Grammar schools to be means tested for free places

How, exactly would Labour tax these people? How would they know where dc go to school? Fees are an easy target, and Vat is collected by the business, but how do you tax parents not paying fees? We have pretty average housing where we have three grammar schools. Very few expensive houses when compared with housing costs 10 miles further south.

Parents have paid for tutoring but some go without to do that. I don’t like it at all. I would prefer the schools to help more but how do you stop tutoring? It’s impossible.

Yes! There is such a big focus on private school parents getting an advantage but no one is actually looking within the state system at the huge disparities there! There are many, many parents with the means to contribute more to the overall system that educates their children and others less fortunate yet instead of paying in, use this money for tutoring and giving their children a significant advantage over their less wealthy class mates! That is were the greatest disparity is and if Labour didn’t have such a laser focused hatred of private schools, they would have realised that there would have been a lot more income to be generated off the wealthy currently taking advantage of the best state and church schools through the funds they have to be able to buy and reside in the right catchment areas in primary and tutor the socks off their kids to get into the best state secondaries!!

I'm not pretending anything.

I'm simply saying that Labour have a long history of trying to remove inequality in education.

Lots of people with kids at grammars like to pretend their kids are "just" at state school and that people with kids in private are evil turds who've bought advantage. But so many of those grammar kids' parents have procured advantage for their kids - just in a different way. Why not target them financially, if it's OK to target private parents? Why should people in million pound houses get free education for their kids? Money is needed - let's see them cough up as well.

In education policy? You mean a civil servant that has been working under instruction of the Conservative for the last 14 years government?

You're now harking back to a government policy of 1965 which was not about charging for state education to try to pretend that a Labour government of 2024 will start charging for state education.

It's just a statement of fact that a Labour govt ordered LEAs to start phasing out grammars in 1965.

There’s lots of relatively inexpensive housing in catchment for grammars in mid and north Bucks. Catchment areas are large too. You don’t need to live near the school. Also, define well off. Who is well off in your world?

@Oakskn It’s better if all dc are helped to pass. I dislike the fact parents pay and others have less chance. I’ve always felt the test structure should be taught. Certainly VR and NVR. It’s difficult to teach a child to read more and get a better vocabulary. It’s often speed of answering that leads to not getting a place. Not finishing and spending too long deliberating. This could and should be addressed.

@Oakskn They survived in my overwhelmingly Tory shire because the LEA and council never played ball and put any plans forward. The schools were not about to roll over and neither was the Council. Parents didn’t really seek change either - the grammars circled the wagons and fought their corner very effectively. Thatcher arrived as Education Secretary and the grammars were saved. Not a single one was lost here.

There is some affluence in the grammars here but our two main independents are big name boarding schools. Most parents in the grammars cannot afford them at, currently, £51,000 pa at the most academic one. £38,700 day fees at that one. The other is £4,000 cheaper, so good news!!!

The grammars are different. Many do have dc from “ordinary” but largely intelligent parents. Doctors, farmers, financial advisors, solicitors, surveyors etc. All sorts but they don’t have £80,000 spare from taxed income for high end day fees for two dc. They simply aren’t wealthy. They just do well enough.

This is desperate stuff.

Children gain clear advantages from grammar schooling. Often, to gain these advantages, they have had paid tutoring, tutoring from their own parents, or live in an expensive house near the school. Or all 3. None of this is any different from a private school parent buying advantages. So I don't see why well off parents using these schools shouldn't be taxed, if private school parents are to be taxed. Labour have been very clear that they do not agree with some children having educational advantages over others, particularly when their sharp elbowed parents have facilitated this.

The order to phase out grammars was made by the Labour government in 1965. This is from the BBC:

During the 1950s and 1960s, it was said, mainly by Labour politicians and egalitarian educationalists, that the selective education system reinforced class division and middle-class privilege.
In 1965, the government ordered local education authorities to start phasing out grammar schools and secondary moderns, and replace them with a comprehensive system.

The quickest changes were made in Labour-controlled areas, while strongly Conservative counties moved slowly or not at all.
A handful of counties and local authorities in England have kept largely selective schools systems, including Kent, Medway, Buckinghamshire and Lincolnshire, while others such as Gloucestershire, Trafford and Slough have a mix.
In other places, a few grammar schools survived in areas that were otherwise fully comprehensive, such as Birmingham, Bournemouth and some London boroughs.
In 1998, Labour's School Standards and Framework Act forbade the establishment of any new all-selective schools.

The Ed Sec who got rid of the most grammar schools was Margaret Thatcher.

'No reason' why Labour might start charging for state education? Really?? Are you sure?

Why not? labour tried to remove grammar schools about 50 years ago. I don’t know how some survived, but there’s no reason why labour wouldn’t slap fees and taxes on these as they are selective and therefore privilege has been gained. They are often populated by extremely affluent people - even richer than private school parents.

@Margot2017 but surely the 11+ is a test that shows a child is academically clever enough to be able to do the work at a grammar school.
If some children are constantly practicing or being tutored but others aren't it's not a an accurate or equal test.
Maybe children can be shown the type of questions that will be on the test and taught how to "do" a test (ie if you don't understand a question don't spend all the time on it - skip it and come back to it later on).
They will have all had the same education from reception upwards - so that's what they should be tested on.

You’re just advocating a race to the bottom. That’s a terrible idea and exactly the wrong message to send to children. They need to work hard and be able to compete successfully - there’s a big world full of people who are striving hard. If they can’t manage that, then they have no hope as adults regardless of where they go to school.

@mitogoshi At Bucks grammars there are places for fsm dc and they need a lower score to qualify. Not sure it’s all 13, but certainly where I live, they do. M

How would HMRC know where you educate your DC? Very big brother.

to make it better for all should be able to do so!

I do NOT want healthcare to be a bit better. I want healthcare to be outstanding as it is in many other countries including former evolving economies. There really is no functioning primary care in England any longer.

Tbh on this thread it seems the issue of paying fees has been brought up by some who think that priority at Grammars should be given to children if they are on FSM.
Or at least OP who queried whether it does already and whether it should.

Yeah - we read the post - which doesn't make sense.

Hence all the comments.

HTH

State schools are free. What they do need to do is ensure those from deprived communities are given support to meet their potential which can mean having a lower pass mark for the entry requirement.

Any talk of imposing fees on state education is just the private school parents scaremongering. It is not the policy of any party. Getting rid of the remaining grammar schools however should be a priority to ensure that resources are fairly allocated

Any Party that tries that on with education or healthcare won’t last long governing this country.
Its a clear vote loser.

I wouldn’t, however, be surprised if there was a push for people to pay into private health insurance as it’s common in many countries.

Absolutely agree with you! More funds could be raised this way for a better and more well rounded education system for all school children. Same with healthcare - all for free clearly does not work any more and those who earn more and can pay in a bit to make it better for all should be able to do so!

have heard from an education policy friend of mine that means testing higher earners using state education in outstanding schools could be considered as a next step should the VAT policy on private schools not raise the funds needed.
😂that'll make the frothing private gang happy.

I personally wouldn't mind at all paying a small school fee for an outstanding school. I also want a semi-private health service and would be happy to be a gift chunk of my salary to ensure an actual health service not the nothingness that the NHS has become in the last 15 years.

Not specific to means testing grammar schools but I have heard from an education policy friend of mine that means testing higher earners using state education in outstanding schools could be considered as a next step should the VAT policy on private schools not raise the funds needed. Again, at the time she mentioned this to me, it was just being discussed and by no means becoming fact…..but no smoke with fire imo and I wouldn’t be surprised it will inevitably be considered by Labour.

I was too - in the 1960s! No state primary in Bucks is allowed to. Everyone here knows that and it doesn’t happen. I think it should and always have. It’s clearly unfair when some parents don’t have the money for tutors. There are practice resources made available here, and that’s it. Dc exceeding have a decent chance of passing but not all will without tutoring. Certainly the secondaries here do have 30% high achievers in some cases.

Why can't state schools 'tutor' though? Back when I did the 11+, the last year to take it in my area, we did 11+ preparation in 4th year juniors (as year 6 was then called). Every child ... I wasn't aware of any additional tutoring going on.