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

I haven't read all the earlier posts, and last time I looked I could not see that barristers opinions had been posted anywhere, but as I understand it the hopes are pinned on Arts 14 and Art 2, Prot 1 - that charging VAT on school fees and not those for nurseries or universities will lead to unlawful age discrimination (Art 14) in the way the right to education (Art 2) is provided.

I would say this is a pretty flimsy argument. You can get lawyers to cook up clever sounding submissions for just about anything if you pay them, and given the commercial interests at stake it must be worth a throw for the schools, but I don't think that this has much chance of flying as unlawful discrimination.

I really hope you are right. I read your posts and think great

But then I read the other pp and think Labour will push through and maybe go ahead anyway and it's disappointing

I guess we'll see. I hope you're right though!

There’s a fuck lot of levels between a newly qualified barrister and Lord whatsisface wjo’s fees are between £5k and £10k PER hour … the man who defended Bojo over partygate.

And no, you probably aren’t, but my point was the fact that these schools are absolutely MINTED businesses that charge a lot of money to educate the kids of the wealthy.
and rather than do anything to help out those parents they’re choosing to sue the government to protect their money and privilege. Not sure that’s going to win the hearts and minds of the nation.

There’s a fuck lot of levels between a newly qualified barrister and Lord whatsisface wjo’s fees are between £5k and £10k PER hour … the man who defended Bojo over partygate.

And no, you probably aren’t, but my point was the fact that these schools are absolutely MINTED businesses that charge a lot of money to educate the kids of the wealthy.
and rather than do anything to help out those parents they’re choosing to sue the government to protect their money and privilege. Not sure that’s going to win the hearts and minds of the nation.

There’s a fuck lot of levels between a newly qualified barrister and Lord whatsisface wjo’s fees are between £5k and £10k PER hour … the man who defended Bojo over partygate.

And no, you probably aren’t, but my point was the fact that these schools are absolutely MINTED businesses that charge a lot of money to educate the kids of the wealthy.
and rather than do anything to help out those parents they’re choosing to sue the government to protect their money and privilege. Not sure that’s going to win the hearts and minds of the nation.

There’s a fuck lot of levels between a newly qualified barrister and Lord whatsisface wjo’s fees are between £5k and £10k PER hour … the man who defended Bojo over partygate.

And no, you probably aren’t, but my point was the fact that these schools are absolutely MINTED businesses that charge a lot of money to educate the kids of the wealthy.
and rather than do anything to help out those parents they’re choosing to sue the government to protect their money and privilege. Not sure that’s going to win the hearts and minds of the nation.

There’s a fuck lot of levels between a newly qualified barrister and Lord whatsisface wjo’s fees are between £5k and £10k PER hour … the man who defended Bojo over partygate.

And no, you probably aren’t, but my point was the fact that these schools are absolutely MINTED businesses that charge a lot of money to educate the kids of the wealthy.
and rather than do anything to help out those parents they’re choosing to sue the government to protect their money and privilege. Not sure that’s going to win the hearts and minds of the nation.

You're hardly going to instruct a newly qualified barrister to take on the government though, are you?There is one chance to defeat this, so the ISC will throw everything they have at this, including instructing the barristers with the best chance of winning. Surely this is just common sense.

So the private schools have hired a £5k per hour barrister to represent them and sue the government… interesting that they don’t have the cash to soften the impact of VAT on their parents but can afford one of the country’s leading barristers.
I’m sure the general public will be well behind this ‘human rights’ case…

When was the last time a manifesto pledge was scrapped ?

Bearing in mind team Jenrick will be watching this carefully as they are planning to put forward pulling the UK out of the ECHR as a manifesto pledge.

When was the last time a manifesto pledge was scrapped ?

Bearing in mind team Jenrick will be watching this carefully as they are planning to put forward pulling the UK out of the ECHR as a manifesto pledge.

No, the aim is to reverse the policy and that is the best outcome for everyone. Nobody is pushing for compensation, but that is the likely recourse of Labour pushing on with the policy despite outstanding legal actions that are likely to be successful. Then the policy will be dropped.
I can’t see it going that way though, it will be delayed from going ahead in January before being later fully dropped. The division this has caused will not be so easily forgotten.

When was the last time a manifesto pledge was scrapped ?

Bearing in mind team Jenrick will be watching this carefully as they are planning to put forward pulling the UK out of the ECHR as a manifesto pledge.

Personally I don't want compo. I just want a ruling that makes Labour scrap the policy plus the resignation of Phillipson.

Is that the outcome that is desired by Pannick and ISC?

That there would be compensation?

Actually I'm not sure, what is the best outcome for them do you think?

Not technically, but the Government would be recklessly leaving themselves wide open to being sued for compensation by the 35000 children estimated to be immediately forced out the private sector when the legal challenge is upheld. They’d be back in the private sector pretty quickly after that, with a few years’ spare fees.

Is that the outcome that is desired by Pannick and ISC?

That there would be compensation?

Actually I'm not sure, what is the best outcome for them do you think?

Not technically, but the Government would be recklessly leaving themselves wide open to being sued for compensation by the 35000 children estimated to be immediately forced out the private sector when the legal challenge is upheld. They’d be back in the private sector pretty quickly after that, with a few years’ spare fees.

Because fiscal responsibility or sense has nothing to do with it.
Labour waging war on people they view as being Tory ie farmers, independent schools + pensioners.
Taxing education is unethical and petty. It is a revenge tax

So the private schools have hired a £5k per hour barrister to represent them and sue the government… interesting that they don’t have the cash to soften the impact of VAT on their parents but can afford one of the country’s leading barristers.
I’m sure the general public will be well behind this ‘human rights’ case…