Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To really dislike Bridget Phillipson?

381 replies

Sensiblyplease · 08/10/2024 13:09

I just absolutely can’t stand the woman.

The lady seems to be making decisions based on personal prejudices and causing intentional division in our education system.
She’s not listening to anyone, and the consequences her decisions are having is far too impactful to ignore. As someone in her power she should model balanced politics, based on evidence, instead of in-sighting hate and division.

My children are in state school- we’ve had 3
more children come into their year group with SEN but no EHCPs as their previous independent schools could cope without one. The parents inform me it’ll take a few years and that’s if they get one- and then they can either go back to their previous independent school (as apparently they won’t have to pay VAT with an ECHP?) or have the help they need according to the results of the ECHP.

Im just so angry. I have nothing against these children and can understand they can’t afford the VAT increase and needed to move back into state schools, but it’s now really disrupted the class. The TA is apparently out the class all the time now and the class teacher has 32 children on her own. It appears that Bridget’s insistence and personal hate against the private sector is damaging to state school children. It’s really pissing me off - our children’s education is important and not to be messed around with.

I feel like the woman likes a good headline but is prepared to throw our children’s education away in order to meet her personal objectives / vendettas.

What is she actually doing for state schools? Her headline grabbing titles is deflecting from her actually trying to improve state education in any meaningful and impactful way. 6500 teachers - so my kids get 1/3 of a teacher for their school? That’s shocking. More children entering the state system now puts pressure on their school, and their teachers. What is she actually doing to address this. Where is she magic-ing these trained and qualified teachers from? What is she doing to retain teachers and help with their current work load?

I’m fed up with her agenda effecting normal people. We need someone with a level head to sort schools out. End of rant!

OP posts:
goodluckbinbin · 13/10/2024 13:15

Hanni5686 · 12/10/2024 20:02

I really hope it is to be honest.

Yes, let’s hopes the sooner this two tier system is gone the better. There’ll always be the Eton’s but the super wealthy will always be entirely separate for most if their existence anyway.

north51 · 12/10/2024 23:06

Ironically it is probably the highest profile, most vilified, private schools, like Eton, whose charitable contribution is the greatest and most tangible. And these schools will continue to do this regardless of the current climate.

Also, not many people realise, only about 50% of private schools in England are charities.

north51 · 12/10/2024 22:55

VimtoVimto · 11/10/2024 18:00

They can also apply for Gift Aid on donations, plus donors who are higher rate taxpayers can claim tax relief. They are also exempt from stamp duty on the purchase of land. It would be interesting to see how much this has cost the Treasury.

State schools get gift aid on donations too (& parents can claim back higher rate tax too.) One of our DC was offered a place at state grammar and we had letter from head asking us to gift aid £120 per month before DC had even started. This seems to be a little discussed secret about top performing state schools. Often the govt expects these schools to raise a % of funds for new buildings from parents and these are gift aided donations. Wld be interesting to see what the true cost of state schools is too. Top performing state schools/those in affluent areas get a lot more funding this way from parents and the govt tax rebate than underperforming schools and schools in poor areas. See also some of the top 6th form colleges in London who’ve acknowledged that they get £1mn+ annual gift aided donations that they use for their running costs. Private schools cannot use gift aided donations for running costs - all their running costs are met by fees which are paid after tax, no gift aid.
There’s a lot more disparity in funding between state schools than perhaps people are aware of. BP could and should be fixing that.

Hanni5686 · 12/10/2024 20:02

Rockalittle78 · 12/10/2024 06:32

Private school exodus could be twice as bad as predicted.

Author of report used by Labour to defend VAT raid warns that as many as 90,000 pupils could switch to state schools.

Well done Luke.

I really hope it is to be honest.

ByTealShaker · 12/10/2024 16:08

You have nothing against SEN children but clearly you do. God forbid they disrupt your precious perfectly developing healthy children… get a grip seriously.

it’s not children under SEN with or with EHCP’s that’s the problem - that is a whole world of its own problems and be grateful you don’t have to deal with it - it’s the education system as a whole. LA’s don’t want to spend money where they should be spending it, and now it’s coming back to bite them on the arse.

Teaching is doing a big recruitment drive, but do you know how hard it is to actually get into teaching? It’s nearly impossible for those thinking about a career change so they’re having to rely on retired or ex-teachers to go back into teaching or otherwise graduates who will quit after a year because ‘it’s not what they imagined’.

WestwardHo1 · 12/10/2024 16:04

SurroundSoundLol · 08/10/2024 13:40

Both parties seem hell bent on using the education sector as ideological football. I would be first in line to sign a petition to keep the sector out of ministerial reach in some way. Maybe civil servants run it, and it doesn't keep changing according to the rotating cast of characters that want to make their mark. Gove, Phillipson et al, so many destructive changes to how children learn and achieve at school and in life.

👏👏👏

SurroundSoundLol · 12/10/2024 15:57

There are really good arguments on both sides of the issue. Perhaps what BP and the govt have got wrong is the amount of tax they are asking for. 20% is a lot - and I say this as we really felt it when our mortgage, which is our largest outgoing, went up by 2%. It's the 20% that seems to be generating all this fuss on Mumsnet, with threats of driving people from private to state, as it's such a ludicrous amount to ask for. Even the IFS report costed for 15% max.

This policy has a chance of some success if they had asked for maybe 5% off this fundraising route, and got more out of other taxation routes, which could be more clearly earmarked for education. Few or no parents may need to move for that much increase, so there might actually be something made for the tax purse.

I understand all VAT just goes into a general pot too, so there's no way for taxpayers to hold them accountable for extra spend on education, with corresponding results. That's what I'm irritated by - she talks a good game, but I would respect it more if she was being sensible about it and putting money where the govt mouth is. Right now I think the 20% "ask" is too much of a risk to work at all. Let's see if the budget actually does identify other sources of funding to help the sector, and not just this tax.

Another76543 · 12/10/2024 15:30

Countrylife2002 · 12/10/2024 15:23

Being wealthier isn’t down to working harder. It’s down to good fortune essentially. Plenty of people on the minimum wage work hard!

People on pension credit are amongst the poorest of the poor. You are really struggling if you’re a pensioner on pension credit.

Edited

I didn’t say minimum wage employees don’t work hard. Being wealthier often is down to working hard though. It’s often not just good fortune. Working 14 hour days, travelling for work and being away from family for days on end etc. Sitting professional exams, studying for years, on top of their jobs etc. Why would people do that if they end up with little more than people who do 9-5 (or less) in a stress free job?

With regard to pension credit, some (not all) have worked little in their life. They have ended up with a higher income, due to the pension credit system, than those who’ve slogged their guts out to save a tiny bit towards their retirement. They would have been better off not trying to save a little bit.

Countrylife2002 · 12/10/2024 15:27

FourSeasonsLobelia · 12/10/2024 08:38

I have already had conversations with people who say they will move their kids to state because of the policy and it means that instead of both parents working full time one will ditch their job completely or both will reduce hours. Because however many thousands has just been freed up and they can step back. So less tax income for the government. And personally i think the rhetoric of ‘those with the broadest shoulders’ is flawed anyway. Those who have the broadest shoulders tend to be net contributors and the very ones who are propping up the system already. Yet get told they are just rich arseholes who deserve to be squeezed to death. Its flawed and counter productive IMO. We are net contributors and over the years have talked about migrating to my home country. But in general terms. Yesterday we had the conversation with intent.

Edited

Think it’s unlikely you’ll be squeezed to death financially…

No-one has an entitlement to a private education.

Countrylife2002 · 12/10/2024 15:23

Another76543 · 12/10/2024 08:31

The more the government take off people, the less of an incentive there is to work harder. What’s the point in working harder, for longer hours, if you end up no better off? The problem with this approach is that there comes a point (which we are pretty much at now) where people won’t work as hard, or they’ll look at moving to other countries which rewards and encourages.

This is the problem with the pension credit system. We are in a position where those who haven’t worked as much during their life, haven’t made any private provision, are financially better off that those who worked, contributed more, and tried to save for their retirement. What is the point in working hard when those who haven’t end up with more?

Being wealthier isn’t down to working harder. It’s down to good fortune essentially. Plenty of people on the minimum wage work hard!

People on pension credit are amongst the poorest of the poor. You are really struggling if you’re a pensioner on pension credit.

FourSeasonsLobelia · 12/10/2024 08:38

I have already had conversations with people who say they will move their kids to state because of the policy and it means that instead of both parents working full time one will ditch their job completely or both will reduce hours. Because however many thousands has just been freed up and they can step back. So less tax income for the government. And personally i think the rhetoric of ‘those with the broadest shoulders’ is flawed anyway. Those who have the broadest shoulders tend to be net contributors and the very ones who are propping up the system already. Yet get told they are just rich arseholes who deserve to be squeezed to death. Its flawed and counter productive IMO. We are net contributors and over the years have talked about migrating to my home country. But in general terms. Yesterday we had the conversation with intent.

pinkpopcorn123 · 12/10/2024 08:38

Countrylife2002 · 12/10/2024 07:58

To increase equality, obviously many people will have to have less, to make sure other people have more. This policy is one step on that road. The money isn’t even coming through yet so of course it’s not hit the state schools yet. But those who have more need to get used to the idea that fairness means they will have to pay more into the system . Education is a good place to start but the principle will need to be applied to many areas. People with little really have nothing, I work for a charity and have done for over a decade and I have never seen things so bad. And it’s something the state can fix.

Those who earn more, already contribute more via NI contribution and tax. I know of lots of people who won't work more as it will affect their benefits. So, a blanket those who have less need to have more is not as straight forward a problem to solve as you suggest. Firstly, if they can't afford more they need to seriously consider working more. Full time workers should not need top up UC, companies should be enforced by law to pay adequately. Childcare is too expensive. So as a charity worker, you will know this is a complex problem with multiple solutions and no easy fix. There is so much wrong with the country but to suggest higher earners should always be the ones to pay more is in my opinion, ridiculous. Look at the pay needed to be a net contributor.
Using, the VAT on fees as an example, Sir Keir's children cost more to educate than a lower earner on say £40,000 using an independent school. The money not used to educate their children is then "back in the pot" and used for everyone in the state system. 50% of the highest earners use the state system. This tax just makes the 7% responsible for the majority. Why not make higher earners in the state system, who are actually using it pay more? Why is it the responsibility of private school parents who aren't using the system to pay for high earners using the state system? If we want to spend more on education this is the responsibility of the entire country. You will run out of other people's money to spend.

Another76543 · 12/10/2024 08:31

Countrylife2002 · 12/10/2024 07:58

To increase equality, obviously many people will have to have less, to make sure other people have more. This policy is one step on that road. The money isn’t even coming through yet so of course it’s not hit the state schools yet. But those who have more need to get used to the idea that fairness means they will have to pay more into the system . Education is a good place to start but the principle will need to be applied to many areas. People with little really have nothing, I work for a charity and have done for over a decade and I have never seen things so bad. And it’s something the state can fix.

The more the government take off people, the less of an incentive there is to work harder. What’s the point in working harder, for longer hours, if you end up no better off? The problem with this approach is that there comes a point (which we are pretty much at now) where people won’t work as hard, or they’ll look at moving to other countries which rewards and encourages.

This is the problem with the pension credit system. We are in a position where those who haven’t worked as much during their life, haven’t made any private provision, are financially better off that those who worked, contributed more, and tried to save for their retirement. What is the point in working hard when those who haven’t end up with more?

EasternStandard · 12/10/2024 08:23

Countrylife2002 · 12/10/2024 07:58

To increase equality, obviously many people will have to have less, to make sure other people have more. This policy is one step on that road. The money isn’t even coming through yet so of course it’s not hit the state schools yet. But those who have more need to get used to the idea that fairness means they will have to pay more into the system . Education is a good place to start but the principle will need to be applied to many areas. People with little really have nothing, I work for a charity and have done for over a decade and I have never seen things so bad. And it’s something the state can fix.

Try not to level down and just make everyone poorer

Labour have already rowed back on some policy due to a very late realisation on behaviour. Why they can only see this as chancellor at this point is concerning and odd but there you go

This policy is along the same lines and should go

Rockalittle78 · 12/10/2024 08:10

Countrylife2002 · 12/10/2024 07:58

To increase equality, obviously many people will have to have less, to make sure other people have more. This policy is one step on that road. The money isn’t even coming through yet so of course it’s not hit the state schools yet. But those who have more need to get used to the idea that fairness means they will have to pay more into the system . Education is a good place to start but the principle will need to be applied to many areas. People with little really have nothing, I work for a charity and have done for over a decade and I have never seen things so bad. And it’s something the state can fix.

I particularly disagree with your last sentence.

The world is not egalitarian - similar to the nature,
some flourish, some merely survive. No amount of social engineering can fix that.

Countrylife2002 · 12/10/2024 07:58

To increase equality, obviously many people will have to have less, to make sure other people have more. This policy is one step on that road. The money isn’t even coming through yet so of course it’s not hit the state schools yet. But those who have more need to get used to the idea that fairness means they will have to pay more into the system . Education is a good place to start but the principle will need to be applied to many areas. People with little really have nothing, I work for a charity and have done for over a decade and I have never seen things so bad. And it’s something the state can fix.

Rockalittle78 · 12/10/2024 06:32

Private school exodus could be twice as bad as predicted.

Author of report used by Labour to defend VAT raid warns that as many as 90,000 pupils could switch to state schools.

Well done Luke.

noblegiraffe · 11/10/2024 22:57

There are over 10 million school kids in the UK. There are about 1000 at Eton, which is 0.01% of kids. Even if you were to say that Eton is significant/a source of inequality, it's balanced out by state schools like Hills Road Sixth form college and Brampton Manor Academy - who send more to Oxbridge than Eton do.

And prime ministers?

veryconcernedgran · 11/10/2024 20:50

Just to add to this discussion I can confirm this person to be a cold , calculating , characterless bully , how on earth she is sitting in a privileged position is astounding , please read some of the posts in Sunderland Corruption , BTW her seat is probably one of the safest in the country so looks like she can remain smug and superior until such time she is exposed for the real character behind the charade .

Rockalittle78 · 11/10/2024 20:30

EasternStandard · 11/10/2024 10:23

@MoneyNeverSleeps did you have a thread on the NHS? Why would that be against guidelines, it seems to be disappeared

Edited

I noticed that too.

Bonkers.

BIossomtoes · 11/10/2024 19:24

Another76543 · 11/10/2024 17:29

The people complaining about Labour aren’t all Tory voters! You only have see the threads with posters regretting being a Labour voter.

Edited

Or saying they are. Anyone can say anything anonymously.

VimtoVimto · 11/10/2024 18:00

Morph22010 · 11/10/2024 17:34

If they operate as a charity then the main relief is from corporation tax on their profit/surplus. I know most operate as not for profit but that same as not having a taxable profit, especially schools that have a high level of capital investment into buildings

They can also apply for Gift Aid on donations, plus donors who are higher rate taxpayers can claim tax relief. They are also exempt from stamp duty on the purchase of land. It would be interesting to see how much this has cost the Treasury.

Morph22010 · 11/10/2024 17:38

Another76543 · 10/10/2024 07:14

It’ll be interesting where she will get it from because she’s ruled out income tax/NIC/VAT rises. Unless of course she breaks this pre election pledge.

Did she rule out a rise in income tax, or was it income tax for working people? I wouldn’t suprised if income tax on dividends went up or they could even not raise income tax at all and add national insurance to dividends

Morph22010 · 11/10/2024 17:34

edwinbear · 11/10/2024 10:11

On the charity point, Labour are also removing private schools charitable business rates relief. So there will be absolutely no benefit from them being registered as a charity. At that point, if they are legally able to, I imagine many of them will voluntarily drop their charitable status, so there will be no requirement for them to offer any bursaries/scholarships, or loan out facilities.

Labour did look at removing charitable status for PS, but quietly dropped it when they realised it was essentially impossible from a legal perspective. But PS will no longer receive any benefit at all from being registered charities so there are no 'threats' that can be leveraged against them if they drop any charitable activities.

If they operate as a charity then the main relief is from corporation tax on their profit/surplus. I know most operate as not for profit but that same as not having a taxable profit, especially schools that have a high level of capital investment into buildings

Another76543 · 11/10/2024 17:29

BIossomtoes · 11/10/2024 17:21

My comment applied to all Tory voters complaining bitterly about three months of a Labour government when some of us suffered for 14 long, miserable years under their favoured regime. That was obvious.

The people complaining about Labour aren’t all Tory voters! You only have see the threads with posters regretting being a Labour voter.

Swipe left for the next trending thread