To ask if anyone is clued up on the challenge this week to VAT on school fees?

[feesss]

we went to look round a school this morning and we obviously asked about VAT and the lady showing us round said there has been a challenge this week so it may not happen? Is anyone aware of this? I can’t see much online about it?

@xenia “Hopefully the courts will find in favour of the private schools in the litigation. it is the court not barrisers' opinions which will prevail. I suppose Labour could choose to abolish the Human Rights Act 1998 and that might help the UK in some other ways too as we would even then still be subject to laws against torture in war - Geneva Convention etc too.
It would be quite funny though if the litigation means Labour is hoist by its own human rights petard.”

Labour will never abolish the HR Act, not even Kendrick suggested that. Even he wanted an equivalent just not be subject to the ECHR having the last word? Even for the Tories this was the old sovereignty adage.

Fact of the matter is, it is hugely embarrassing for a G7 country that used to command respect worldwide to constantly be litigating on human rights law breaches! So what now - we are going to try and be green to set an example to the developing world a la Miliband yet we are happy to embarrass ourselves publicly yet again by breaching human rights of disabled children? It is a fucking joke! Reeves has openly admitted she cannot exempt children with SEND in private schools because with such an exemption her policy won’t make any money at all and so won’t stand up as a tax policy. She has already admitted that she will lose in my mind.
Frankly, I think this is a Labour Party own issue, I do not one minute believe Reeeves or Starmer ever believed they would get this through. They have done absolutely everything towards making this fail.

And all the research shows how damaging it is for any child to move schools, especially in secondary.
The main issue is cost. For every child that leaves indy the state then has to pay for their education at £7-8K per year. Indy sector saves state £4 billion per year because parents pay for their child to be educated, we take that responsibility off the state.
If 10% leave then the cost to taxpayer will be £375,000,000 per year

A lot of the children who will be forced to leave have already tried the state sector. They left because it was failing them. Lots of children in the private sector cope with smaller, more nurturing schools. They simply cannot cope with large state schools.

And all the research shows how damaging it is for any child to move schools, especially in secondary.
The main issue is cost. For every child that leaves indy the state then has to pay for their education at £7-8K per year. Indy sector saves state £4 billion per year because parents pay for their child to be educated, we take that responsibility off the state.
If 10% leave then the cost to taxpayer will be £375,000,000 per year

Going to the state school available to me did harm them. It's really that simple. I'd bloody love it if mine were confident, outgoing, academic, popular and well served by a free local school. Of course I would. But they aren't, weren't and suffered the consequences. That's not true for the majority I know, and that's great, but pretending it's fine for all because it's fine for most is no help.

Many kids find the school environment hard, the vast majority have to get on with it. Only a tiny percentage can afford private.Where was your concern before? I didn’t notice any frothing re the under funding in education before the 7% of the population using private education were faced with rises in fees being due to VAT. Families unable to cope with any rise in fees (which happens anyway ) isn’t in a child’s best interest either.

The whole point of this policy was to get the vocal middle classes back into state? So if they end up being vocal on behalf of children with SEND where is the actual problem? If the courts hold that the whole SEND system is inadequate we all benefit and Central Government will have to pay up more towards education. That is what most of us want. To improve education for all children rather than children being an afterthought after pubs.

And an.afterthought after enriching Chinese companies selling cheap litter vapes into the UK because it might lose some working class votes who took up vaping.

This is a theme that comes up again and again - that if you get vocal private school parents into state schools they'll somehow improve them?

Not only is it nonsense - you're never going to get a majority of private school parents to move into the state sector - but also it's so damning to suggest that state school parents - all 93% of them - have such an ineffective voice that they need the other 7% to speak to make any difference.

The irony is that they want us sharp elbowed parents to move our kids to state so we can somehow miraculously improve the state sector yet they are shocked when we use those elbows to challenge this punitive policy.
The expectation was that we would just roll over meekly?

Forcing happy children from the private system isn’t going to help those many kids already in the state system and finding the environment hard though. Who gains? No one. But some happy children are harmed.

Of course they don’t care, they don’t care about Sen( which so many now proclaim their kids to have) and they don’t care about the state sector- all they care about is their kids getting a private education which causes huge inequalities amongst the rest of the population. That’s fine but you will now have to pay VAT for it.

Well they’re not- speaking as somebody who sees kids moving schools countless times. It’s life, 93% of kids don’t have the luxury of parents able to buy them out of less favourable situations. They cope, yours will too.

I work in the state education sector and I agree that this is absolute rubbish.

Believe me, we already have plenty of "vocal" parents. A few more won't make any difference.

My child couldn’t cope in mainstream school, he is autistic, private wasn’t an option for us so we had to battle through the Sen system which is a shambles and eventually for a specialist school, this included a tribunal for refusal to even assess his needs by the la. It took us from year one to year four to get specialist and during this time he got worse, was having big meltdowns at school as he couldn’t cope in the noisy chaotic environment and got to the point where the meltdowns were so bad he was throwing furniture which is obviously unsettling for other children too and outside of school he was saying he wanted to die and tried to throw himself down the stairs and out of windows. I can totally understand why parents if the option is available to them choose to send their child to private, small nurturing schools rather than have the inevitable years long battle to get support in mainstream or a specialist school, sometimes just muddling through isn’t an option

Mine will cope, because they won’t have to move. They are staying exactly where they are. Many children will not cope though. I can’t understand how a civilised society can intentionally seek to make some children unhappy, when that doesn’t improve the lives of anyone else. No one is gaining. Some children are being harmed.

Ok so speaking as one of the 93% not in the position to do so I’ll say again your choice, the vast majority are not able to do so and have to get on with it. You takes your money and makes your choice but now you will need to pay VAT for it.

Of course they will. Forces kids to it all the time.Since when as a society did we produce a majority of kids unable to cope with moving schools? Life isn’t about being blissfully happy all the time, any parent striving for that is not doing their child a favour, quite the reverse.

20% use it at some point in their education, this policy may put it out of reach for you if you were desperate to use it say to cover GCSE or a level when an event happens which makes your current state school untenable, You may find yourself priced out or all the local schools closed down.
You are arguing to reduce your education choices as a parent as well as everyone elses. You’ve been duped by the oldest divide and conquer trick in the book, the aim of this policy is purely ideological.

Does anyone know what the legal arguement actually is? All I can find from googling it’s thst it’s potentially a breach of human rights/ discrimination as a school may be the only school that can meet a child’s needs due to Sen, I understand that bit. however there is already a system in place in place for Sen, people apply for an ehcp, and have access to tribunal if they disagree with the la’s decision, so if a school is the only school that can meet a child’s needs the existing Sen system can be used so that school is named on the child’s ehcp and then the la will fund the fees including vat. In practise the Sen system is shite and it takes years to get through the process so I totally understand why parents bypass it completely by opting for private but then shouldn’t the human rights/ discrimination arguement be against the existing Sen system rather than vat on school fees.

The ISC legal action is not just concentrated on SEN, but also faith, single sex, specialist in nature ie music, sports etc. education. Any children who are being denied their parents chosen education as a result of the policy. It’s a winner.

Read the posts above. Some children cannot cope in mainstream schools but thrive in smaller environments. One poster mentions her son wanting to die and trying to throw himself down the stairs. That’s not just a simple case of teaching kids to be a bit more resilient. They simply can’t cope.

A small nurturing environment should be available to everyone but isn’t. Harming a section of children isn’t going to help anyone else.

There are lots of state schools that have small classes and nuturing environments. Ours does. It's not an either or situation.

But why has the vat changed the position? If it is a winner then can all parents who want say a faith school or single sex but can’t afford the basic fees even before vat was added take the case to court as their child’s human rights are being breached/ it’s discrimination and the government will have to pay the full fees? Has vat changed the position somehow and if so what’s the logic relating specifically to vat and not fees as a whole being the barrier?

There’s a lot at primary not so much the case at state secondary, that’s why a lot of Sen children burn out in year 7