To think that there would be less anti private school

[Poopoolittlekitten]

sentiment or threads on MN if people using private school were a tiny bit more self aware and didn’t ask for sympathy for rising fees or possible rising fees if Labour take away their false ‘charity’ status?

send your kid private if you want, just don’t come moaning about the costs or claim than anyone can go private if they ‘prioritise’ their child’s education they way you do. Particularly at a time when state school teachers are striking over pay and conditions.
And many, many people are working their socks off just to keep a roof over their family’s head.

YANBU - stop whining and looking for sympathy about your fees!

YABU - my milkman sends his 4 kids private by ‘prioritising’ their education so it’s not just for whiny poshos….

If Tesco put up the price of milk by 40% I’d shop somewhere else. Or stop drinking milk. Look for an alternative. Or perhaps complain to them direct via SM.

but that really IS an idiotic comparison. Isn’t it?
It would be more like my accountant deciding to hike prices up for her services - I’d want to know why, if it was necessary and what value I was getting. Would it still be worth using her or should I look for an alternative? Do my own taxes perhaps?

But my original post wasn’t saying people shouldn’t use private schools, just that if wealthy people moan about having to pay more for a luxury service when there’s a free alternative, they won’t find much sympathy.

And two thirds of voters in this thread appear to agree.

Who said you get the final say on what entity is registered as a charity?

There are plenty of registered charities that people don’t agree with.. “society for the protection of unborn children” anyone? Big in the US by the way. Pretty sure the Catholic Church fund raises for them or used to and that they qualified for gift aid (or used to). Many feminists on Mumsnet would not support their aims.
If you end up researching charities you might find things more offensive to your particular moral code than private schools. Not everyone else will though.

Not sure if that's addressed to me or someone else, but of course I don't get the right to decide. I am merely expressing an opinion, as is my right. Many people agree with me, and hopefully our next government will take the action that many of us would like to see.

What is 'luxury' is all relative though. Surely you can see that?

There are loads of things people post on here about every day that could be considered a 'luxury.'

Would you object to someone asking if the hourly rate for cleaners has gone up? Or gym membership? Or flights? Or hair salons? Or jewellery?

Are we only allowed to mention food or fuel?

There will be many things in your lifestyle that millions will consider a 'luxury' I'm sure. Perhaps you own your house, for instance. That's something millions can never hope to achieve.

Again, this is not your personal WhatsApp group. It's the internet. What do you expect?

Some people use independent schools. Some people use grammar schools, or faith schools, or boarding schools or home educate - all kinds of scenarios. They are just as likely to be on here as anyone else. They are just as entitled to post as people using comprehensives fgs.

Sorry that was to OP.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves - are you opposed to church schools too? Selective state schools? State boarding schools (still have to pay about 17k) - what about for Forces? What about comps in London with music places? Where does it start and where does it end? Should all school places be by lottery?

Yes, I'm opposed to state funded faith schools and selective schools. More so that private schools tbh. I don't want to get rid of private altogether, just tax it appropriately.

I think there is probably a place for state funded boarding schools in some circumstances. No idea about music places at comprehensive schools... not familiar with them.

A lottery would be my preference if there was a way of making it work practically, yes. Eg good transport arrangements, not having multiple children at different schools in different directions etc.

Should churches in the UK still get tax benefits? When many people don’t like them anymore? What about the monarchy? Should we all vote on that? Should we also vote to privatise the NHS?

I am just not really that interested in what the general public think post Brexit.

“Yes, I'm opposed to state funded faith schools and selective schools. More so that private schools tbh. I don't want to get rid of private altogether, just tax it appropriately.

I think there is probably a place for state funded boarding schools in some circumstances. No idea about music places at comprehensive schools... not familiar with them.

A lottery would be my preference if there was a way of making it work practically, yes. Eg good transport arrangements, not having multiple children at different schools in different directions etc.”

Whilst I can see the merits of your arguments, it just is not workable and too idealistic. The education landscape in England today is very diverse and many of those particularities actually work pretty well in reality.

Of course it's all relative. But most of the things you have listed would incur VAT, and rightly so.

I have no issue with people talking about fee increases, personally. The OP may feel differently, but I agree with you, people can talk about whatever they like.

I was merely commenting on the issue of whether private schools operate for the public good - I don't think they do, personally - and whether the fees should incur VAT - I think they should.

If you want to bemoan how expensive the fees have become, then by all means, go ahead. Of course, some people might judge what they read - that's life, but you're free to carry on having whatever conversations you like as long as you abide by the rules of the site.

Sorry, just seen that you were directing your question to the OP.

I have never bemoaned school fees or school fee increases.

All this is about ONE THREAD where ONE POSTER said something about the fees at her DC school going up quite suddenly and she was wondering if this was just that school or if this was something happening more generally.

That's not 'expecting sympathy.' It's asking a question.

I can't remember what the figure she gave was, but she was in Northern England and I think the fees were about half of what people pay in London. So even though her fees were going up, it still looked fairly inexpensive to me, in relative terms. Maybe that school was playing 'catch up.?' No idea. So what anyway? What a fuss over not a lot.

I guess that's where I disagree - I don't think the current system is working very well at the moment.

As for whether a fairer system would be workable or not, I don't know...I suspect it could be made to work if there was a real commitment.

The children learning at the private schools are part of the public - and the community using the facilities are part of the public so it is for the public good.

Wealthier people already pay more in taxes and if using independent schools using less resources - and education doesn't come under a "luxury item" just like other children's educational items and clubs, books ect.

Why do you feel strongly about taxing schools and making them more expensive? This would make it affordable to less children and not really have any benefit those not using them?

Why are you offended by an organisation set up to help people that you have determined to be too wealthy it's not taking from other charities to help other groups of people - many charities help "wealthy" people with various things and i'm not sure why anyone who is not using a private school would feel strongly about making it more difficult for those that do choose to use them or it's VAT status.

I have explained my reasons already. I consider private education to be an optional luxury purchase - education itself isn't a luxury, but nobody needs to go private, unless perhaps they have specific special needs that the state can't cater for (and in that scenario, I think the state should pay the fees in full).

And as a luxury purchase, I think it's right to apply VAT, as we would for any other optional luxury product or service. I don't know what else to say. I believe in taxing luxuries in order to redistribute wealth and reduce inequality. You are of course free to disagree.

The argument that wealthy people have already been taxed on their income is irrelevant in my view... that might be an argument against VAT in general (though I don't think it's a very good one) but it doesn't support the argument against VAT on school fees in particular.

As for the public good, yes, those children are part of the public, but on that argument, anything that benefits any individual is for the public good. If I rob a bank tomorrow, can I argue that that's for the public good because it benefits me and I'm a member of the public? Of course I can't. The "public good" suggests that there is a wider societal benefit, rather than simply a benefit (or, at least, a perceived benefit) to certain very privileged individuals. Many would argue that private schools do more harm than good at a societal level.

I don't particularly want to stop people from using private schools if that's what they want to do and they can afford it. I just want them to be taxed like any other luxury, as I see no logic in making an exception for them. I appreciate that this might mean some families can no longer stretch to afford the kind of education that they might ideally like, but state schools are available so it isn't as if their kids will be left with nothing. I don't really see it as any different from families who can't afford to treat their kids to fancy holidays or similar. It's a shame but we all have to live within our means and these things are nice-to-haves rather than essentials.

Private schools, in the main (excluding those that cater for children who can't engage with mainstream schooling) are ways to convert money into advantage for your offspring.

That is what they are for.

That is why those not forced to resort to them pay the money.

Now there's nothing wrong with parents wanting to buy their children advantage, goodness knows.

But can we please call a spade a spade. I'm not offended by people using private schools. I have plenty of friends who do it. But this doesn't map onto any kind of notion of "public benefit" that I recognise.

Buying advantage for one's children relative to their less wealthy peers is not a charitable endeavour. It's understandable. I absolutely understand why people would want to do it. But it is not charitable.

Disclosure on my own part

• we could send our kids to private school if we wanted to
• but we have decent local state options so am using them instead
• plenty of my local friends are going private, that's fine, it's their choice
• went state myself and did OK
• my spouse went private and that's also fine
• charitable status for the sector as a whole blows my mind
• I suggest such status was limited to schools filling mainstream gaps

You don't think people paying school fees are contributing fairly to society? Are you being serious!!!!!

It seems to me that a lot of people love moaning about private schools but waste no time sending their kids there if they can afford it.

“A lot of people” who send their kids to private school previously objected to the concept? I can’t say it’s a trend I’ve observed.

With the wealth gap such as it is, it’s difficult to fathom your shock at this…

Yes I’ve seen that too. Someone I know wasted no time in telling me they disagreed with private education as a matter of principle when we sent ours. Funnily enough, several years later when their financial situation had improved, their kids were moved to the private sector.

‘It seems to me that a lot of people love moaning about private schools but waste no time sending their kids there if they can afford it.’

I know lots of people, myself included, who could but don’t.
So that argument, often rolled out under ‘they or just jealous’ is rubbish.

Yes, I am being serious.

We have horrible inequality in this country with many families relying on foodbanks to feed their kids, children living in inadequate or unsafe housing, children caring for their disabled parents etc. What hope do those children have of succeeding in education with everything else that they have to worry about?

Those who are affluent- and I include myself in this - need to contribute more in tax in order to improve the life chances of those children. Taxing luxuries is one way of doing this, alongside income tax, inheritance tax etc. I'm not saying that those families won't pay a lot of tax already - obviously, I see what goes out of my salary every month - but while there are children still living in poverty, it clearly isn't enough.

For me, contributing "fairly" is not the same as contributing "equally". I think it's "fair" that those with the ability to contribute more should do so in order that everyone's basic needs are met. And currently, there are an awful lot of children whose basic needs are not being met.

I do take issue with charitable status for organisations which typically benefit the wealthiest in our society

Plenty of very wealthy people are eligible for support from charities - think of all those charities set up for people with X, Y or Z disease or health condition. Illness doesn’t discriminate on health grounds (although may affect the poor in bigger numbers). Many of these charities support policy development, drug development, scientific advances which are not really charitable outcomes per se but potentially benefit us all. We don’t deny a wealthy person with cancer access to treatment trials or support or counselling just because they could afford to pay for it.

Private schools in my experience are not run as profit-making business. Their aims are to educate, even if on a self-selecting basis. I can see the argument for charging VAT but I am not sure I can agree with it.