to suggest that every single parent with a child at private school apply for a state school place asap?

[sarjd]

let's see how that works.

Not unreasonable at all. You child is entitled to a state school place.
you should double down and move or rent a house just across the street from your chosen school to guarantee your place. After all it’s what most state school parents appear to do to access the best education for their child.
Good on them. Do whatever it takes.

You said that "Mr Starmer" would have statistics to look at if people just registered an interest though which is not the same thing as actually starting at a state school.

Too late if the children are currently in year 6 or above.

Will they? If you are, say, comparable to Sunak with two children in private education, you are still looking at paying this only till they reach 18. Will you suck it up and pay, or will you instead choose to spend an awful lot of time and throw a ton of money at lawyers for a case you may not win, resulting in having to throw another ton of money at your opponents' lawyers? Legal costs would almost certainly outweigh what you are paying on school fees, particularly if schools act ethically and pass on savings on setting VAT payments against VAT liability.

@wombat15 - on any contract if you increase payment terms the other party has a right to end the contract in accordance with the notice period. That is why they write to you when your phone bill goes up or your gym membership. Private schools are meant to give the parents a full term’s notice of an increase of fees so they can in theory give notice.

If the Labour Party introduce VAT from September 24 it breaches all sorts of fundamental principles of contract law. As the schools would have to pass the VAT on by law, not sure what a court would say. Would it become force majeure and give the parents a get out. It’s never been done before.

Or - the OP has been paying her taxes which is what funds state schools for years and now needs the state to pay for the place that she is and always was absolutely entitled to - like any other tax paying individual.

Well it’s not that surprising. Take away their charitable status and impose VAT and they will behave as the entities they already are - businesses. Parents pay for most of those things you mentioned and they will expect that to continue, especially with a 20% hike in cost. This is one of the unfortunate consequences of this policy. The first thing that may go are the things that cost them money but don’t bring any in. It may take a while for the idea of CSR to kick in again. And as has already been stated, the VAT recovered won’t go to state schools to improve education, just into the general pot which no government seems to spend well enough to improve life for those most in need so who wins?

Come on down and join the rest of us. They'll find a space for your child.

He was asked specifically if he would pay if his relative was waiting for life-saving care. Frankly, it was a no-brainer, given that private medicine doesn't offer life-saving care. More fool Sunak for falling for the question.

@zyq- if I am rich public school parent with a child with SEN I may feel it is in the public interest to bring a claim on behalf of my child and others. Regardless of cost. It’s making an important legal point.

A politician shouldn’t just be able to decide a dog whistle policy and impose it on children with disabilities. They know there are 100k children in the private sector with SEN. They have the figures. It is a public interest point.

Unfortunately I think a lot of richer people actually put up and shut up and just pay up rather than get their child the full help they are entitled to or a “label”. There is that type of thinking too. Especially when it comes to mental health.

In my experience it is lawyers who avoid taking their own issues to court whenever possible, because they know exactly how hassle- and stress-ridden the process is, to say nothing of how expensive.

This, is what really pisses me off about this whole policy. The whole gleeful, vitriolic joy in it… I am state educated, my husband is state educated, our parents.. Window fitter, nurse, teacher, small business owner.. Our child is at an independent school.. I don’t have an opinion on whether VAT on fees is good or bad, we will find the funds. Luckily we have one child, many I know with more than one won’t but neither I nor them would ever claim hardship or poverty. But what I do know is, it won’t benefit the state school system one bit, and it will hit children on bursaries, children with SEND, free use of assets in the community, fundraising for charities and current state educated children in the catchment areas of good and outstanding schools hardest. It won’t touch the sides of oligarchs, the old boys network or the likes of Boris Johnson and his chums one bit. Contrary to popular belief many of us self entitled, uncaring, disinterested parents are in fact already working, volunteering and governing in the state system. I have been a governor at a state school for 8yrs, a chair for five, so believe me when I tell you this won’t help. We already give back, we already care, we already understand what will help.. We are not all sitting on our horses galloping from lunch date to tea party to the spa.. I’m privileged, we worked hard, got lucky, chose the right careers and I chose independent because 7:45-4:30 school worked for me as a FT working mum, because I valued five hours of sport a week, because the extra curricular offerings let me work until 5:30, because I believe in setting, and testing and curriculum flexibility. Not because I think my child is better than anyone else’s, not for small class sizes and not because of who she would mix with. Her school is more ethnically diverse than almost all state schools where we live, and the demographic of the parents more socially diverse than all the “naice” primary schools full of white, middle class, privately educated parents who pushed up house prices around the schools of their choice to create de facto private schools. We are also at least honest about our choices. The glee with which people like you are enjoying hurting any child is appalling, with no knowledge of how little this will help, and with your patronising assumptions that all these parents will suddenly “take an interest”, we already are, many of us are already in the trenches… those that don’t care won’t suddenly change, those that don’t have time won’t suddenly find time, they’ll have less time now, and the elite going into politics you hate, well they’ll still be there, still going to the tune percentage of Eton like schools completely unaffected. What will change, for one, will be people like me who have decided that if you really dislike us so much you can do without us.. this will be my last term as a governor in the state system.. I cannot work for a govt, sector and apparently a parent body who loathe me and my child. I’m done.. and it’s “your” loss and the state sectors loss..

They offer scholarships, bursaries and assisted places to high achieving kids. I.e., kids who were being taught very successfully in the state system. These students' achievements boost the private school results, but the hard work was put in by the state school. It makes it appear that private schools provide better education, but it's an illusion. Stop funding state school students and the results will plummet. Would any private school want that?

Very few parents send their children with SEND to private schools for this reason, not least because when LAs finalise EHCPs they may well name a different school.

They whole SEN shitshow is mostly caused by the government's wholesale failure to fund SEND anything like adequately over the last 14 years. That is unfortunately another mess a new government will have to grapple with.

The obvious answer for those parents is to get on with applications for EHC Plans. If they can show their children need provision over and above what is available in state maintained schools it will be relatively straightforward. That would be a much more productive use of their time and money.

I don't understand your reference to disability discrimination: a challenge to the VAT proposal based on that would never get off the ground.

Absolutely we need to fund more specialist schools, there is already a massive shortage in specialist places because of consistent underfunding by the current government. Likewise we need to fund local authorities properly to carry out their duties to children with SEND. Maybe some of the funds realised through this policy can be used for that purpose.

Somehow I don't think any government is going to base its policies on what goes on amongst your family and friends.

“The obvious answer for those parents is to get on with applications for EHC Plans.”

A lot of people have started the process but the waiting lists are unreasonably long. If the local councils fail to deal with the issues in a prompt manner, then there should be recourse through the courts. If someone ends up having to pay out of their own pocket plus VAT on top of that due to a failure by the council and government to employ enough people to deal with it in a prompt and fair manner, then those sums of money should be recoverable for that family (plus reasonable amounts of interest). Would you not agree @Zyq ?

Not really. Depends on a lot of factors including the education authority and in year admissions rules and if a place comes available who is closer.

Not sure what you mean. Of course either party has a right to end the contract in accordance with the notice period but that is regardless of price increase. If private school contracts state that they have to give a terms notice of a price increase then no doubt that is what they will do.

Private schools invariably cater for fee rises in their terms and conditions. There is no chance a court would say that having to pay VAT nullifies contract terms.

Not setting up sufficient SEN schools and not funding SEN places is discriminatory towards children with disabilities. Just because some have quietly gone away and paid for their children, that does not make it less discriminatory.

Good luck trying that argument. At least you would give the judge a good laugh.

“Private schools invariably cater for fee rises in their terms and conditions. There is no chance a court would say that having to pay VAT nullifies contract terms.”

That cannot be true. If a Government passed a law tomorrow stating that every private school parents now has to pay 3000% of VAT on top of fees per term, then a court would definitely hold that the parent can leave without notice immediately.

No education authority guarantees a child a place if the year group is already full. It doesn't matter if they have moved next door to their preferred school. They will go on the waiting list and only be offered a place if someone in their year group at that school leaves.

They almost certainly won't bring it in before September, because there wouldn't be time to go through the normal Parliamentary processes. No doubt they'll think about timing as part of the process of formulating the relevant statutory provisions or regulations.