To think good school places will be even harder to find next year because of the VAT on school fees

[Nesca1]

We are are looking at secondary schools for DS. We have our eye on a decent school bang in the middle of a solid middle class area . The school is always over subscribed; this year we would have gotten a place but last year we would have missed out because of how far we are from the school.
Usually, the school offers places to children living 1600m away, last year it was 1400m due to a large number of sibling applications.

Due to the whole VAT issue, i think more parents from the local area are going to be sending their kids to this school, rather than sending them to private schools.

Is this a reasonable assumption? I don't think parents will wait for the policy to be enacted, but they will move their year 6 children into this school.

I listened to a programme on LBC in the last few days in which a state school parent had sent their DC to Spain for free uni. It is happening more and more suddenly and people are just much more mobile and international. Especially post Brexit, everyone I know who could got their hands on an EU legacy passport. The Labour Party is really playing with fire here. We need our young talent to stay, whatever school they went to. Unfortunately the actual truth is that parenting is what makes all the difference to outcome, not schooling. Especially now that so much is available online anyway, even free stuff. State schools should be working with big tech providers to get free online platforms for disadvantaged kids. There is already lots of free amazing stuff out there like Dr Frost Maths and Seneca for Science, just some minor examples. What would be great is to get all children from an early age to understand what is out there for free to achieve academically and get the parents’ buy in. Educationally motivated parents do this already anyway. It is the poorer children with clueless parents (or actively anti Education/anti establishment type parents) that need the most guidance. All these petty fights over private school just cost time & money.

You do realise that there are plenty of people in their 30s and 40s struggling financially who are not in council accommodation and might even have a mortgage but are still struggling? Honestly it's like a different world on here. I live in a fairly middle-class area but the majority of people I know simply CANNOT afford private school feels! Its laughable to think that simply by moving this could free up 25k (or double or more if you have more than one child) of funds AFTER TAX PER YEAR! Not everyone does have a "good job" - some don't but still have a mortgage as they bought 20 years ago. People struggle in all sorts of ways, especially at the moment. To suggest these opportunities are open to all if they just make some life changes is absolutely ludicrous!

I know of someone who has gone to a different European country, and the cost is comparable to the UK, even with travel factored in. It’s very tempting for a lot of students. I think some countries offer free tuition even for international students. It’s certainly something our family will be considering. Unfortunately, the UK education system is pushing away many talented people, and it’s likely to get even worse under a Labour government.

Wow, you really are coming across as a total snob here "the poorer children with clueless parents"! Did you read that back before you posted it?

"The point still remains, however, that it IS a luxury to pay for private school fees when there is free access to state education. So therefore, it should be subject to VAT."

From any economists' perspective, it's not a luxury. It's your opinion that it's a luxury, and it's an opinion that fails to take account of costs and benefits.

Private school is a double positive externality. Investment in human capital is one of the best things the private sector can do for society...for the same reason that if you build a factory you don't pay VAT on it. And it saves the state ££££ per pupil, which is why it's essential we don't use the word "free" to describe state education.

And that's before considering bursaries, partnerships, the ability to support EHCP (which would look pretty silly if the schools didn't exist), cultural contributions like cathedral schools, and the listed building liabilities / tourist attractions often provided at cost or even free.

All of which are extremely good reasons not to tax education.

@Allnormalhere “You do realise that there are plenty of people in their 30s and 40s struggling financially who are not in council accommodation and might even have a mortgage but are still struggling? Honestly it's like a different world on here. I live in a fairly middle-class area but the majority of people I know simply CANNOT afford private school feels! It’s laughable to think that simply by moving this could free up 25k (or double or more if you have more than one child) of funds AFTER TAX PER YEAR! Not everyone does have a "good job" - some don't but still have a mortgage as they bought 20 years ago. People struggle in all sorts of ways, especially at the moment. To suggest these opportunities are open to all if they just make some life changes is absolutely ludicrous!”

You have completely misunderstood my post!

I was speaking about CHOICE IN THE STATE SECTOR.

Why is it that there were FSM kids in my DC’s state primary who have managed to get a great state education? Lots of motivated immigrant families with very little capital but loads of motivation and drive.

If it is all just down to parenting, then why are some posters so upset by the idea of their children going to state schools?

The other side of this what people don’t see is that we are not competing as a country, we are competing with the world!!! Therefore we can’t level down our country vs the rest of the world.

the ROW will laugh at policies like this one.

"Labour are the only party that will try to level things up down"

Fixed that for you.

Yep, sadly this will be the outcome

Yes @Allnormalhere - I stand by what I said. There are plenty of children in this country who are being massively failed by their own parents! Or do you think I am making that up?

No @wombat15 parents would like choice. As so many on here have done I will relate to my own personal experience. My town doesn't have a sixth form. The nearest is two buses away taking around one hour. The next one is one bus away but in rush hour traffic takes an hour and a half. The local private school is 5 minutes away in the car. It makes everyone's life easier being able to go there. With two children I could possibly need to find an extra £10,000 next year allowing for 20% VAT plus the fee increase school have already announced. I could move to a decent state school for that. I would need to move house but doable.
Of the just below 70 Oxbridge places in my county (last published results), 60 came from 5 schools, leaving for the remainder of the county.
In my local LEA of 18 schools only one had above average value added, 3 below average and 9 well below average. I would love a good state school near me and as a previous state pupil myself would be more than happy for my children to attend one, just not a failing one.
The state school system is fraught with inequality. I offer the Tiffin school versus the Kemnal technology college, opposite ends of the spectrum. You want to reduce inequality, choose something that will really have an impact. The division between the North and South has widened since the pandemic. I would support policies which aim to tackle this. VAT on private schools appeals to the politics of envy. It will not stop Eton dominating government.

I am not sure many posters are that upset about their own children going to the right state schools. More frustrated because they understand how the system works. They made a choice originally and you are asking them to change course. Which they will as a group, because most of them are able to. They are simply pointing out the flaws in this plan. They will either pay up or change direction. You need not worry about the outcome for their children unless they have SEN. But we do need to worry about public finances and the course this country is taking. That is if you care about the poorer, elderly and those that need public services.

Exactly this. It’s such a shortsighted policy. Penalising a sector which, on the whole, functions very well and produces great outcomes for children is crazy. We should be aiming to bring the state sector up. This policy does nothing to help with that. Unfortunately many people seem to forget that there’s a big world beyond our little island.

No, but rich parents can fail their children too and not all poorer households have "useless" parents. Being a good or bad parent is not all about how much money you have! If a child is happy, fed, clothed and loved, then they are not being failed. Personally, I think sending a child off to boarding school at the age of 11 is a massive emotional failure of parenting. There aren't many children who would choose to leave their family at this age!

There are as you say, MANY households on 60/80k on dual incomes. That's as relevant as your earlier rude jibes about lower earners and waiters.

What's relevant is there are also, as I said, MANY households on 60/80k on one income, or one plus part-time, and enjoying (between the parents) a good deal of leisure. That's the option that's easily available to a family that's currently busting themselves full time for £100-150k for school fees, if they no longer need school fees.

You can keep up the insults all you like, but "bubbles" work both ways. The success or failure of this policy rests on the choices and experiences of the families I'm describing, and I wouldn't have thought it's that hard for you to think outside your bubble.

My issue was with your use of the phrase "kicking back" to describe anyone earning less than 100-150k per year; many do earn much less than this and work bloody hard for it, so I hardly think they are "kicking back". Those of us who live in the real world and know people in lots of different financial situations, understand this.

@Allnormalhere “Being a good or bad parent is not all about how much money you have! If a child is happy, fed, clothed and loved, then they are not being failed. “

Yes, I agree with that, however, I would add books, talking, mental stimulation, personal growth to that as well, and some healthy ambition.

I have observed plenty of poorer parents in London have DC who have achieved very highly educationally and become successful in just one generation through motivation, sheer hard work and the right educational values.

But personally I am not one bit threatened by my electrician sending his DC to private school locally. We can help ours at home. He can’t, according to him. I am really happy he is doing this and happy with his own choice and I cannot fathom why the Labour Party would try and keep him down.

@IvorTheEngineDriver I agree with you. The assumption that Labour will win is not to be relied on. Labour has an astonishing ability to lose elections they should have won easily.

Nothing is certain, and they don't seem to have a plan for the transfer of pupils to state schools, if they do win. Especially SEN pupils.

My DS will enter private 6th form in September so my exposure to increased fees is limited to two years, possibly only one year - IF Labour win outright, rather than being in coalition and having to horse trade with the LDs or the Greens.. I can't afford an extra 20% but I'm not panicking yet.

So possibly your electrician, with his money but no time/inclination/ability (delete as appropriate, I don't know him) to help his children at home is more "useless" than an parent who is "poor" but takes the time to help their child educationally in all the ways you have mentioned? So not always about money.

@Allnormalhere spectacularly missing Araminta1003 point.

And what was the point? Did you see the original comment where she accused poorer households of being "useless parents"?

There a plenty of single income families with children at private school.

You simply don’t know enough about how Private Schools work.
In applying for a place at a school parents declare their form of employment. In applying for any form of reduction in fees parents have to prove income, savings and financial assets. Some kids will receive a reduction, some not. Parents also default on payments with some in long term debt. Some have a charge put on their properties to pay the shortfall. Some pay monthly out of their wages and so on. Grandparents pay fees also.
Schools know the financial situation of many.
Those parents who are on the margins are known by the school.
Those who pay in full at the beginning of the year, not so much, but those are probably not the ones going to be affected. In most schools these are in the minority.
We paid in full at the beginning of every year but we were in the minority at our first school- prep rep and prep but definitely not in our second senior school.

Ultimately we ll all see what happens
Give it a few years and see it’s all hype to get the masses to vote Labour
So the masses can cheer and think they are getting one over Indi parents. No one cares about money being saved really, just about taking away choice.
If I can’t have it no one should ….what an attitude to push for any potential Government

Its a Brexit bus. It will be a disaster and it won’t help state schools.

State parents and additional % on taxes are the only things that can do that.