Kier starmer! He hates strivers!

[Bucketheadbucketbum]

He wants to introduce a policy to put up the cost of school fees 10 to 15%. This is a tax on hard-working parents! We slave away cutting cots everywhere living hand to mouth to try and improve our childrens future . Live in an average house average area 1 shit car no holidays work like a dog to get our kids through. We are easing the burden on the state system by choosing independent schools. We're not sending them to Eton paid by our trust fund! Why does he want to punish strivers! Tax the energy companies! So disappointed. We need a new political party. What's the point in trying to better your future.

@Figmentofmyimagination no, I didn't mean children who normally live here. The school I worked in and it's sister schools had numbers of Chinese children coming over and living as lodgers to have a UK independent education. There were also a few from various African countries doing the same, mostly coming to live with relatives but some in hostels to be able to study over here. I meant what I said. Not resident here apart from for school.

Even so, leveling up, not leveling down is the answer. Bring the poor kids up to the level of the rich kids, not the other way around.

LOL

Poor you. I have a kid in a private school but I support this, or better still, bring private schools and their resources into the state system!

@MintyFreshOne may I congratulate you on correctly identifying how education in the UK is currently structured. It does not have to be that way though. A more equal society is a better place to live.

Let's say all schools became equal, same lessons ect.

once school is in session, due the human mind, everyone will be different, some will be good, some great, and some will need improving, therefore how is it useful having an equal starting point, when as soon as lessons begin, it's no longer equal ?

That's socialism for you. Levelling down

@Q2C4 I agree, life isn't fair at all. I just don't see how possibly increasing private school fees by removing their charitable status thus potentially displacing thousands of children helps anyone. I think every child should have access to a great school. I am just not convinced this is the magic bullet to do so. I do think that if you are after fairness then there is no place for private tutors. I think it's hypocrisy to say it's ok to buy help via a tutor but a private school is morally wrong. For me they are different sides of the same coin.

Eh? But your post was about how removing a VAT exemption from independent schools was also going to affect universities, swimming and music lessons. Which it wouldn't, necessarily.

But anyway, it isn't "levelling down" to abolish some tax breaks that only small percentage of school children benefit from.

Whenever a tax loophole that benefits the wealthiest in society is closed, do you think of that as "levelling down", too?

How's the so-called levelling up going?

How are we doing after 12 years of Tory government?

Great, isn't it 🙄

Lol no.

(Sorry, failed response to the poster saying 'this is how you get people to vote Tory.)

This is been being discussed for years, so any sensible parents would have planned accordingly so that their child wouldn't have to move. If you weren't sure that you could afford private education, then you probably should have sent your kids to state schools instead.

I support this policy. It has nothing to do with the politics of envy or hating "strivers". We could have sent dd private but concluded that it wasn't worth it for a child like her, who was likely to thrive and excel in the state system.

I don't believe that private schools should have charitable status. They mostly cater to the wealthy, who do not need charity, and the offering of a few paltry bursaries for clever kids who will boost their stats and support their marketing efforts just isn't enough to justify it in my view.

Paying for education isn't necessarily morally wrong but it is unfair to many and shouldn't be subsidised by those who can't afford it.
Bursaries are not necessarily aimed at getttge poorest an equal chance either. In some schools they are a bit of a front.

You certainly don't need to be poor to get a bursary. We had 50% plus scholarships and still had to find £20k per child per year. Not exactly affordable if you're 'struggling' - we were grateful and it was a fabulous opportunity at a difficult time, but not exactly a means tested support for poor children. The means testing was farcical but to our advantage.

Capitalism is going si well for the people living from the charity and generosity of others and needing to leave their homes to be warm.

When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

When the Salvation Army come round at Christmas, remind me to put a few bob into Eton's charity box.

I'm tuning up my tiny violin.

🎻

Levelling up has been great. I and my rich mates have got richer. If only everyone else strived to defraud the taxpayer as much as I have then they could be as rich as me.

When I give to a charity I don't expect the charity to give me anything back.
So how about this for an idea.

Allow the wealthy to still give to schools that are charities, but instead of their own children going to that school, a child is selected from the local community to attend that school instead.

Now that is something that would persuade me to support private schools having charitable status. I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen though!

I'm sure there will be plenty of people saying "but bursaries", but as a pp has already pointed out, a lot of bursaries tend to go to families who are comfortable enough to pay the difference. There are very few 100% bursaries available, and even fewer for kids who aren't very high achievers who will help to boost the school's marketing stats, so there really isn't much that is charitable in them.

When I hear about a private school giving 100% bursaries to disadvantaged kids with average academic potential, then I might agree that they are worthy of charitable status. The children of rich parents do not need that subsidy.

Your 50% fee is still several thousand more than the full fee at my children's private school. The school you're talking about is one, we could only dream about. Private schools are a heterogeneous bunch.

@jgw1

You know if these parents just cancelled their Netflix, or just got a better paid job, they'd be able to afford the VAT on school fees.

I hear rice is 48p a kilo in Asda. If they'd only learn to cook.

That's socialism for you. Levelling down
Not at all.

I think the proposed policy is superficial, poorly thought through on several levels, and more about creating a class war between the working and middle classes instead of encouraging both groups to look where the main problem is: decades of policies to enrich the super rich, whilst making lower and middle income people pay the cost.

I'd love a more egalitarian state system that's appropriately funded, offered a rounded education for all, valued technical education and was staffed by high quality staff. For that to happen there needs to be systemic change in several areas and you need enough people to actually want to teach. It would raise the bar for all if we could make it happen.

You're wrong. You forgot about all the coffees they buy too.

I don't have time to cook, I'm too busy striving, whatever that might mean.

It also very important that I spend 20minutes each day in a queue at the school gates in my SUV burning fuel and polluting the environment.