheap litter vapes into the UK because it might lose some working class votes who took up vaping.

The whole point of this policy was to get the vocal middle classes back into state? So if they end up being vocal on behalf of children with SEND where is the actual problem? If the courts hold that the whole SEND system is inadequate we all benefit and Central Government will have to pay up more towards education. That is what most of us want. To improve education for all children rather than children being an afterthought after pubs.

Many kids find the school environment hard, the vast majority have to get on with it. Only a tiny percentage can afford private.Where was your concern before? I didn’t notice any frothing re the under funding in education before the 7% of the population using private education were faced with rises in fees being due to VAT. Families unable to cope with any rise in fees (which happens anyway ) isn’t in a child’s best interest either.

Going to the state school available to me did harm them. It's really that simple. I'd bloody love it if mine were confident, outgoing, academic, popular and well served by a free local school. Of course I would. But they aren't, weren't and suffered the consequences. That's not true for the majority I know, and that's great, but pretending it's fine for all because it's fine for most is no help.

And all the research shows how damaging it is for any child to move schools, especially in secondary.
The main issue is cost. For every child that leaves indy the state then has to pay for their education at £7-8K per year. Indy sector saves state £4 billion per year because parents pay for their child to be educated, we take that responsibility off the state.
If 10% leave then the cost to taxpayer will be £375,000,000 per year

A lot of the children who will be forced to leave have already tried the state sector. They left because it was failing them. Lots of children in the private sector cope with smaller, more nurturing schools. They simply cannot cope with large state schools.

And all the research shows how damaging it is for any child to move schools, especially in secondary.
The main issue is cost. For every child that leaves indy the state then has to pay for their education at £7-8K per year. Indy sector saves state £4 billion per year because parents pay for their child to be educated, we take that responsibility off the state.
If 10% leave then the cost to taxpayer will be £375,000,000 per year

@xenia “Hopefully the courts will find in favour of the private schools in the litigation. it is the court not barrisers' opinions which will prevail. I suppose Labour could choose to abolish the Human Rights Act 1998 and that might help the UK in some other ways too as we would even then still be subject to laws against torture in war - Geneva Convention etc too.
It would be quite funny though if the litigation means Labour is hoist by its own human rights petard.”

Labour will never abolish the HR Act, not even Kendrick suggested that. Even he wanted an equivalent just not be subject to the ECHR having the last word? Even for the Tories this was the old sovereignty adage.

Fact of the matter is, it is hugely embarrassing for a G7 country that used to command respect worldwide to constantly be litigating on human rights law breaches! So what now - we are going to try and be green to set an example to the developing world a la Miliband yet we are happy to embarrass ourselves publicly yet again by breaching human rights of disabled children? It is a fucking joke! Reeves has openly admitted she cannot exempt children with SEND in private schools because with such an exemption her policy won’t make any money at all and so won’t stand up as a tax policy. She has already admitted that she will lose in my mind.
Frankly, I think this is a Labour Party own issue, I do not one minute believe Reeeves or Starmer ever believed they would get this through. They have done absolutely everything towards making this fail.

Going to a state school isn’t harming children, neither is moving schools. Kids up and down the country do it all the time.

I’d be more embarrassed by the U.K. being the only country in Europe to tax education than your friends being concerned about their children’s education to be honest.

As far as people publicly criticising Government policy, until Privilege Finder General becomes an official role and the U.K. leaves the ECHR you are going to have to ‘cringe’ through freedom of speech and plurality of education.

Again, IF this would help, I'd swallow it. But they will be harmed for no gain and there's no perspective that makes this right.

Exactly this. Children are being harmed for no gain. If it was raising money to improve the state sector, I could understand it more, but it isn’t.

@Orchidzombiewatch what perspective is appropriate for me for my children on this? I mean, I have good credit rating, I'll remortgage if I have to and probably delay retirement but I know some of their friends will be leaving school if this goes through. I know them well. They re not "Sebastian and Arabella" to me or their parents. Again, IF this would help, I'd swallow it. But they will be harmed for no gain and there's no perspective that makes this right.

How do you know I can "easily afford the increase"? Do you know the finances of every one of the parents of all 550,000 kids? It is this sweeping stereotype that infuriates me most. You must understand that the wages of parents in the NE are vastly under those in the South as 1 example?
Same argument was applied to WFA ie all pensioners are rich so they can afford the increase.

The most wealthy often aren’t complaining about this policy, because they’ve pre-paid fees and won’t be subject to the VAT.

It is nothing to do with fairness. It is that education is zero rated across the while of Europe and much of the world. That's the point of principle. That Labour will make UK the only country in Europe to tax education for literally £0 net income.
Nothing to do with "keeping our privilege", it is a point of principle that governments don't tax education or seek to raise money on it.
Universities are already in scope due to BP setting the age limit to 19 so don't be fooled that this will end with indy schools

Why did you choose private schools if you prefer lower inequality?