it's daft to think parents with kids in private school have money to burn?

[Popgoestheweaselagain]

Just got asked by my school what would be the impact if they had to pay VAT, adding 20% to fees. My response was 'I'd try to keep my child in the school, but ....'. I think almost all parents would respond this way. Alarmed, did a quick google, and found this is Labour policy. Next time they come knocking at my door looking for my vote, I'll be telling them why they can't have it!

Now, I understand why some people are ideologically opposed to private schools, the unfariness etc. But when I hear this argument that goes something like 'Those people must have loads of money because they send their kids to private school' it kind of annoys me. Money is finite. If you've spent all your money on school fees, you obviously don't have it anymore!

Yes, even state primaries in London sometimes work on that basis - eg the Kensington state primary the David Cameron children attended and the C of E secondary the Gov daughter did (and the Blair children's Catholic state secondary), neverm ind those state schools in posh bits of surrey where the houses cost over £1m. In a sense those parents are worse than honest school fee payers. The 500,000 honest school fee payers save the state the costs of educating 500k children and tend to be high tax rate payers too so make a massive contribution to the education of others and save the state a small fortune.

The sharp elbowed state school parents picking super selective grammrs and posh comps and finidng religion are stealing money from the mouths of the poor in a sense in a way the private school payers do not and those posh comkp etc parents then think they are holier than thou and meet the socialist principles of choosing state education?

Very well said, @Xenia

Very true Xenia. I'm in London and you should see the shenanigans. People suddenly finding Catholicism when the baby is six months old. If people think independent school selection is a malarkey - what about Catholic schools where the criteria is based on how quickly a baby was baptised after birth? As if the child could control that!

Or, those who can, spend hundreds of thousands in stamp duty to move house to the catchment of the "right" schools. If you're going to pay that, you might as well pay school fees!

Don't even get me started on the tutoring racket for certain grammars - rippling over-anxious parents off to the tune of thousands.

Basically, schools in the U.K. are a postcode (even faith) lottery and until this is sorted out, people who can may well choose to opt out of the system and pay fees.

Here we go - the leafy comps argument. These are the minority in my anecdotal experience (which is all that is being discussed here). Most are average. Many are failing or close to failing. I haven't seen a leafy comp since I moved from SW London. There might be a few sharp elbowed parents in a few schools. They of course are the most visible parents.

Also agree completely. It's notional equality at best.

100% my experience being that bright girl who off her own back applied to Oxford. The school just didn’t care. I wasn’t the right colour or background.

Don't even get me started on the tutoring racket for certain grammars - rippling over-anxious parents off to the tune of thousands.

I live an area with 7 Grammars, 2 Catholic Highs and 9 non denominational Highs and around 70% of kids are tutored, some from year 3 onwards.

Every year the electoral wards with the highest to lowest number of grammar admissions corresponds almost exactly with highest to lowest average wealth in said wards.

Our current grammar system definitely isn’t the social mobility vehicle it was designed to be!

It's a very damaging myth that top unis and jobs want to keep certain people out and keep all the privilege to themselves. It seems to be based on the idea that because moving into a certain setting might be a bit more of a culture shock than it would be for other people that that means that there's some kind of conspiracy going on.

I’ve moved my kids to prep school and there are more black, Asian and Chinese children than their outstanding Primary.

I'd vote for that tbh. If you can afford private school fees you have more money than most

most businesses pay VAT - individuals, unless they are self-employed and their turnover is more than £85k pa

Private schools are registered charities which means they are exempt from all kinds of taxes and able to write lots of things off as expenses.

it is an anomaly that has been reinforced by most people in power, the majority of whom have all gone to private schools and many of whom educate their children at private schools.

I paid for my dd to go to private junior school. Her state school which we removed her from in reception was failing. Ofsted backed that up 12 months later when it inspected it and put it into special measures. I had 3 older children go to that school before it started going down hill. I live in an over subscribed area. 6 primary schools on my doorstep and we couldn’t move her to a single one.
Paying privately was not a luxury it was a necessity. Her education was priority. We put ourselves on the line financially to do it. My car was 16yrs old and falling apart but we made it last. We massively cut back to make it work. I wouldn’t change a thing. We were definitely not the only family in the same situation!

Some do some don’t. They do the state system a favour by taking pressure off it whilst still paying for it but not using it.

Livingmybestlie, I agree totally .

I'm with you, same situation. Many sacrifices made to 'afford' fees. 20% more is unaffordable.

I fully agree.

Also, the opinions here are not reflective of the true clientele for private schools.

There are a lot of 'rescue' children and parents who make huge sacrifices to ensure that their children have a happy school experience.

Sadly the state schools are so run down and devoid of resources, they can barely cover the essentials.

I don't know how people expect children to learn in a situation where the child is unable to access resources that are essential for their learning.

Just as children's learning styles and teachers delivery differ, the families behind the children and their situations also vary greatly.

Education should not be considered a luxury, and state schools should be fully resourced/equipped and funded. It would make a massive difference.

Tbh I'd not really thought about private school fees enough to realise it wasn't Taxed. However it is six of one and half a dozen of the other. If kids get taken out of private schools they'll go back into the state system and school funding to provide spaces for them will come out of the public purse, thereby putting more pressure on public services. So I'm not sure whether it is better or not to tax private schools. Overall it makes sense to tax them so the money can go back into the public purse.

I fully appreciate that not all parents who send their children to private school “have money to burn”. I sent my youngest when she was 13. I hadn’t budgeted for it, so funded it through a draw down loan. A former colleague of mine sent his 3 children. He and his wife made sacrifices in other areas of life, living modestly, to afford it. Nevertheless, private school’s status as charities, not services is a long-standing scam developed by the establishment, for the establishment! It’s a service and a luxury service at that. Of course it should be subject to VAT!

What's really sad about this is that there must have been many children at that school whose education went down the drain because their parents couldn't afford to buy it.

private schools already have bursaries for bright kids who cannot afford to pay 🙄

Two of my children went to fee paying schools after being recommended to sit the exam and passing it. They won bursaries. One of them regularly visits as an 'old boy' which is encouraged with talks by them as to what the school has given regarding opportunities and links not available in state schools and what they've been able to give back to their community.
I would not normally have considered a private education for them had it not been offered, although we could have afforded it for two children but not more. The cost of the numerous kits for all the clubs is eye- watering. Luckily all that plus uniforms was covered by the school.
It did make a difference to their outlook on life although their siblings who went to a state school, all have good solid careers too.

We used to live near a private school. Some neighbours had DC at the school with scholarships.

On the other hand, boarders basically keep the local restaurants, takeaways and coffee shops in business. Think Pizza Express, independent Italian, Chinese and Indian restaurants. and a Lounge branch, plus 2 high street coffee shops, full every lunchtime, 7 days a week during term time. The female pupils have Gucci bags and the boys have Hermes belts. Some of those parents are clearly super wealthy. But others struggle to keep up with all the extras on top of the scholarship.

*I meant scholarships not bursaries.

frivolous? You might not agree with some people's choices on here, but when people tell you their children weren't learning, the school was failing, how can you compare that to buying a house or a car? You clearly just don't get it. Your children get one chance at education. I don't agree that it's wasted on the young - this is the age when the brain can best take in new information. It's not just about getting a better job, it's about discovering what you're good at and putting that to best use. Reading a book or playing an instrument and enjoying it. A new house, a shiny car! Not the same thing at all!

I’m much more in favour of grammar schools. Carry on paying private fees that’s your choice , it doesn’t make you better than anyone else