To be glad that the VAT on school fees

[Shaketherombooga]

Is now going to be happening in January? what’s the point in stalling it? I think it’s one of many decisions that we just need to get in with.

YABU - it’s SO unfair. Labour hates ‘strivers’ etc etc

YANBU - Yup, Labour said they are taking away tax breaks for private schools, so let’s get on with it.

Don't be daft!

Although I was interested to see how posters would twist that so it wasn't an advantage, so thanks at least for that.

Sadly this is too true. CAMHS waiting lists are years long and I wouldn’t trust a school counsellor with someone with this degree of poor mental health. Parents are often told to just lock away anything harmful and provide a 24 hour watch.

There are already a tonne of initiatives like this, to the point that merit is no longer the dominant factor sometimes. I benefitted from such a scheme- big bursary and my application received more weighting because of the unis social mobility charter so I'm not against them just pointing out this already exists. I'm not sure how much further it would be fair to push this, children who go to private school being actively disadvantaged isn't a good look either- a balance is best and acknowledging not everyone will have bustling extra curriculars etc in addition to academic achievement. I believe UCAS are scrapping the personal statement which is often where stuff like this was weighted.

Frankly I think labour needs to go further and cap the amount of top uni places inline with privately educated percentages.

Rather than seek to punish those children who parents choose to send them to private school, why don’t you think Labour needs to ensure that state schools are as good?

That in itself though is the issue with many state schools, they don't always stretch the very able, naturally gifted child. And that's where these children are being failed, not because their parents can't afford private, but because state schools often aren't aspirational enough to help the most able acheive their full potential. Children at private schools are instilled with a belief that they will succeed, that they can do anything, which some mistake as being cocky or snobby, but all children should be given that self belief - that their life is what they make of it, that they are not victims of their circumstance but agents of change, they are in control.

I have a friend who works in CAMHS and she said the 2 biggest reasons for the huge rise in children's mental health referrals are social media, and the political agenda that those born into difficult conditions are trapped there, that it's inevitable that they won't acheive more than their parents, that they don't have any control over their future. This leads to depression and anxiety.

I'm state educated, and so are my children, but this policy absolutely does not have me rubbing my hands in glee. I don't think it will benefit our children in any way, and it will potentially do harm to those children who are privately educated because they were not coping in mainstream and are forced back, I take no pleasure in their challenges. It will have no impact on the very rich, it will impact hard working people stretching themselves to do whay they feel is best for their child. And from a selfish point of view, my daughters are in classes of low 20's in a lovely mixed catchment, diverse primary, I don't really want more children coming into their classes, it won't bring them an extra teacher so can only be a bad thing.
It's a poorly thought out, spiteful policy to win votes and although I voted Labour on balance of all policies, I absolutely do not agree with this one.

Just coming back to the point about private schools being in fancy ex-stately homes with large grounds. These certainly look glossy and the whole link of the buildings to aristocracy gives them an air of elitism. But in reality schools are one of the few uses to which many of these listed buildings can be put. They are impractical for pretty much any other use and developers don’t buy them because of listed status means they can be a nightmare to develop. Not saying they won’t have a value, at the right price and of course someone might be interest if they are in the correct location. But they are not always quite the wealthy asset they may look.

Can you please quote where anyone has called state pupils peasants in anything other than an obviously piss taking capacity? I've seen plenty of that from people who support this policy, assuming that's what private parents think but not one I can think of where a private parent has said "I want my kids away from the peasants" or similar.

I am wondering this too. DC was on 75% bursary and it’s dropped to 40% - due to inflation & VAT coming in (I have it in writing). I am wondering if the charity that pays the bursary will have to pay VAT on the fees too.

@Standupcitizen private schools provide over 85% of the doctors you rely on. Just one example. You sound very immature.

@Bushmillsbabe

"I have a friend who works in CAMHS and she said the 2 biggest reasons for the huge rise in children's mental health referrals are social media, and the political agenda that those born into difficult conditions are trapped there, that it's inevitable that they won't acheive more than their parents, that they don't have any control over their future. This leads to depression and anxiety."

This is massively important and overlooked point - a lack of hope, that they can't improve on their situation, being fed you are a victim narrative, comparison via social media to the fancy lives that "everyone else" seems to live all of which leads to frustration, anger, anxiety and depression.

It also leads to violence and anti social behaviour- "nobody cares about people like us so why should we care about anyone else / rest of society ".

There needs to be hope and there needs to be ambition to try and improve your "lot". Telling someone that they are a victim and that the system is stacked against them simply destroys hope.

There's a really good TED talk on this:

Just caught up with the last few pages and almost every post says "private school kids are.." , "private school parents are.." or "private schools are..". There's no such thing. Equally true if state schools of course. Most of the reasons being put forward for supporting this policy are based on false assumptions and generalisations that are simply not true. Someone said if you can afford First class travel you can afford the 20% rise. My kids are in private but I can't afford 1st class. Someone said kids move schools all the time, they'll be fine. My kids are in private because of unmet needs and horrific bullying leading to EBSA and ongoing social anxiety. But yeah I'm sure they'll be fine if I tell them they're going back.

In my particular case, I'll get deeper into debt to avoid that, stop paying my once a fortnight cleaner her £30, stop giving the local chippy £25 a month, stop the payment to the local activities for my kids that cost £100 month. My cleaner is hit and miss with communication as she can't afford phone credit. I'm sure she'll be thrilled to lose £60 a month. That's a microcosom of course but it's real people on the end of this. And yes in an ideal world I'd not have such tight margins but I didn't foresee my kids' issues in state or the mortgage hike, food price hike or anything else. And yes I know people will jump on me having that money to spend on a cleaner in the first place but as I said, margins are v tight. I chose that so as to free up time to support my kids, not because I'm too posh to scrub a toilet.

Until people stop talking in generalities about what private schools / parents / kids are like this is a pointless discussion.

I have direct experience of this in the grammar system. Many DC came from prep schools and in Year 7 there was a little bit of a disconnect between what had been covered in state vs prep with some DC. However by year 8 any prep school advantage had eroded and there was a big shift in who was hitting the top scores in the year group. My DC had gone to state primary and were in the top handful of GSCE and A Level performers in their Year Groups and went on to the most competitive courses at top universities.

As I understand it, the very limited extra money garnered from this policy will used to train up more teachers. It’s not as if state schools are suddenly going to get a cash injection and even if they did, it would be a drop in the ocean - barely noticeable.

Its all well and good training up more teachers but, the real issue is how to retain teachers! We constantly hear are leaving in droves, due to stress, aggression / lack of respect from pupils and belligerent / unsupportive parents, etc. What is the govt doing about this? Otherwise, all the teachers they are planning to train won’t stick around long. They’ll just leave and pursue less stressful and better paid careers.

Any school is largely a reflection of its hinterland - ie. the community of people who use it. Teachers are not police or social workers, but sadly, they are too often expected to be these days. This is why school resources are stretched to the max in some areas..Schools are expected to provide things like breakfast clubs - as if it’s now too much for parents to be expected to give their own kids breakfast! Where there are behaviour issues, too often the parents collude with their child and blame teachers instead. Especially where parents have negative school experiences themselves. Of course, state schools vary massively and not all parent / teacher / child relationships are combative in this way - far from it. But still, it happens too much and is a definite trend. This is why the education system is broken, where it is broken. It’s societal breakdown.

It's certainly refreshing to have a government that says exactly what it is going to do, and then gets on and does it. Prior to the election there seemed to be a lot of commentators saying that the Labour manifesto was hot air and they would never do any of it (including assurances that they would back down on VAT for private schools). While I'm ambivalent about the VAT, it's certainly a pleasant change to have a government that actually follows through on their promises.

In what year groups exactly are numbers dropping? Children are in school for 12 plus years, it isn't just affecting the upcoming reception intake year . 2012 birth year for example was large, those children are about to enter Senior school.

They haven’t done it yet. Just more potential ‘hot air’.

It’s been explained over and again that state numbers are dropping and when you spread the tiny amount out who will leave private it will hardly be noticeable so probably best to drop the scaremongering.

I don’t get this argument. If numbers drop then that means money is saved. If they drop less due to children switching from private then less money is saved. Given the point of the VAT was apparently to inject more money into state then the fact children move into state costs the state more money means it is a policy failure regardless of it the total number of students goes up or down.

I agree that children of similar ability in a private school are likely to be further ahead. However, not every child who goes to a private school is high ability and so they are unlikely to be in the top set. As previous posters have said, there are also many SEN kids in private schools.
I also don't agree that finishing the A-level curriculum early is necessarily a sign of better teaching. There is something called quality first teaching, where the curriculum is taught more slowly but with lots of opportunities for practice and exam technique along the way. This is actually considered better than teaching faster. In general, I think private schools are better due to the culture, which encourages learning. I also think private schools can deal with disruptive pupils much more effectively than state schools. This will be worse with Labour's new policy of preventing disruptive pupils being taken out of the classroom. This will compound the already serious issue of bad behaviour disrupting learning for the majority and lead to more teachers leaving the profession.
I personally think the 20% VAT should not be added to fees as there is likely to be no net gain if more than 10% of students leave private schools.
I also think people are misguided if they think that getting rid of private schools leads to equality. The Sutton Trust has said that disadvantaged children are much more likely to go to inadequate state schools due to where they live. This will not change as you can't engineer where people live or go to school especially in more rural areas.
The school population is also particularly large in the GCSE years at the moment and about 15% of all children usually go to private schools at sixth form. I think that if a large proportion of these opt for a state school sixth form it will be very costly for the government as each child who goes back to the state sector costs money. I think that the 7% of people who usually move their child from state to private for sixth form won't make that decision now especially with changes to university admissions. So again there will be no net gain in funds from taxing private schools.

I feel as if our freedom of choice is being eroded.

That's not accurate. The current picture is that 28.5% of UK Medicine and Dentistry students were privately educated.

When our children were young we couldn't afford a private education for them.
However, we were very fortunate that we could 90% of the fees paid for by my husbands work (RAF) so we opted for the private education.
I'm so glad we did, one of my children was struggling in state school and flourished within a year in private education.

IMO a private education gives kids a better chance.

Ha, the irony!
I absolutely do know how widening participation and contextual offers work, both from a professional perspective and as a parent.