The Irony.. PM's donation was for ‘son to study for GCSEs’

[JustSpeechless]

PM suggests £20,000 donation was for ‘son to study for GCSEs’ | The Independent

Sorry if there are other threads, but I did search and nothing came up.

“My boy, 16, was in the middle of his GCSEs. I made him a promise, a promise that he would be able to get to his school, do his exams, without being disturbed,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“But if you’re a 16-year-old trying to do your GCSEs and it’s your one chance in life – I promised him we would move somewhere, get out of the house and go somewhere where he could be peacefully studying.

So its OK for the PM to be worried about his child's "one chance" GCSE year being disturbed ...but he's not so worried about other people's children feeling stressed during their GCSEs by introducing the private school VAT during an academic school year.

I don't have a child in private school doing their GCSEs. And I know that there are lots of people who support the VAT and those who don't.

But I think there is a midline where lots of people on both sides of the fence agree making this change during an academic year is not fair on the kids in key exam years...and I am one of them because not all parents have a Lord Alli to step in to ensure their child's "one chance" GCSE year is not being disturbed.

For Voting:

Unreasonable - I am with Keir and I am not really bothered with other people's children's "one chance" school year being interrupted.

Not Unreasonable - I agree Labour should not interrupt the academic school year and introduce the VAT in September 2025.

If the people donating know it might go on party frocks then that's fine

I'm surprised the RAAC isn't more in the news - it's still badly affecting DN old school and outside of them managing the problem there seems to be no solutions for them.

Teacher shortage I've mentioned how bad it's been for my DC and have been accused of scaremongering or outright lying. Thankfully it looks like they have finally managed some stability at least for last child's Y11. Other schools are now being badly affected and one hitting regional news with 60 + classes - this school there wasn't a peep when it was like that for my DC in couple of their subjects.

The shear number of VAT on private education threads is staggering - I'm not keen on it personally but much more worried and impacted by loss of winter fuel payments for recently bereaved parent.

He did what most of us do. The best we can for our kids. 🤷‍♀️

I don't think it has done Starmer any favours actually. He's seen as a hypocrite and public opinion has dropped

A shame when politicians put in poor policy to make it hard for some doing GSCEs

No. Thought not.

Erm... yes!

And to improve the NHS. And social care. Etc, etc, etc...

But not all politicians have the same background.

If it is a genuine work requirement to have different clothes, there should either be a clothing allowance or acceptance of donations. The latter is less costly to the taxpayer and there could be conditions placed around what is allowed e.g. donations from British firms only, only 1 outfit accepted per firm per year etc

Why would you need different clothes to be PM?

A few suits and no one will care or notice, like any other well paid job

oh we have not had a private school VAT thread for all of what two days

this isn't new, Labour made it clear a while ago and schools have had a long time to prepare

not all the VAT has to be passed on to parents, like state school private schools have to manage on a tighter budget

Nope don’t know - please could you be explicit in how I was normalising.

You may have a very different job to me, but I certainly don’t have a wardrobe with appropriate formal evening outfits.

Day to day workwear, yes.

But not all politicians have the same background.

Your post said politicians. Starmer is the politician, his wife is not.

If you did mean dresses not suits for the spouse then they can be hired. It's wasteful to need a new formal dress to wear only once.

no. He took stuff from someone else to do it when he is a rich man and could afford to do it himself

I was thinking of politicians and their plus ones generally, not just KS and his wife.

I actually don’t know how many formal outfits the average MP / minister would need. But if it’s a lot, and they’re photographed a lot, it could mean that even hiring outfits (assuming they’re a standard shape and size) gets expensive quickly. I think it anyone needs non-standard clothing for work it shouldn’t come out of their personal income.

what is this thing about needing different clothes every time?

Comms people, desperate to justify their roles in the post election landscape I think.

Nice try but you might like to look again at the numbers - loads are irritated, you can see it in commentary, media and polls

As for comms people - assuming you are a Labour supporter your party might want some better ones

You assume incorrectly.
I was responding to a specific post regarding the daily anti-government threads, not commenting on this particular topic.

Apart from some private school parents that I know most do not give it a second thought about VAT on school fees

its just not on the vast majority of peoples radar

And it certainly wasn’t an issue for Labour at the election

Why would mn be one of the only places not to have threads about the current party in power?

Of course people start threads about them, and talk about them on other sites and below the line commentary

Are donations taxed?

But the point for many is the hypocrisy.
Labour's constant carping about donors and freebies when they were opposition makes me cut them no slack whatsoever now.
Starmer, Rayner etc al would not have accepted this reason from a Tory so there is no reason it is any more acceptable because it's Labour's excuse.
The fact the Tories may have been worse is irrelevant in this context. If you set yourself up to be beyond reproach, you haven't take the consequences when you fail.
Are you saying that Labour can do whatever they like up to when they are 'as bad as the Tories' and that's OK? Because that's the logical conclusion to your argument?

I think it is a lot. Look at events like COP 26, G7/G8/G20 summits, No10 receptions, Diplomatic receptions, state visits hosted by UK, Remembrance Day, Coronation, Guildhall banquets, all attended by PM and cabinet plus spouses (and opposition party leaders). Sam Cam's outfits were reported. So were Carrie J's and Akshata M's. Where they are representing the Govt or the UK I don't expect them to pay personally. No reason they couldn't be hired, but since they are props for the representative and Diplomatic work of government, they should be funded by the state, not individuals or private donors- or at least they should be tax-deductable. Day to day wardrobes and clothes for spouses doing their own thing are another matter, and party political activity such as party conference wear should not be state funded imo. I'm not suggesting kitchen suppers for political friends and personal chums should have any subsidy at all.
Most jobs don't require a working wardrobe of evening wear, but some do.

I haven't suggested that there shouldn't be threads but as a daily MN reader, I can assure you that the frequency and tone of the current slew is remarkable. I have therefore chosen to remark upon it.

Not really. Did you miss all the daily threads about the last gov?