To really dislike Bridget Phillipson?

[Sensiblyplease]

I just absolutely can’t stand the woman.

The lady seems to be making decisions based on personal prejudices and causing intentional division in our education system.
She’s not listening to anyone, and the consequences her decisions are having is far too impactful to ignore. As someone in her power she should model balanced politics, based on evidence, instead of in-sighting hate and division.

My children are in state school- we’ve had 3
more children come into their year group with SEN but no EHCPs as their previous independent schools could cope without one. The parents inform me it’ll take a few years and that’s if they get one- and then they can either go back to their previous independent school (as apparently they won’t have to pay VAT with an ECHP?) or have the help they need according to the results of the ECHP.

Im just so angry. I have nothing against these children and can understand they can’t afford the VAT increase and needed to move back into state schools, but it’s now really disrupted the class. The TA is apparently out the class all the time now and the class teacher has 32 children on her own. It appears that Bridget’s insistence and personal hate against the private sector is damaging to state school children. It’s really pissing me off - our children’s education is important and not to be messed around with.

I feel like the woman likes a good headline but is prepared to throw our children’s education away in order to meet her personal objectives / vendettas.

What is she actually doing for state schools? Her headline grabbing titles is deflecting from her actually trying to improve state education in any meaningful and impactful way. 6500 teachers - so my kids get 1/3 of a teacher for their school? That’s shocking. More children entering the state system now puts pressure on their school, and their teachers. What is she actually doing to address this. Where is she magic-ing these trained and qualified teachers from? What is she doing to retain teachers and help with their current work load?

I’m fed up with her agenda effecting normal people. We need someone with a level head to sort schools out. End of rant!

👏👏👏

You have nothing against SEN children but clearly you do. God forbid they disrupt your precious perfectly developing healthy children… get a grip seriously.

it’s not children under SEN with or with EHCP’s that’s the problem - that is a whole world of its own problems and be grateful you don’t have to deal with it - it’s the education system as a whole. LA’s don’t want to spend money where they should be spending it, and now it’s coming back to bite them on the arse.

Teaching is doing a big recruitment drive, but do you know how hard it is to actually get into teaching? It’s nearly impossible for those thinking about a career change so they’re having to rely on retired or ex-teachers to go back into teaching or otherwise graduates who will quit after a year because ‘it’s not what they imagined’.

I really hope it is to be honest.

State schools get gift aid on donations too (& parents can claim back higher rate tax too.) One of our DC was offered a place at state grammar and we had letter from head asking us to gift aid £120 per month before DC had even started. This seems to be a little discussed secret about top performing state schools. Often the govt expects these schools to raise a % of funds for new buildings from parents and these are gift aided donations. Wld be interesting to see what the true cost of state schools is too. Top performing state schools/those in affluent areas get a lot more funding this way from parents and the govt tax rebate than underperforming schools and schools in poor areas. See also some of the top 6th form colleges in London who’ve acknowledged that they get £1mn+ annual gift aided donations that they use for their running costs. Private schools cannot use gift aided donations for running costs - all their running costs are met by fees which are paid after tax, no gift aid.
There’s a lot more disparity in funding between state schools than perhaps people are aware of. BP could and should be fixing that.

Ironically it is probably the highest profile, most vilified, private schools, like Eton, whose charitable contribution is the greatest and most tangible. And these schools will continue to do this regardless of the current climate.

Also, not many people realise, only about 50% of private schools in England are charities.

Yes, let’s hopes the sooner this two tier system is gone the better. There’ll always be the Eton’s but the super wealthy will always be entirely separate for most if their existence anyway.

There will always be a two tier system. Adding VAT doesn’t affect the wealthiest (many who have pre-paid years ahead). What it does is make it unaffordable for aspirational parents who don’t have generational wealth. The 2 tier system will then be even more divided.

I'm not as worried about the affordability point per se as there will always be a cut off point but, as you say, the consequence is undesirable. Those at Eton will inevitably be the wealthiest in society who arguably ought to be paying more tax (if you think the funds should be raised by taxing the wealthy more) whereas the same cannot be said for those at the lower end of the private school scale - there will be definite cross over with families in the state sector and so we cannot be sure that we'll be taxing people who are all wealthier than those using state.

As you say, those that can afford it may have paid fees in advance anyway (as I did).

My comment that I hope the exodus is double is because I'm so sick of reading comments from people who smugly think they're going to hurt private school children - maybe they need to feel the repercussions themselves before they realise. Brexit bus no.2.

And as someone who doesn’t buy into any of it, I don’t actually care if it’s the wealthy or super wealthy who use private schools. Or don’t.

Yes, let’s hopes the sooner this two tier system is gone the better

It sounds very much like you do care. You care enough to keep posting on these threads about how you hope the VAT is imposed.

@pinkpopcorn123

"Those who earn more, already contribute more via NI contribution and tax. I know of lots of people who won't work more as it will affect their benefits. So, a blanket those who have less need to have more is not as straight forward a problem to solve as you suggest. Firstly, if they can't afford more they need to seriously consider working more. Full time workers should not need top up UC, companies should be enforced by law to pay adequately. Childcare is too expensive. So as a charity worker, you will know this is a complex problem with multiple solutions and no easy fix. There is so much wrong with the country but to suggest higher earners should always be the ones to pay more is in my opinion, ridiculous. Look at the pay needed to be a net contributor.
Using, the VAT on fees as an example, Sir Keir's children cost more to educate than a lower earner on say £40,000 using an independent school. The money not used to educate their children is then "back in the pot" and used for everyone in the state system. 50% of the highest earners use the state system. This tax just makes the 7% responsible for the majority. Why not make higher earners in the state system, who are actually using it pay more? Why is it the responsibility of private school parents who aren't using the system to pay for high earners using the state system? If we want to spend more on education this is the responsibility of the entire country. You will run out of other people's money to spend."

SPOT ON

Please could someone who agrees with this policy explain why the high earning parents of state school children are not being asked to contribute and they're ok with that? This never gets addressed.

It's also true that some parents of private school children will be less well off than parents of state school children. Why then, are they the ones being told they have to pay to make the state system fairer?

The PP will be first to squeal on the imposition of fiscal policy which directly impacts them.

Socialism is great when you are spending other peoples money, as they say.

It’s incomprehensible to some people that some of us actually don’t mind paying more tax, in fact we’re very happy to do so if it’s spent on high quality public services. We’ve currently got the worst of all possible worlds - the highest taxation in eight decades and public services on their knees. Thanks, Tories.

An utterly disingenuous post.

Some of us are paying a 60% marginal rate and don’t use public transport, the NHS or state schooling.

Think, for a moment, where a large portion of the increase in public sector spending is allocated. That’s right salaries and pensions - so if you think you are going to see a wonderful improvement in, say, the NHS - think again. They’re even reliant on the private sector to attempt to cut waiting times.

Labour are simply pandering to their core voters.

Yup. High earners, pay the tax, will probably pay more and we would much prefer it goes towards good public services than lining bankers pockets… you want to save money? Use state schools. Ta da! Over night you’ve go an extra £20k or £40k or £60k a year back… depending on your fees and how many kids you have…

Those who want to pay more tax can voluntarily to HMRC

As for tax burden it’s going up under Labour so they’ve created their own new record.

That’s the point though isn’t it.

Increasingly punitive tax rates, ageing demographic, declining tax base, increasing social care bill etc.

And you want the fewer and fewer of us with broad shoulders to pay more?

Aint gonna happen, so expect either growing UK debt and/or some fresh form of austerity.

@goodluckbinbin that works on an individual basis. On a population basis, you are making the assumption that all families who do this work as before and spend the "excess" money within the economy. They also now cost the state to educate their children so unless budget increases, then spend per pupil reduces. You're also assuming they won't reduce hours, stop working, retire etc as they no longer need the money. This also reduces the amount of tax they pay.

This is the question that is never properly answered. Why wealthy state school parents, using the best state schools, are saying "yeah come on, pay a bit more for us whilst we sit here and hope nobody notices". I am saying that as someone who has the advantage of a very sought after state grammar very near which we intend to use. Really though, it's a joke that I'm then going to benefit from someone else paying more tax when I'm a top 1% earner.

Honestly because the messaging from the Labour Party is so powerful. They have also stifled debate or alternative opinions being broadcast. The BBC, our biggest news outlet is biasied. Most people don't think beyond the headlines. They certainly don't critically evaluate the pros and cons before making a decision.

Labour rhetoric lands with people even if it doesn’t stack up

And for all the ‘I’m happy to pay more tax’ Labour posts on mn people want others to pay.

You need salaries for good public services and there’s at least 20% tax - and up to 60% marginal rate - going straight back to the Treasury. Everyone uses the NHS, there’s no emergency care outside it and no maternity care outside London. There are many services I don’t use - education, social care, public transport - I understand how taxation and society work, you clearly don’t. The NHS will improve because it’s going to get the reform it so badly needs.

The BBC, our biggest news outlet is biasied

Indeed. It couldn’t be more pro Tory. Just like most of the rest of mainstream media.

'Some of us are paying a 60% marginal rate and don’t use public transport, the NHS or state schooling.'

At all? Ever? You didn't go to state school yourself? You, or you parents, siblings, grandparents have NEVER used the NHS? Never went to state school?
You weren't vaccinated in the UK? You weren't born with the help of the NHS?
You never got a bus, or train or tube EVER? Not even as a child?

Then you must be MINTED! old money, good for you Generational wealth is something special. In my entire life I only know on person who'd never used public transport until we took them on the Tube for the 'experience' - and that was because the family used car services and private jets.

You clearly lack commercial acumen, so I am not clear what your professional background is, aside from a FT MNer.

Simply throwing money at it will not fix your beloved NHS - the wage bill represents some 46%, and rising.This excludes GPs and social care staff etc.