Abolishing private schools - how would it work in practice?

[Dongdingdong]

Labour has voted to abolish private schools:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-public-private-school-abolish-eton-vote-conference-corbyn-education-policy-a9115766.html

Whether you agree with this or not, I don’t understand how the logistics would work. Would private schools suddenly cease to exist from say, summer 2023, with all pupils forced to find a place at the local state school for the autumn term onwards? What would happen to the buildings and facilities - would they remain as state schools or be sold off to developers for example?

I don't think funding differs much from England to Finland (I don't know re Scotland NI etc.). Finnish teachers get paid a bit more I think, but then class sizes are somewhat bigger and little technology has been used until very recently.

I’m not really in favour of this policy as it becomes across as a bit communist where the state owns your children but appreciate many people are against a two tier system so could support abolishment of any tax breaks and the benefits of charitable status. It would make a difference in that some of the ‘minor’ public schools might fail but of course the elite ones would continue, even if it meant they would just become even more elitist than they currently are by making it more of a domain of the super rich. Or might just turn into exclusively overseas students institutions.

You can’t just ‘seize’ the endowments though. Who the fuck are they to do that? If I was seriously loaded (theoretically because I’m not) I decided to give money to a certain charity or cause and the government tried to claim it I’d ask for it back because that’s not who I gave it to. Most of these people are dead of course but it would probably be illegal to appropriate it unless we go full Venezuela.

What happens to all of the cash and property if the schools are abolished I don’t know.

How long do we have left of Corbyn?

How long do we have left of Corbyn?

My theory on this is he will resign between Brexit and before the next election.
Labour do not want power before Brexit. Let the Torys sort out the mess they created. So JC comes up with loads of off the wall policies knowing it will loose them votes.

Once we are out of Europe JC resigns and a more middle ground "Tony Blair" like leader will take over from him.

Just my theory!

Momentum and the party members won’t let a middle ground leader take over. No chance of a vote-winning Yvette Cooper for example.

Look at the party conference, they’re still chanting his name and trying to bin Tom Watson. Bonkers.

noble i agree. Bonkers. And really sad. Labour would be in power by now if Bromentum hadn't fucked it.

@Phineyj similar for us. we would have to either give up one of our jobs, or hire a nanny to have our kids go to a state school. private school is cheaper than that (and that is before you take lost pension and mental health into account).
on top of that, a good friend who teaches into the school we would have gotten into told me to do everything i can to not send my oldest there - they don’t have the ressources to support shy, middle of the road kids. all effort goes to either confident, super bright kids, or misbehaving troublemakers. her exact word “A (the youngest) will be fine, he’s confident enough to demand attention. r (oldest) will fall through the gaps - they won’t even notice he’s there, we just don’t have the ressources “,and based on a stay and play session, that certainly would have been the case. And i would have to pay more for that than for a private school - not happening

It's a bit of an insult to all parents of kids in state schools that they need this influx of private parents to come in and get change to happen.

I agree, it’s incredibly patronising. Like private school parents are somehow better than everyone else.

My experience of state schools admittedly fairly leafy, is that they have lots of committed parents on board as fundraisers and PTA type things. Our private school has one fairly low key group i think, apart from that we pay our money and let the school do their job. So not sure where all these driven private school parents are.

It's a bit of an insult to all parents of kids in state schools that they need this influx of private parents to come in and get change to happen

Why?
There are a lot of parents who don't give a xxxx about their children, let alone how they are educated, these are unlikely to be parents who shell out a fortune for private schooling.

We are not all equally, have the same abilities or drive for improvement.

It's a bit of an insult to all parents of kids in state schools that they need this influx of private parents to come in and get change to happen

Totally agree, as above.

The switched-on parents tend to congregate in catchment pockets anyway, most of them probably already have their critical mass. The remaining ones aren't going to get any private school refugee/magical agitators in any case.

@jasjas1973 yes, but parents often send their kids to private school because they don’t have the time to do loads of fundraising, be day-to-day patent helpers in school, and ferry kids around to tutors snd loads of activities. private schools are one stop shops - you pay the fee, and don’t have to do all of that. to be able to help a school on a day to day basis, i would have to give ip my job. so i pay.

Yes, this is true as well but in the main, most parents choose private because they want better education and life choices for their kids, which by definition isn't available for the rest of us.

The abolition of private schools would have the effect of making those in power think more carefully about education in this country.

Would Cameron have cut funding in education if it affected their own children?

It's a bit of an insult to all parents of kids in state schools that they need this influx of private parents to come in and get change to happen.I agree, it’s incredibly patronising. Like private school parents are somehow better than everyone else.

It's people with power and money that can effect change. Not your bog standard local private school parent, no. But those that work in education and the government, in positions of power that are able to make decisions about the schooling system and its funding. The people who's kids go to grammars, leafy comps and private schools so really aren't that affected personally if a sink school fails further and the whole system is unjust.

I really don't think I bought 'better life choices' with my fees.

My kids would have gone to a good university whether they were at state school or private school, and we aren't well connected enough for them to swan into top jobs (does that really happen much now)? They are learning certain soft skills that might make them more employable but there's no reason state school can't do that other than a lot of state parents don't think manners and leadership are particularly important, judging by the way they criticise teachers and moan about detentions

Would Cameron have cut funding in education if it affected their own children?

His kids went to state schools. So the answer is yes he cut education funding, but he was careful not to let it affect his own kids by other means.

@jasjas1973 sorry, but you are talking anout a tiny minority of private school parents, which happen to be the ones that can easily afford overseas boarding. so all that will happen is that more kids are stuffed in an already overloaded state school system, and the proper elite is going abroad. so education for most kids will get worse, and a minority will go abroad (and “homeschool “ at primary level”. loss for everyone

I've already got a business plan sorted if this happens! I'd imagine lots of people will make quite a lot of money out of it.

Would Cameron have cut funding in education if it affected their own children?

His children went to an extraordinarily beautiful church primary school, just at the corner of Kensington High St and Church St.

It is largely impervious to the whims of the government, because of its affluent catchment - the Beckhams are within it (although they haven't used it as far as I know).

No state school is impervious to the whims of the government. That's sort of the point of state schools. Whether they are pretty or not is neither here nor there.

It can be more impervious to the whims of the government if it, for example, asks for ‘voluntary’ donations from parents which I understand is becoming more common in the better-off catchments.

Being an academy also means they don’t have to follow the national curriculum.

On top of feeling it a very patronising view, I’m very cynical as to whether or not a bunch of private school parents would be able to have any noticeable influence anyway. I (private school parent) was part of a group of parents (state school, mostly MC professionals) trying to combat some specific council wide cuts. We had a range of fully costed innovative solutions including support from a major university and well known figures in that area of interest. We had extensive positive media coverage across the national Scottish press and the wider group of parents well behind us.

From the very start, the Labour led Council made it political and spent their whole time accusing us of just being a bunch of SNP activists (at one meeting when I finally convinced a councillor that I wasn’t SNP, she told me I was being manipulated by the SNP). It was utterly soul destroying and at the end of the day, the Council just did whatever they bloody well wanted anyway.

This particular service could have been transformed if the Council had worked with us but it better served their purposes to just shout about SNP cuts rather than trying to find a solution.

Perhaps other areas would be more open to working with parents, but I would certainly never get involved with anything like that again.

It can be more impervious to the whims of the government if it, for example, asks for ‘voluntary’ donations from parents which I understand is becoming more common in the better-off catchments.

Yes, their PTA is pretty epic I'd imagine.

Whether they are pretty or not is neither here nor there.

It is, because beautiful church schools don't happen in the middle of run-down estates. You don't have the concentration of scary behaviour just outside the gates that you do in poorer neighbourhoods and parents feel good about sending their children there.

Then if location is a problem, as well as anti social behaviour, how would banning private schools help?