To marvel at privately educated Keir Starmer's hypocrisy?

[Bursarysadness]

Both Kier Starmer and his wife are privately educated. Kier's senior school converted into a private school in the second year of his attendance and he has received a generous full bursary up until his A levels. He has built his life and his success on this education, supported to the end by the bursary funded by the same schools and parents he is now trying to destroy. It pains me as my children receive 50% bursaries from a brilliant local school. We've worked incredibly hard to cover the remaining 50% but it has been worth it, seeing how my children blossomed. We had a very different experience in their primary state schools, including bullying and racism. We don't live in a great area. We have just been told that the school will probably reduce all their bursaries to be able to lower the fees for the non bursary parents who are now struggling because of the VAT introduction. I don't know what the future for my children is now and they have so many close friends where they are. They are both academically brilliant and work very hard - hence the bursaries were granted. I feel so depressed that, from what is becoming obvious, they won't be able to benefit from the generosity of bursaries the same way Kier Starmer did when he was a child ..

Would not use it. We have money saved that could be used but fundamentally am against private education.

He was too young to choose where he was educated.

Can I ask you why, not trying to get into an argument, I’m genuinely interested as I just don’t understand the issue?

So in your argument, if I go to the supermarket and buy mince beef and you go and buy fillet steak, your fillet steak should be taxed because I can’t afford to buy it?
education is not a luxury, you are not depriving another child of an education because you pay for one, in fact quite the opposite, you are taking one more child out of an already massively overcrowded classroom!

I wish these people who have the money but are so against private schools would realise that, rather than just asking people who dont use the state funded places to cough up even more, maybe they need to start contributing more to what they actually use.

Imagine turning up to a food bank when you can afford to go to Sainsburys.

Agree! This is ridiculous to even discuss . The people who identify with AR. Would be represented by her and will come to her support. However, people criticism of someone educated to be in government is only in this country. First thing people see is the background and education of the candidates that are going to represent them. As well as course the policies and the rest.

You are being arrogant if you think you work harder than those who can't afford sending their children to a private school.

I was gobsmacked to learn that Eton has 40 football and rugby pitches, 19 cricket pitches and 50 tennis courts. Yes, not every private school is that big, but if they want to stay in business they can and should absorb the VAT increase.

They chose to send him to a selective school, and to send him to private school once it converted - at no cost to themselves, paid for by other people. He had the perfect socialist start, really.

That's a silly comparison that doesn't make sense. Food is completely different as few foods qualify for VAT. It's more like if you bought the same steak in a restaurant and it was cooked for you, you would pay tax on it. Though I still think relating this argument in any way to food is nonsense.
People are not doing the world a favour by sending a child to private school, it isnt for altruistic reasons, its because you believe you will get something better than everyone else by paying. This is fine and if you wish and are able to make the choice, you should just be willing to pay the tax on it. The same as if I wanted to buy any luxury item, I would pay the tax.

Eton, Harrow etc. are a very small proportion of PS. In fact, you’ll find DC of the richest in the world there. It’s the small town PS that will be affected. The ones with 200 kids in them. You all say they won’t close, but at some point when the numbers drop, it becomes unviable to keep the school open.

PS aren’t full. They struggle now to stay open. If a school of 200, that can accommodate 300, drops to 150, it’ll close. This is what happened to a local PS of mine. Where are those DC going to go, my town can’t accommodate them. They offered my DC his 4th choice of secondary, so I left him in private.

If education is a luxury, why are we now the only country in the world who does this? NZ are the only other country to put VAT on school fees. They do this as everything has 15% VAT for simplification, then they offer rebates, e.g. £1,000 rebate to secondary school private DC. No one else in the world died it as it is immoral to tax education.

It would be better to tax all those in the top 5% of income more, and spend that specifically on schools, rather than maliciously target children directly.

Targeting DC, those on bursaries and with SEN most affected, and taking heating money off pensioners is malicious and petty.

I would’ve preferred it if KS put up my tax by the same amount, but instead chose to go after my DC.

Apparently this new law has loads of flaws in it. I really hope someone contests it at the ECHR and its thrown out.

The top 5% income-wise includes anyone on over about £81k, those people are already paying 40% tax and they lose any child benefit etc (fair enough imo). Those on £100-£125k pay about 60% in tax already, because they lose the personal tax allowance. I'd prefer to see some sort of wealth tax introduced before income tax is increased. I don't earn either of these amounts by the way, I just think we base too much on income.

Bravo, bravo, bravo. From a full-fee paying parent. Thank you.

Does he send his children to state schools? I met a parent who lives near him and said Keir has a child at the same private school his child is at?

You have negated your own argument there! Food is food,if you buy fillet steak, you’re buying it because you think it’s better than mince! Either will feed you but you’re buying ‘something better’. If you believe you’ll get a better education by paying for it, what’s the difference? It’s jealousy pure and simple, I can’t afford it, so you shouldn’t have it!

I haven't, I very clearly stated I didn't think food was a good comparison.

What exactly do you believe I'm jealous of?

Clearly that you think someone is getting a better education because they are paying for it, the very fact they are already paying is surely enough without paying a ‘luxury’ tax on top?

'Champagne socialist' is clearly being used as a pejorative term on this thread but I really can't see the issue.

What's so wrong with wanting others to enjoy the chances you may have had just because of a circumstance of birth? Wanting to bring society up by making great education accessible to all is a good thing surely.

Some people actually care about the world beyond their home. That some of you who send your DC to private school can't believe why, if we had the money to pay for it, we wouldn't send our own DC is very telling.

You should not be running a country based on your own experiences, that makes no sense. It would not matter to me if Kier went to private school- 1 that would have been his parents choice not his, 2 I would be worried if a PM made decisions based on his personal experiences rather than the overwhelming evidence in front of him, and 3 he is implementing a very sensible approach. Private schools are not charities, they absolutely should be seen as luxuries and be subject to VAT. In 5 years' time people will look back at this debate in astonishment.

I think you tagged the wrong person, I don't pay for private and I don't believe it is always better.

Neither Sir Keir nor his wife chose the type of education they were given. It was their parents, so don't blame them.

Totally agree with this as a family we will undoubtedly be worse off under labour. However I am an adamant supporter of if you can afford to you should vote for the benefit of others, and I like others believe that Labour at the moment is the best party for society as a whole.

Private education cannot be considered as anything other than a luxury.

Wanting to bring society up by making great education accessible to all is a good thing surely.

Yes, I agree.

Our state education system needs more resources. They could’ve gone after tax dodging companies and people. They could look at taxing those rich people who use state, or a wealth tax, but they haven’t.

You could leave private schools alone, and bring up the state schools to a higher level.

I say this as someone no longer affected. My last PS DC is now going to state 6th form. So, I’m saving £42k. I actually feel like I’ve had a 15k tax rebate, I’m getting something for my taxes, plus I’ve got 42K to put as a deposit for my kids flat.

Actually, thanks Keir 😉

They could’ve gone after tax dodging companies and people.

Doing exactly that is in their manifesto. Did you not read it?

@Dibblydoodahdah
I don’t send my DC to private school for the grades (in fact my other DC’s state school has higher results), I send them for their mental wellbeing and happiness. I know that they will appreciate it because the negative experiences that I had at school destroyed my mental health.

Just because you had a bad experience at school, doesn't mean everyone else will.
Two members of my extended family went to a private school and had horrendous experiences.