To be annoyed at The Guardian largely because it is such a dump solution - private schools

[Dlwch276]

So as part of their recent excessive coverage of a book which attacked the private school system (written by someone who went to private school) The Guardian has suggested adding VAT to school fees.

Asides raising more money via tax i don't see how this would make the system fairer? From what I've seen the logic is that parents who are motivated to pay £20k+ on fees would force state schools to improve if their children attended them. Mumsnet is full of posters at their wits ends trying to affect change at their local state schools. No-one that I've met at our small private is wringing their hands that the local state schools are terrible and that this gives their children extra advantage.

Surely to improve educational equality either we all need to pay more tax to change class sizes or poorer students need better access to private education. In NZ private schools receive the same student allowance as state schools - wouldn't this be a better solution for students not able to access private education? For everyone to sit the entrance exam and then private schools to have to accept the student allowance as fees for those who can't afford it?

The obvious solution is to charge wealthy parents who use state schools and pump that money back into the education system

That would be the general taxation system.

Other countries manage to fund their education systems decently.

In the UK, governments make the choice to cut funding for schools. That’s the problem.

And to all of you who think that abolishing private school would create positive change I am sorry to tell you but you are wrong and haven’t thought it through. My parents grew up in a system with no private schools. The result was a race to the bottom coupled with low level indoctrination. The state didn’t have to compete with a private education system which would highlight its short comings and by virtue of its complete control ove education it could teach children complete rubbish to further its own political agenda because parents had no where else to turn. The only thing that nationalising all schools would achieve is a mass exodus of wealth and a generation(s) of under educated. All these parents who care about education who you think will push up standards will just get the fuck out of the country because they’ll be able to see what’s coming.

@iggly the country is running a deficit. No one is paying enough to even fund schools as they are let alone properly. State schools were conceived of as a gap fill for children who could otherwise not afford education not a free pass for parents to ignore their financial responsibility to educate their own children. Countries that do manage to adequately fund state education are very limited arevtypically Nordic countries with very small propulations.

All these parents who care about education who you think will push up standards will just get the fuck out of the country because they’ll be able to see what’s coming
Yeah they care about education of their own children and no others. Improving education for all children is not on their radar.

The existence of private education does not improve state education in the UK.

Where do you get such nonsense from beyond heresay and anecdotes?

@Racecardriver

And the debt position continues to grow despite austerity....?

Your point is?

There are priorities that the government has chosen and it isn’t to fund the education of its future generations.

If you want a country’s economy to grow, to have a well educated population who are going to be economically active then you should educate them well. If we had a decent education system, we could encourage more inwards investment as people see this as a place to build business, to have a decent and well educated pool to select employees from.

Echoing Racecardriver private schools do show that there are more ways of providing good schooling than the version espoused by the state at the time.

The people objecting to VAT being charged on school fees are either people who use the private school system or would like to.

Those that do not see it as an unfair exemptions from the tax system.

If state school teachers had smaller classes, the same level of funding and facilities then I strongly suspect that they may well have different results.

But what’s the actual empirical evidence for a like-for-like comparison of state v private.

It hasnt been possible to change it whilst we are in EU

Whether a tax on school fees should be introduced in a successor new general consumption tax, and at what rate, is a fair question for Brexiteers. This is a whole new opportunity.

And a thin end of a wedge. The big question is, Should education ever be taxed? If so, How do you define education? What about special schools and specialist schools?

@iggly you implied that tax payers were paying for their children’s education. They’re not. There is a deficit. We are not paying enough to cover costs.

@Racecardriver

Where do you think the majority of teachers train?

Plus the massive tax breaks that private schools obtain by claiming to be “charities”....

Oh and common sense was the answer to the previous question. Ffs. Does no one know what went on on the ussr? This has been done before. The effects were devastating.

@iggly they can’t just claim to be a charity. The legal tests are pretty clear on what is and isn’t a charity. In order to obtain charitable status they have to meet public benefit criteria.

Not sure what teacher training had to do with it? Where I come from teachers do a degree with a placement in a school (either private and public). I would assume that in Britain they mostly train in state schools as there are so many of them but I really don’t know.

It’s more a point of having competition to measure whether state schools are ok and options for parents who don’t agree with state school methods. The alternative is allowing the government to educate 100% of the population. Can’t uou see how dystopian and fucked up that is?

The problem with this idea is it works on basis everything stays the same. All people in private schools will pay the VAT and just carry on. The reality is there are large number of parents at the independent day schools (so not the etons) who will pull their children out as the can’t afford a 20% increase on fees. Other parents thinking about private school will hold off - so rather then sending at 4 will start at 7. They will move to state sixth form.

For a lot of parents if they don’t have to pay school fees - they will reduce hours (May have to if schools don’t have outside standard hours care). They therefore pay less tax.

If you follow this through where does this vat end:

Music lessons
Tutor classes
University fees

What about private healthcare? Surely that will be the next logical one to hit. Then you have exactly the same situation people who opt for private sector staying in nhs. Vicious circle.

My point is that people seem to think that the private education system is wholly independent from state and it’s somehow doing the state a favour.

It most certainly isn’t.

Personally I don’t think it will ever be possible to abolish the private sector.

But I think that the private education system in the UK perpetually maintains inequality.

More should be done to break the cycle of inequality- and that means private education needs to be more accessible to all. Reduce the fees, more state subsidy so that more people can afford it.

Offering bursaries just isn’t enough. Not at all. It barely scratches the surface.

Personally I think, lower fees or more state funding into education to reduce the need for private schools and remove the charitable status (it’s too easy to obtain!). Let more people have access as opposed to a handful of “poor” people.

The private sector in education does not act as a proper “check” or “comparator” to the state sector to help the state sector improve.

It’s more a point of having competition to measure whether state schools are ok and options for parents who don’t agree with state school methods

It isn’t competition though. Most people in this country can not afford private. It’s not like shopping at Tesco vs Aldi

Iggly in the same post you say there should be lower fees and also say remove charitable status. But clearly removing charitable status will massively increase the fees and make it more elitist, not more accessible.

@remainymcremainface you missed the bit where I said more state funding. Let the state subsidies private schools more so that the fees can be lower.

I disagree with charitable status because it just doesn’t make sense. They aren’t charities

Ok, I thought when you said "more state funding" that you meant more funding going to state schools.

But on your charitable status point, that's exactly what bursaries are.

Agree entirely that what is on offer bursary wise has loads of room for improvement, but it meets the criteria for charitable.

@remainymcremainface

I also mean that as well.

My biggest issue with private education is that it really is limited to a small minority. You can earn a decent wage, above average in this country, and cannot afford to send a child to private school.

Private education is a massive cause of inequality and it’s far too skewed in the UK.

I would prefer a bit more balance. If more people could use private school, then people from a wider range of backgrounds could enter certain professions and break down the barriers (especially in politics) and make the country better.

I find UK politics so unsatisfying and I’m sure our mainly privately educated politicians don’t help.

Agree entirely that what is on offer bursary wise has loads of room for improvement, but it meets the criteria for charitable

I’m my view, these bursaries still serve the rich. Many bursaries are given to “gifted” children of parents who can still afford the fees for example.

It’s a left wing newspaper - of course they are going to hate private schools.

Scholarships might be, but bursaries are means tested.

Although these days, bursary offers are often limited to scholars so you would need to be exceptional, but you wouldn't need to be rich.