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?

Yeah everywhere has homeschool so no didn’t include that.

Private school isn’t tax deductible and may get tax credits but is still taxed.

What other types of education don’t fall into what I have mentioned? Except homeschool which you have rightly pointed out and is the same everywhere.

I'm middle class and the only people I know who don't support the change are those with kids in private school. Everyone else thinks it's a great idea or is indifferent. I definitely don't know anyone who uses state schools who is actively opposed to the change.

If you use private schools, people are probably just trying to be non-confrontational by telling you they sympathise or agree that the policy is bad. In reality, why would they give a shit that your kids will now have to compete on a more level playing field like everyone else's?

It won’t though and yes I still would on principal. It’s a luxury item that causes a lot of damage.

Children that can manage in a mainstream private school will not get an EHCP. Parents don’t get to choose whether they’ll take support the state system offers. An EHCP is awarded if children need more support than the state system can provide, the bar is very high and it’s very unlikely that even if an EHCP was awarded a private mainstream place would be funded by the state.

Well that’s ridiculous and incorrect. Numbers are dropping in the state sector and bums on seats are needed for funding. Only 6% of children are privately educated and the vast majority will continue to be privately educated. The few whose parents didn’t factor in financial contingencies and the high likelihood that finances change over 14 years will be welcomed with open arms.

your kids will now have to compete on a more level playing field like everyone else's

What does this mean, please?

Thank you KatyaKat
excellent post

In some areas state schools are closing due to falling numbers, for example on the Isle of Wight and Cornwall. If a family can no longer afford private education, it may actually benefit local communities, because their local school may no longer be forced to close if a few extra children enrol. The families may not get the school that they want, but many families don't get their first choice of school.

I think you need to do your research.

It’s 6% of children that are privately educated and a tiny proportion of that 6% will go into state so we’re talking tiny amounts of children into a sector of declining numbers.

Oh and getting an EHCP isn’t a given or a right. The vast majority of children aren’t and won’t be eligible for one so it’s pointless waiting for one. Most send provision is provided without EHCPs and provision in the state sector is often much better than the private sector for a variety of reasons.

Loving the way the small amount of children now leaving the private system are suddenly all EHCP needing children with severe SEN.🙄It’s pretty shit the way SEN is being seized on by disgruntled MNers.

I think it's been poorly thought through. The children at private schools who will be affected and unable to continue will disproportionately be those for whom state school is going to be really difficult, impossible in some cases or whose local state schools have poor track records. State education will not see a huge influx of funding for teachers, buildings, resources, etc - but will see more children, some vulnerable and with additional support needs. Families who can comfortably afford school fees won't have their budgets wrecked by this - they'll still be able to afford it. It's instead the families who are working hard to make it possible for their children to attend schools that meet their children's needs who will be disproportionately priced out. This has knock-on effects for attainment gaps (which will still exist and may widen, if anything), parental economic activity (eg the parents having to stop work to home educate children with complex needs and/or mental health difficulties), child health and wellbeing, and more.

“The children at private schools who will be affected and unable to continue will disproportionately be those for whom state school is going to be really difficult, impossible in some cases or whose local state schools have poor track records. “

Why does not being able to pay £18k ( the equivalent of a full wage)x 14 years mean your child will find state school hard,that you are in an area with poor schools(90% are rated good or outstanding), that your child is vulnerable with additional or complex needs and you are hard working?

Why? Anybody who is able to pay £18k a year per child for any length of time isn’t poor. Not planning properly and needy to leave the private sector doesn’t make your child vulnerable or have SEN by default.

Who are these fictitious private school parents? Even the ones who can well afford it tend to be against it because of the impact it's having on their children's learning environment

Absolutely THIS.
All these extra curricular activities pursued by the well off parents of state educated kids BUY your kids an advantage. Let the flood gates open and you can all do your bit too to financially support the crumbling system. Tutoring should be next in line.

It's pretty clear that you have absolutely no idea about the types of children who have SEN, the breadth of the types of SEN and how it impacts those children, including the support required.

My son's state school basically ignored the fact my son is austistic with sensory requirements (he masks and has selective mutism, so essentially was no bother, despite being hugely affected by being in a normal class). That was until the emotional based school avoidance started and his lack of ability to cope started to affect their stats. So, in order to save their stats, with a byproduct of helping DS, they got the Ed Psych in to assess prior to starting the EHCP process.

Essentially, the upshot is that he's more than capable of a mainstream type of education, but this would be better in small class sizes due to his sensory needs. And there are loads of other bright, capable, autistic kids in the same boat. Our LEA admitted during the EHCP process that these children in our area fall through a gap, as there's no suitable peer group in the local special schools (LEA or private) but mainstream state can't provide the small class sizes these children needs. Other LEAs do have more suitable provision, so I'm not saying this is a problem nationally. It is for us.

These are the types of children who would benefit from state-funded private education (intellectually bright, but sensory processing issues which mean that large classes inhibit learning / ability to attend). Our local private school has a handful of children with EHCPs, where the state is paying their fees. And I will absolutely push for this for DS if our state school compromise doesn't work, when the EHCP is reviewed.

The vast majority of people who can afford independent education are aware of their privilege. We have two children at an independent school and it costs us around £40k. Just because we're able to spend that on education it doesn't mean we'd be happy to divert it all to tax if they went to a state school. We are - like so many of our peers - struggling to find the extra in our budget. Personally we've massively extended the mortgage on our house, cut back on pension contributions, but we feel lucky not to have dug into our savings.
The tax simply isn't going to raise revenue for state schools. Labour have all but admitted this - look at the way they are(n't) tracking the long term effects.

Same. Given the consequences are - pay a bit more or send your children to a normal school, it’s hard to have empathy for the people bleating about ‘envy’ etc.

However, the majority of people providing these services on a self employed basis wouldn't fall within the VAT regime because they don't generate sufficient taxable supplies. They already have to absorb the VAT they incur on costs without being able to offset it.

OK Happy for you that your kids are all right Jack Willyoujustbequiet.
Your response is saddeningly ignorant if you are a parent of children with EHCPs.

The parents who are going to be disproportionately affected (that is, no longer able to afford the fees) are going to be the people who are operating with a narrower safety margin on being able to afford it. Many will be making substantial sacrifices elsewhere in the family budget, because of their child's needs or factors such as local education provision. These families are more likely to be priced out. The children affected are therefore going to disproportionately be those whose parents already identified that their needs might not be met in the state sector (hence prioritising private school fees in a budget). Families with large financial safety margins aren't going to be significantly adversely affected, to anywhere near the same degree.

I'm not opposed to something being changed, I'm state educated as is everyone in my family, and I have relatives who work in education. I just think this plan has not been thought through with consideration for its impact on those most likely to be affected by it.

You can push all you like but it will be very unlikely you’ll get one as you said -

”he's more than capable of a mainstream type of education”

There are far better ways to use SEND funding on children capable of mainstream than to spend £18k or more to privately educate a few that don’t need special education, particularly in this climate. The vast majority of children with autism who present like your son manage in the state sector( with support) without tiny classes.

You know, I’m not sure they are aware - there’s a lot of people paying £20k -£40k per child claiming that they really aren’t privileged just ‘ prioritising’ education. It sounds as if you need to sit down and have a good, hard look at why you’re spending £40k on fees.
Despite all the posters claiming that private schoolparents aren’t well off I would say that being able to afford £40k without ‘digging’ into savings makes you pretty well off.
Although getting into more mortgage debt, paying less into pensions… is that sensible???

Any normal state parent is going to hear about the ‘struggle’ of finding the extra money and think - leave the school! It’s so obvious to anyone outside the private ‘bubble’.

“The children affected are therefore going to disproportionately be those whose parents already identified that their needs might not be met in the state sector (hence prioritising private school fees in a budget). “

Well that’s ridiculous and entirely your assumption. Parents on a budget choose private education for all sorts of reasons- snobbery and the unfair advantages a private education brings, superior facilities….

Also the wealthy do have children with SEN, SEN isn’t caused by family income. 🤔

We don't actually know if he's going to cope in mainstream secondary, actually, even with the extra support (including a 1-1 TA, whose salary likely costs more than the local private school does), as he doesn't start until September.

The entire point of an EHCP is to allow the child to achieve as well as they can with support / reasonable adjustments.

If he still can't cope, then I will be pushing for the private school (I already managed to get a vastly-amended EHCP through to panel and approval, despite our case worker being resistant and - wrongly - telling me I had no right to do this), as that setting should be able to meet his needs.

Your assumption is waaaaay off the mark. Try harder. You clearly failed to note that the Ed Psych specifically said he should have small classes. State mainstream with support is a massive compromise and may still not work for him.

Except that there are lots of parents of state school pupils who have far higher incomes than some private school parents. Why aren’t they paying more tax? “Better placed”. You’re talking absolute bollocks.

And you seem to have read 'capable of mainstream-type' as 'capable of mainstream'. 'Mainstream-type' is the level of education, not the 30+ class sizes. He's very bright. The local special schools don't cater for this, sadly. But he also can't cope with large classes. Which is why private will likely be the best fit.