Doubts grow over Labour’s VAT plan for private schools

[Blanketyre]

Article in the Observer here:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/oct/05/doubts-grow-over-labours-vat-plan-for-private-schools

I must say they've gone very quiet on it.

@Didimum I’m not say they do get funding. I’m saying that every child in a nursery class with a child that has deferred a year will now have to pay an additional 20% VAT on top of their nursery fees if the nursery is in the grounds of a private school. The government has confirmed this to be the case. We will have to pay 20% VAT on our two year olds nursery fees.

Where did you get the impression I was against private education?

Really, comprehension people.

Read about black swans and blind men touching elephants.

No feelings hurt just surprised your indy school didn't teach you not to look down on the education of others or think you are better than them because you were sent to an indy school. Thank God DDs indy school doesn't promote the attitude you portray

"Bring on VAT", "state for all"

Sorry to burst your cosy bubble. Private education is not ‘the biggest segregator’ of society.

As was stated above, with supporting evidence, the biggest difference predicting a child’s success in life / society is the presence of 2 parents.

>>>However, a growing body of evidence not only contradicts the conventional wisdom, journalistic narratives, and academic assertions that a stable, married family is of little or no importance to children but also indicates something quite different.

In fact, marriage and a stable two-parent family appear to matter more than ever for children on a range of outcomes.

Recent research suggests that an intact family is increasingly tied to the financial, social, and emotional welfare of children—and family instability is more strongly linked to worse outcomes for kids than it used to be.

The upshot for children is that marriage not only still matters, but it seems to matter more than ever. Children who have the benefit of two parents are comparatively more advantaged today than they were in previous decades.

Consider children’s educational attainment. In Education Next, a research team led by Kathleen Ziol-Guest at New York University explored the link between family structure and “educational attainment”—or how many years of schooling children complete across America.

From the late 1960s, when family breakdown was more unusual, to the 1990s, when it was common, that link did not weaken; instead, it grew stronger. The researchers concluded: “the estimated relationship between the single-parent family structure variable and educational attainment more than tripled in size.”6 The tightening link between family structure and education does not just apply to educational attainment, it also extends to student behavior.

A recent analysis by Nicholas Zill and Brad Wilcox found that “rates of school contact for student misbehavior are nearly twice as high among students living with separated or divorced parents as among those living with stably married parents.”

Zill and Wilcox also found that school suspensions or expulsions are almost three times as high for children living in non-intact families, compared to children in intact, married families. Moreover, their results indicate “the relative risk faced by students from non-traditional families has actually increased” from 1996 to 2019 when it comes to school suspensions and expulsions, as well as school reports of student misbehavior. To be sure, on some outcomes, like repeating a grade, Zill and Wilcox found that the link was essentially stable over time. But they found no evidence that the link between family structure and student outcomes is diminishing.<<<

Actually, you've totally convinced me. I don't want my kids turning out like that so, yes, definitely off to the grammar school.

And if you want to attack me academically, I have 9A*s at GCSE, 3 A,'s at A level, a first class law degree (and top of my year) and a distinction at post grad. So that's not bad for someone who has no comprehension skills.

Given that only 7% of children go to private school, that is a tiny percentage you are referring to.

Maybe I should return my Masters + PhD if I'm that ignorant! 2 x RG universities obviously got my ability wrong

But Twistyizzy, you lack a private education and apparently that makes them superior...I'm totally losing track of their logic tbh. It's also amazing with all this segregation that we must've slipped through the net.

I’m not looking down on anyone because of their education.

If you read the posts, I first ascribed to a private education the stupidity of not understanding 8. education would include independent provision.

Then the poster (you? Can’t remember, don’t care enough to check) said they went to state school.

If you want to take offence, read everything properly so you are taking offence to something that’s actually there, not a perceived slight.

For what it’s worth, I don’t look down on anyone for where they went to school. I went private, my kids will likely be state educated, I might move house to live closer to a grammar. It’s all good, we make choices that fit our lives.

You don’t need to get so upset about an internet discussion.

Is something else going on here?

Do you feel inadequate because you didn’t attend a private school? Because honestly, I’ve never met anyone who held the attitude that a state educated person was inferior.

Ah now you turn to gaslighting

My daughter has two terms left in a private school - and the way things are going if vat introduction is moved to Sept 2025 we won't be paying the vat because she would have finished school by then.

So we'll be out of the system and not subject to the vat - would it not make more sense to keep us in the system by increases taxes towards education? Would it not make sense for all of us to pay more taxes towards improving education for all and for children with sen needs? Not just a few? I don't even understand why if parents with sen needs applying for an EHCP know how hard and how long it takes to get one - why they would want these private school sen kids back in the state school system because that's going to lead to even longer time frames for kids applying for EHCP.

To answer your question, a lot of children with SEN needs (especially girls with ADHD/autism) mask at school and fall apart at home each night - state school systems are overwhelmed - they don't have the interest or resources to help kids masking sen at school to the extent they will help with an EHCP.

I did not even know an EHCP existed until my daughter was already in a private school - and when I asked both the council and got free advice from a sen lawyer - they said not to bother because it would take ages / cost a lot of money and time and most EHCP's are understandably about finding government schools to suit a child's needs and it didn't make sense to move our daughter's to a third high school and it was also during her GCSE years .

Most of the kids in private school for their SEN needs have mild SEN - children masking ADHD/Autism, Dyslexia etc - as part of this SEN they have issues with change / socialisation / sensory issues in large class sizes etc so moving schools and friendship groups is a HUGE deal for them. Stuff that is not obvious to the rest of the world (so difficult to get an EHCP) but is a child with SEN's whole world. My daughter used to come home from school and go to her room and lie down on her bed with the lights off for the rest of the evening to overcome her sensory overload. I suggested she wear headphones in class - a) her sensory issues meant wearing headphones were uncomfortable and b) as a teen she was not keen to look different. The smaller class sizes means she doesn't suffer so much with sensory overload. She also has social communication issues which led to bullying as she was quirky / different / more vulnerable to the other kids. But since lots of kids are in private school systems due to SEN needs she is not alone in her quirkiness - in fact its kind of considered the norm so these kids are not as isolated as they make friends with other neurodiverse kids.

No, I’m not. Read my comments.

The conversation played out exactly as I have stated.

Rather - Given that 75 pc of 7 pc is just over 5pc of children, compared with 30pc most wealthy households, that further highlights that if want you want to address is wealth inequality, this is a really un targeted policy.

This, together with no VAT on state boarding fees (being heavily promoted on my feeds by these schools) shows how ill though out the policy is.

I was arguing against those posters who claim that parents shouldn’t have to pay for state education because they don’t use it. That’s nonsense. Everyone uses it. I could say that I am lucky enough never to have to have used the criminal justice system but it would be wildly naive to believe that just because I haven’t personally used it, I don’t benefit from it continuously.

It seems that some in the Labour Party are picking this hill to die on.

BP’s X comment was fairly unpleasant imo.
Labour said they would charge VAT on private school fees to fund an extra 6500 teachers for state schools. On the X thread there’s a clip of Emily Thornberry saying if she has to choose between pupils in her constituency getting breakfast before they start school each day or charging VAT, she’ll choose the VAT on fees! Sorry now it’s about kids eating breakfast. And she said they’d recruit 16000 teachers. They can’t even get the message straight.

And I’m a Labour voter with kids in state school and honestly I’m worried about the extra strain this policy will have on already pressuirsed state schools.

What we've actually said is that everyone should pay for it through income tax, which, as an additional rate taxpayer, includes myself! I'm happy to pay but I expect other wealthy people to do likewise. But this has been said to death!!

What is it with this breakfast, will it be compulsory so your child isn't late for school, we used to breakfast together in our house, don't others do that.

@cardibach yes it may not make it worse. But how exactly will it make it better? It won’t. Hence @MichaelandKirk ‘s point that it is simply the politics of envy.

No, it will just be available free of charge at before school clubs which you are free to use or not as suits your routine. And no, lots of people don’t breakfast together due to working hours and the increasing chance that they can’t afford enough food for everyone with the CoL crisis.
There seem to be an awful lot of people about on various threads today who either don’t understand what actual poverty looks like or pretend not to.

And single parent/income families are one of the least wealthiest in the country – below the 70% mark which is … yes: also the magic marker for those who populate private schools.

Wealth has also been found to increase marital stability, as divorce rates drop as you move up the socioeconomic class. No guesses as to which demographic makes more use of private education.

And what ensures perpetuated wealth? Bingo: private education.

It’s like talking to a brick wall at this point.

It’s possible to think someone shouldn’t have an unfair advantage without being envious of it. ‘Politics of envy’, like ‘champagne socialist’, is such a lame criticism.

It’s about thousands of families being poor enough to not afford breakfast for their children, and ensuring the children have enough food to sustain them through the school day.

Like being called a Tory for criticising any Labour policy then