VOTE Labour and

[DistinguishedSocialCommentator]

AIBU to feel this will happen un a Labour government???

From what I see and IMO, the Labour lot on the whole believe in aspirations but only for themselves

Older people will vividly recall the the hideous tax rates under labour - between 1974 and 1979 the paye tax rate was up to 80%. Then there was a tax on top of that for so-called higher earners of 18%. This equated to 98%

I don't trust Labour, nor do I trust the Torties. Liberals, IMO they will sell your soul down the river to get a sniff at number 10

As I said I don't trust any of them. But if you are working, worked hard, been prudent with your money and have savings, decent private pensions in the pipeline and possibly a property or two that you have worked for, for your retirement and not wasting your money and want to leave some behind for your kids, GC etc rather than throw it away on the hand to mouth life - then if Labour comes into power, you are totally and truly F'd

Labour rants they will do this and the other - the last time they almost bankrupted England,

If you are working hard being prudent with your money and made sacrifices to send your kids to a private school as many Labour MP's do on pay at almost 100k - they are eager to put VAT on this part of education. The MPS whose pay is a couple of times above average pay will be able to afford it - will you??

Me, my family, relatives have all worked hard, not on benefits, never lived in social housing and not thrown our money away but been prudent to be self-sufficient and pay our taxes to support our country. If you are like us, then trust me, under Labour, you will be shafted hard.

I'm not sure if I will vote tory or an independent but this circus of Tories and Labour taking turns to lie to the nation is not on and yes, most politicians lie and will lie and say anything to get into number 10 and if your feel that is not true, then you must be on another planet

Well no single policy is going to lift kids out of poverty, but the estimate is that the introduction of VAT and the end of business rates relief on private schools could raise c. £1.7 billion, which is not inconsiderable and would certainly help improve state education when invested in that - the plan is to invest in additional teachers and counselling services. As such, it would benefit far more children than it would somehow 'disadvantage' if the policy potentially means a tiny number of children's parents would feel compelled to send them to state schools rather than keep them in private schools. But of course that compulsion will be down to a matter of timing and how this is introduced.

The interpretation is that private education should be considered a luxury i.e. of personal rather than societal benefit, much as it is in New Zealand where it comes under goods and services and where - like the UK - most people attend state schools.

I'm disappointed that Labour have dropped their plan to change the charitable status of those private schools that claim it.

I don't feel any vitriol whatsoever towards private school children - and I find the emotive and simplistic arguments that supporting this policy is somehow an unjust attack on children - emotive and simplistic.

And according to the report top 10% if roughly £69k pre tax. You do know private school fees cost £20k on average so those people are not rich and many cannot afford a price increase which means these people will buy up properties next to outstanding schools as they have more disposable income to splash now without the private school fees and push the less off people away who can’t move to worse schools. The less well off just gets less well off. But putting vat on education means creating more elitism for the mega rich (like the Beckhams who can easily afford the increase) and not levelling the playing field at all!

maybe we should start looking at cutting benefits for those people that just sit on their arse all day and do nothing instead of trying to tax the hard working people trying to improve their children’s lives!!

You literally just threatened to punish a state school by calling every day and making the teachers lives miserable because YOU can't afford the fees of your preferred school. You're literally claiming you will throw all your toys out of the pram and take it out on some absolutely uninvolved bystanders just doing their job, for no reason than they happen to be unfortunate enough to have you live in their catchment area. I think they're more rubbing their hands together in glee at the idea that people like you will get a reality check.
Lots of children move halfway through GCSEs for all kinds of reasons. You're not special. Your son is not special. You don't deserve anything more than anybody else. Shit happens.

I don’t think you are talking about a tiny number. A lot of my friend are going state even though they could have afforded the fees and probably still can with the vat. My friend bought a £1m house in the catchment of an outstanding school so they can get in, rather than going to private. So lots of people are not even going to start private. As a matter of fact alot of private schools are struggling with enrolment numbers and many have already closed in the last few years

The £1.7bn is assuming that most people don’t drop out of private/ same amount of children will start private there is a report which states there is actually no benefit to added VAT as more people will leave private to go to state and tax payers will need to fund these places now out of the budget where this money could have gone to the NHS etc. plus decreased VAT revenue from less people in private schools - they aren’t going to get £1.7bn at all.

Well if that's your take, then maybe private schools are really only accessible for the top 5% of earners? If people at the lower end of the top 10% of earners find it a struggle, maybe they should be more realistic about what they can afford.
Are you suggesting that 90% of the population aren't hard workers and don't try to improve their children's lives?

You're more than happy to throw the sick, disabled, low-paid and single parents to the wolves, but because I won't advocate for more privilege for the already over-privileged, I'm "nasty"? You must be a Tory voter.

I'll concede one point - I was wrong to say that I hope school fees treble.

I hope they quadruple.

It is a comparatively tiny number though, 94% of children are educated in the state sector, so it's some % of 6% of all children.
I haven't seen the report you're referring to. The money saved is earmarked for investment in state education - not the NHS. Let's see what happens. I think it's better to improve state education rather than benefit a tiny number of parents/children.

My friend bought a £1m house in the catchment of an outstanding school so they can get in, rather than going to private.

This is exactly my point about the real educational inequality. It's between different state schools. Lots of people don't go private but they do still pay for a good school. They just do it by inflating house prices near good state schools, pricing less well-off families away from those schools. Unless the link to affordable housing is acknowledged and addressed, school inequality (and inequality in general) will still be an issue.

You're more than happy to throw the sick, disabled, low-paid and single parents to the wolves

It's true things are bad for those groups now, but what will Labour do for them? Have they said? (I don't know as haven't been following politics too closely recently).

In terms of your comment on cutting benefits, the UK has a massive poverty crisis. What exactly would you cut in terms of benefits? Already, the poorest families can't afford food and energy.

The tiny number who can't afford the VAT (and it is tiny) certainly won't cause any issues at our local schools, schools are closing in my city due to there not being enough kids.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies v some random on Mumsnet. Who to believe? It's so difficult.

I went to private school and support all of Labour policies. If you go to private school you benefit from networks and opportunities, in addition you benefit from smaller class sizes, not having to follow the national curriculum and access to more facilities and extra curricular activities.

However private schools will simply introduce more scholarships which will be very competitive.

In terms of your comment on cutting benefits, the UK has a massive poverty crisis. What exactly would you cut in terms of benefits? Already, the poorest families can't afford food and energy.

The tiny number who can't afford the VAT (and it is tiny) certainly won't cause any issues at our local schools, schools are closing in my city due to there not being enough kids.

Both these issues are linked to affordable housing. Fewer people would need benefits if there was more council housing, and it needs to be evenly spread across all areas to ensure mixed communities. That would address the issue of inequality between different state schools (however I suspect it wouldn't be popular? I'd like to see mixed communities but I'm not sure if I'm in a minority?). Related, regarding people who might be able to afford private school VAT, many probably can afford it but instead pay (via housing and catchment areas) for a good state school.

You're addressing a person who believes that someone on £69k a year isn't rich. Some people don't inhabit the real world.

It's not a personal attack on you, how far fetched. What sort of world do you live in? You clearly think it revolves around you lol. Why are you threatening to launch a personal attack on some state school teachers?

It's like shouting at the bus driver because you can't afford a chauffeur 😂

Are you suggesting that 90% of the population aren't hard workers and don't try to improve their children's lives?

Sure reads like that is what @pattysam is implying. What I don't understand though is why all these "hard working" parents complaining about being unable to afford an increase in fees don't just work harder.

After all isn't that all it takes to be successful in toryland? That's certainly what they keep telling everyone else anyway.

So Patty, if you're worried about being unable to afford private school fees once labour are in power, then the solution is simple.

Just work a harder, get a better job or cut back on those unnecessary luxuries like a new phone, holidays, alcohol or the internet (I think that's what the tory faithful usually suggest to anyone who's worried about money).

It's not what Labour will do, it's what they won't do, i.e. get rid of PIP, which is what Rishi wants to do, and will do if re-elected. This would do a staggering amount of harm to one of the poorest sectors of the population.

Stuck up and pathetic were the words used. There is no need for that.

And I didn’t threaten any attacks on state school teachers. You’re making it up.

Remember libraries, public toilets, park keepers ? Many of these services now gone.

The conservatives have cut police numbers by 20 thousand , offered redundancy to experienced prison staff that now can’t and will probably never come back.

Not to mention a teacher shortage that will probably be worse in years to come.

Keep voting for the same party and nothing will change.

But will Labour truly make things better ? I really wish I knew.

Of course if Labour win, they’ll have the same problems to inherit.

Do you think state school parents don’t have aspirations for their kids? 🙄

@HelenaWaiting Have Labour confirmed they won't get rid of it? If so, that's good news. I want a society where the vulnerable are supported. I'm just not yet convinced Labour do (but hope to be proved wrong).

This - exactly. The idea that only those who send their kids to private schools are aspirational for their children or really care about their future is just ridiculous.

"I'm not sure if I will vote tory or an independent"

Sure, sure.

In 1974 the Average annual gross salary was GBP2k.
Average Wage (Hansard, 28 January 1974) (parliament.uk)

Income tax rates on those on an average salary were 30%
Rates of Income Tax, 1973-74 to 1989-90 (excellentcontent.com)
Income Tax Rates (Hansard, 26 March 1974) (parliament.uk)

Yes - for those earning over GBP20k/year rates were 83% but this was for those earning 10 times the average. UK current Average salary is GBP35k. I'd be ok with folks earning 10 times that paying lots of tax!!

Average weekly earnings in Great Britain - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2008/nov/25/case-study-45p-tax