Why are Labour and Phillipson shutting down democratic debate?

[Another76543]

Yet again, another petty social media post about private schools. I understand that many people disagree with private education. Many people agree with it. Why are Labour trying to stop democratic debate around this policy which disrupts the lives of many children? Her Facebook page also appears to be removing any comments she doesn’t agree with.

If you truly believe in something, have some backbone and stand up for your principles. Don’t try to silence those with a different opinion.

The post also shows a serious lack of comprehension of the tax system. This has nothing to do with tax on private schools; it’s a tax on parents. It’s the parents, not the schools, which have to pay any VAT.

For some reason, the Labour Party don’t want scrutiny of any kind. They don’t want this policy questioned. I assume it’s because they realise that the numbers don’t add up and don’t justify their actions.

How does that help those in the state sector?

@Another76543 because the budget will increase due to tax rises?

Ah so you're one of those who just doesn't want to pay tax. Yet you want people like me, on £18k a year pre tax (probably the same as your fees) to pay more tax. How is that right?

The IFS have confirmed the tax won’t make a difference to public services. For children transferring in-year, my understanding is that the school funding doesn’t increase until the following academic year. Schools will have to cope with more pupils on the same budget.

Well I'll take the IFS's word as gospel.
Good to see the labour party are sticking to this manifesto promise.

Seems that PISA scores rose under the conservatives. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50563833

Different groups have different interests. Parents want children to learn. Teachers want children to learn, but they also want pleasant easy work.

The fact that teachers love Bridget, doesn’t mean much to me.

I think you missed this part of my post “I’m not against tax rises”.

I think everyone needs to shoulder some of the burden. They are expecting pensioners on £12k a year to shoulder part of that burden. A minimum wage full time job pays several thousand more than £18k per year.

‘No debate’ has been the slogan of the ‘new left’ for some time now. They’re just extending its scope.

‘My way or you’re a nazi’ in other words. 🫣

Labour are relying on the IFS report for their figures.

@Another76543 so pensioners and people at fee paying schools are out

So it's the young who have to pay it all, sod everyone else

@EmpressoftheMundane

schoolsweek.co.uk/pisa-2022-rise-in-maths-but-warning-over-inflated-results/#:~:text=In%20maths%2C%20England%20actually%20moving,and%2013th%20respectively%20in%202018.

Where did I say the young have to pay it all? I said everyone needed to shoulder some of the burden.

Add 1% to the standard rate of VAT, which mainly applies to discretionary spending, not necessities. Why would that be unfair? It would raise several billion pounds.

The Tories weren't interested in kids actually having teachers, so this makes a nice change.

Generally parents are in favour of their kids having teachers.

Before the election the senior figures used to do these off the record meet and greet in the city and they basically admitted at one that it wasn’t going to make much if any money but they thought it would win the election so it was too good not to implement.

@Another76543 because that targets the poorest in society and not those with several thousands of disposable income to spend on school fees?

Source?

Well I couldn't care less where they get their figures from, but from an idealogical perspective I am happy to see them bringing this service under VAT.
It may or may not bring in the amount of money they hope, but it is the right thing to do.
Oh loving the idea of another 1% on VAT generally, that will help with the cost of living for everybody.

The 20% VAT rate applies to discretionary spending not necessities. The poorest have much lower levels of discretionary spending. It would also mean that the millionaires using the state sector pay more tax, which the school fee VAT policy doesn’t.

If the policy you want doesn’t bring in any funding Labour’s pledges for extra teachers and so on are out.

And you’ll disrupt dc education for no benefit

No we will only disrupt the education of the children at the private schools whose parents thought this would never happen and can't afford the extra, at the schools who didn't bother to try to offset the increased fees by cost cutting measures.
How many will that be exactly?

Why don’t they count? They are real dc in the middle of learning

Plus with no extra funding there’s more students in state and no extra teachers. Why is that good for state?

There’s already posters on here complaining that their class sizes have increased in the state sector because of movement from the private sector, and others complaining that there’s more competition for grammar places, and reduced catchments for excellent state schools. It affects both sectors.

Why is it when right wingers aren't happy about something they always add 'democratic' to their argument.

We live in a democracy and this means you vote for the party, or rather a candidate who you choose to make your decisions for you. It doesn't mean you get to vote in everything you personally don't like.

I’m not expecting to personally vote on everything. I am expecting all MPs (including elected MPs against this policy) to be allowed their say in Parliament. Phillipson’s post suggests she’s against this.

It's not that they don't count @EasternStandard I feel quite sorry but I imagine that there will be fewer leaving than you all seem to expect.
Because parents will find the money somehow, and the schools will mitigate the extra fees by cost cutting, and offsetting input VAT.