AIBU to think that Bridget Phillipson is exaggerating the level of middle-class support for VAT on school fees?

[TepidWatersOfManagedDecline]

Bridget Phillipson has been quoted as saying that the policy is supported by "middle-class parents in good professional jobs with housing costs who just can't afford that level of fee" and want "brilliant state schools". www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c86wd1y7v2xo

Is this true, in your experience? Most middle-class parents with professional jobs who I’ve discussed this with think that it’s a spiteful policy (including those who don’t use the independent sector).

AIBU to think that Bridget Phillipson is exaggerating the level of support for the policy?

What harm has labour done to school budgets? Headteacher of my son's high school is normally very vocal about such things so I'm interested

But that's not exactly what you said and you know it - your comment is offensive as it suggests only private schools can offer excellence in education and some people can't be bothered to pay for that even when they can afford it.

I didn’t say it did. My comment has been taken out of context, in that I merely pointed out that some families, on a salary of a quarter of a million pounds, would prioritise spending on education over spending on other things.

It will cost us £200 a month more, easily affordable but DS is in his GCSE year so we would do absolutely anything to keep him at his Private school.
I don't support the policy but not because its costing us money but because I know how bad our local Comp is as I am a Governor there and even if we had no choice but to send DS there we can't as its full, just like all the other State Comps in our area according to a couple of Head teachers I know. So where would we send him anyway?
My other objection is that I don't believe this VAT will actually raise any money, if I knew it was going into the coffers of my local struggling State schools I would support it.

we have 3 close friends using private schools, all the others - state schools. Not one of the MC state school parents - as far as I am aware - care about VAT on fees. Even one of the private parents thinks it’s fair.
Our kids are all spread across 4 pretty average state secondaries. No ‘ outstanding’ schools, no grammars.
6% of parents use private- the majority use state schools so of course there are more MC parents who care about state.
Whether or not the wealthy pay fair tax? No-one really cares outside of them.

I think you are absolutely right but only in places. Geography has a lot to answer for. That isn’t my experience where I am. SEN provision isn’t great anywhere but I know many parents with SEN kids (who go to my kids school) who feel the provision works for them - diagnosis took a really long time as did a plan but otherwise they are ‘happy’

I didn’t say it did. My comment has been taken out of context, in that I merely pointed out that some families, on a salary of a quarter of a million pounds, would prioritise spending on education over spending on other things.

But why do you think someone choosing state & earning well isn’t spending on education? What about extracurriculars? school trips? Holidays? Tuition?

I'm not saying "fuck them". Just realistically people don't care a great deal about things that don't affect them. Privileged people being slightly less privileged isn't high on most people's priority list. Just the way it goes.

I said

Most families could easily mange to spend £40k for 2 children at private school on a salary of £250k. Gross £250k gives you net income of around £155k assuming it’s earned between 2 people equally. Most families could comfortably live on £115k net income after school fees.
Many families prioritise their children’s education.

Where have I said that only private schools can offer an excellent education? I was state educated. I have always said that some can access an excellent state education. Too many cant. Nor have I said that people cant “be bothered” to pay for it. I pointed out that on that level of salary many would choose to pay for it.

Last year I spent about £400 a month on activities, school trips & clubs for my dc.

I didn’t say they weren’t spending anything on education? I said that a family on £250k could choose to pay private school fees, after a poster claimed that a salary of that level made a private education unaffordable.

Nope not at all. Unless you are in that boat and know many people in that boat it doesn’t make it true.

You kind of did though. It’s the same smug response many ‘striving’ private parents give re being ripped off by these companies to educate their kids.

I didn’t say they weren’t spending anything on education? I said that a family on £250k could choose to pay private school fees, after a poster claimed that a salary of that level made a private education unaffordable.

But you didn’t say that. You said *would prioritise spending on education over spending on other things. which is what people have taking umbrage with. *

They haven't fully funded the pay increase (which our wonderful teachers absolutely deserve) and we don't have any extra funding to cover the increase in employer NI contributions, head estimates our budget is down 3-4% in real terms. To balance the books we have not replaced 2 experienced TA's who were providing interventions to support with achieving reading targets etc and individual/small group emotional support sessions, supporting vunerable families etc. Difficult decisions are having to be made around further cuts within the school budget due to changes in how school funding is distributed by local government, funding cuts related to ofsted status etc.
Labour promised universal funding for breakfast clubs which has not materialised, which the school is now covering the cost of for our most vunerable pupils who need it most, which means cuts elsewhere.

You know full well I didn’t. I said that a salary of £250k would enable a choice to be made to spend money on education. If people choose not to, fair enough. Other people’s spending decisions don’t bother me. Everyone makes different decisions. To suggest that a private education is out of reach of someone earning that level is beyond ridiculous.

Only 6% of kids in the UK go to private schools. The vast majority of these are from families who are the top 10% of earners since the average cost per year per child of private school is £18k.

It's questionable as to whether these families can be considered to be middle class.

For the vast majority of the middle classes private schools are completely unaffordable.

VAT on school fees is easily affordable by most parents who already pay for their kids at private schools. Some parents will be tipped over the edge into unaffordability and are understandably angry - and very vocal - about this. But the number in this category I think is in reality pretty tiny.

I think this is a bit of a non policy and it's not clear what will or won't be achieved by it. If it does improve the state system then I think it will be on balance a good thing.

Indeed. You’ve also missed the part where I said we don’t believe in private education. It’s not better. State education is, IMHO, is a much more rounded,
rich experience. My WC, free school meal background influences that.

And if I say it would have been a stretch, then that’s true. Which, as I said before is an absolute joke…

£20k per child doesn't get you much of a private education these days though. You'd have to double that for secondary round me.

People are getting rather defensive. Some people would choose to pay for an eduction over a bigger house. It’s no different from saying some choose foreign holidays over a bigger house. It’s a spending decision. If people choose not to spend money on education, fair enough. It doesn’t concern me. I pointed out that someone on a huge salary could afford private education if they chose to though.

They received 33% of the vote the lowest of any government forming party since the war and only gained 2% from the last election.
It’s just that people punished the tories by voting elsewhere not Labour.
The number of people actually supporting any of what they are doing currently is tiny!
Yes I think the majority of people with kids in private schools are pretty well off. However if you have made the commitment to send your kids to private schools for 7 years and budgeted according it is wholly unfair to suddenly hit parents with this sort of unplanned huge increase.It’s just politics of spite.

The average day fee is no where near £40k per year, even including the VAT.

Unfortunately, scraping this particular barrel isn’t going to be sensible. The barrel is going to be scraped and hacked to the point that it has a hole in the bottom and private children come out of that hole and into the state system.

i read on another thread that there is already a council paying private school fees on behalf of parents who quit private and wanted a state place that was not available. So council are paying ££££££ to send the kids back to the private school they were at.

I understand that the VAT is chargeable on everything except travel (if it's outsourced) including all extra curricular activities

This means that not only is mandatory KS1,2 & 3 academic curriculum subject to VAT but also specifically 5-18yo music lessons, mental health, pastoral care, sport, health-care, food & even things like Duke of Edinburgh awards programmes, whilst these are not subject to VAT for any other identified group of any age in the UK. It's hard to argue that major hub online providers (i.e. above the VAT threshold) for the same services to the same identified age group of 5-18 year olds e.g. mytutor or Mabel (for MH) or private medical consultations should be allowed to carry on being exempt for the same perceived "advantages" to 5-18yo "middle class kids" as surely, to exempt them must also be unfair on the rest of society or particularly the pushy ones Brigitte Phillipson is appealing to who just don't like anyone having something they don't have.

As absurd & discriminatory as this sounds (and will likely be struck down as legally (age & disability) discriminatory in due course) people shouldn't forget the current legal challenge that articles 2 & 14 of the ECHR are also being challenged early in the new year

The rushed through finance bill that the VAT was tagged onto bipassed the legal statute book & legal oversight of parliament but could well be its undoing and while many of us were appalled at the Tories apparent disregard for article 3 of the ECHR with their Rwanda policy (even though we weren't directly impacted with us being threatened with illegal deportations) the same seems true of applying a sales tax to education that would clearly have a v.negative effect on the human rights & pluralistic society we are legally entitled to live in e.g. SEND, but also other areas of human rights e.g faith schools, single sex education etc where the govt isn't obligated to provide but are legally prohibited from limiting access to.

These policies that take away our human rights be that an education sales tax or illegal deportations need to be opposed or reconciled within UK & ECHR law first, because relying on politically popular slogans won't suffice against a legal system designed to protect our human rights against the cruel intentions of a baying electorate seeking innocent scapegoats

People are not getting defensive - you're refusing to see how others have interpreted your comment.