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?

Good question.

i don’t understand how anyone can support the effect that the VAT added will have on families of SEND kids. Kids many of who have already been let down by state system and changed schools several times, now facing more disruption if their parents cant pay up.

What about the massive and well publicised crisis- level post code lottery in state SEND provision? the crisis- level lack of availability of places in state special schools? The crisis- level lack of SEND support in state mainstream schools?

Fact that since even before the pandemic applications for EHCPs have shot up? And that the rate of SEND diagnoses is also shooting up- possibly partly due to the previously unmet SEND needs of girls, only in recent years being recognised.

And that the ‘safety valve’ agreements between central and local governments which are designed to ration local authorities spending and EHCPs, are being widely imposed on councils in financial distress with direct obligations to cut services further?

https://www.specialneedsjungle.com/uncovering-truth-send-safety-valve-agreement-cut-childrens-send-provision/

If we provided private education for all bright children capable of mainstream but not large classes education funding would collapse.

Of course SEN isn't caused by family income. What is influenced, though, is the budget a family has available to support children. An approach affecting all relevant families equally significantly would have been more equitable.

Do most people actually believe that? Is that what they think the Labour Party mean by a “tax break”. Are you not ashamed that you have been so manipulated by a Government? Honestly, there is no hope for this country if they is what people actually believe.

In case you haven’t worked it out by now, it was state schools who had the “tax break” as they have always been able to reclaim input VAT, unlike private schools. And no, charitable stays does not allow a private school to reclaim VAT.

Well, he will - sadly for you - be entitled to it if the state secondary provision collapses and the private school says they can meet his needs.

You have failed to appreciate that he has 1-1 TA provision in his EHCP. This costs more than the local private school if you also add on the £7-8k cost of each state educated child per year. It will be a saving sending him private.

My children are exactly the type you describe. I will keep them at their small, shabby, pastorally brilliant indie and go into long term debt to do it because if they have to go back to a 1000+ comp their EBSA will return and I'll probably have to give up work to support them and help them learn something at home which will cost the gov my income tax and whatever UV and carers allowance I'd get.

IF this policy was actually going to make any kind of dent in the issues for state schools (I'm a teacher btw) I would be in favour, despite the personal cost to me but as it stands the only reason for anyone to be in favour of this is idealogical because practically, as a revenue raiser its completely pointless and is actually going to harm and disrupt some children. I know of 8 already at my kids' school who are leaving in the summer and many more who would have stayed to 6th form but who are now not. It's not a big school, or remotely wealthy. Every penny is plowed into the upkeep and salaries.

Those that are vat registered.
Swimming lessons run by private companies that now manage the local government contracts.
Dance/Drama schools etc generate huge turnovers.

Your post hit the nail on the head! They will (hopefully) 'manage'. They will not 'thrive', they will not 'excel' they will not 'grow'. Is the aspiration we have for children of this country so low that we are content with 'they will manage'.

I don't think this parent was asking that the government pay the 18k tuition fees. Just that they don't charge her an extra 3.5k VAT on top. Which is far less than a state mainstream place costs (around 6k per child per year in primary), so a child in private is still saving the country money vs them being in mainstream.

And I'm sure that the 'well there are spare spaces so it won't cost the country money' will be trotted out. Which fails to recognise that smaller class sizes are actually better fir childrens learning. Both mine have massively benefitted from classes of around 20 in our state primary, and just because 30 in a class is permitted, doesn't mean it's helpful or beneficial. We should be setting our bar much higher for all our children than 'managing' ' max ratios' etc.

Large classes ARE mainstream. That's what many kids like mine cannot cope with. The crowded corridors and lack of supervision at lesson change times. It's not the work. I actually think many many kids could cope much better in state secondary if most of them were cut in half size wise. I know it's impossible but more than anything, that's what makes the difference between what some PS provides and state, the smaller, calmer, everyone is visible kind of atmosphere.

No, I was saying that the state will pay for the private school (which will cost them less than mainstream + 1-1 TA, and also be way cheaper than an LEA special school which he isn't suited to due to lack of peer group).

It's actually quite short sighted to pursue mainstream state with support, when this costs more than the private alternative (especially when the LEA would fund a special school at greater cost if there was the suitable peer group there!).

It's rather ableist of that poster to condemn kids like my son to just 'managing' (meaning that in reality it's absolute hell for them, but they just hide it at school, having huge meltdowns at home).

A multitude of other illegal delaying and blocking tactics from councils are also addition being used towards children seeking EHCPs, as cash strapped councils desperately seek to evade their financial responsibilities towards kids with SEND. These massive funding cuts to local councils have been taking place under the Tories’ watch since 2010 so by now are desperate and Labour is not committing to resolve this.
https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2024/mar/24/hard-up-english-councils-ration-access-to-special-needs-tests

So much so that councils consider it cheaper to force SEND parents through the court process than to find the required funding for their kids. Councils are legally challenging evidenced and reasonable legal parental requests for EHCPs, hoping the majority of these hard pressed parents will simply have to give up and drop out unsupported by the council, rather than the councils having to pay according to their long-standing legal obligations to support the diagnosed additional needs of local children.

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/22/100m-spent-in-england-on-failed-efforts-to-block-childrens-send-support

https://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/education-law/394-education-news/55170-councils-accused-of-wasting-60m-in-a-year-on-tribunal-battles-over-support-for-children-with-special-educational-needs

The additional VAT placed on school fees burdens the SEND parents who just have the means to use private schools. They didn’t ‘choose’ private education for fun. They ‘chose’ to paybecause their local councils have no provision that their kids can access because special schools are full up. These parents are incidentally relieving pressure on the state school SEND budgets by taking their kids out.

it is well known among SEND parents that councils extremely regularly break their s19 commitments to provide education to children who are kept out of school for reasons of SEND. Meaning kids that are out of school with no form of education for months, years.A short time on any SEND Facebook forum will tell you that. In spite of every council’s clear legal obligations to educate all kids.

It’s become a luxury belief to think that local authorities follow the law when it comes to SEND these days. They’re simply not being funded sufficiently by central government to do so.

And even if councils did provide some education to a child at home, then a parent (who might well be a single parent) then has to be at home all day to chaperone. What do people think happens to that parent’s paid job? They lose their job.

So there will always be parents of SEND kids or any kid who needs small class size, or need a particular alternative education, who really need the option of a more relatively more affordable private school, to help them try to keep their jobs and also suitably educate their kids.

This includes parents who want an alternative education or ethos like a music or ballet or sports specialist school, an outdoor or Steiner school; or a specific religious school. Honestly it comes into discrimination in so many areas to take this choice away from those who could make it; while not oroviding an improved state offer. It is morally flawed to want educational choice to be pushed further and further out of reach by central government where there is no state funded alternative.

Many families with Sen will be wealthy enough to stay, most will stay, many leaving won’t have Sen,of those with SEN many will be perfectly able to access education in the state sector and those with an EHCP will stay the same if private is funded.

The use of Sen and hysteria whipping by a few MNers angry that they can no longer afford the privilege of private education needs to stop.

Excellent post

Yes, what we should be providing is small classes of 10-12 children in mainstream, for children who are capable academically but struggle from a sensory or emotional perspective. This would cost around 9-10k per child, much cheaper than sending them private

It’s not the size of class that’s the issue really though is it? It’s the lack of discipline. The lack of kids being quiet, respecting others need for peace. If all children were beautifully well behaved and courteous my ASD child would be fine in a state secondary. But the local state secondary is chaos so we have to use private.

It’s not ableist, it’s life for the vast majority of autistic adults and children of which I have too. If we provided private education for every autistic child who has meltdowns at home the system would completely collapse.

The irony of your comment is probably lost on you.

What do you propose for the bright children with asd whose needs can't be met in a large class then? I don't mean this in a goading way. I am genuinley curious.

There's so many children with asd who are basically getting zero education and not coping at all in mainstream. My mainstream has an asd unit. The chikdren attend many of the mainstream classess, but have additional support in the unit abd can work in there. Places at that unit are more expensive than an independent school though.

Not sure that expressing an opinion that something has been poorly thought through really meets the threshold for hysteria whipping. I'm not actually affected significantly by this myself so there's no bitterness or envy here, just empathy for other families who will be affected and an understanding of the importance of impact assessments.

@NoWordForFluffy - my DD has an EHCP, giving me good insight into the system. The state will not pay for a private education for your son - think you might need to pay for this yourself. Local authorities pay for specialist independent provision when there are no other options/other options have been tried and failed (often spectacularly failed at the detriment of the child).They will not pay for your son to be in a small class - pay for that yourself.

So many parents of children with SEN cannot afford private school really but as it is the only option of their child receiving an education they will scrape together the pennies. That’s why it’s the SEN children who are much more likely to have to move due to this tax.

If you don’t have a SEN child, think of what you’d do if your child was self harming and refusing to attend state school. Your choices are fund private or home school. What are you going to choose?

Please go and read the excellent posts just above yours which outline the huge obstacles to getting EHCPs and exactly why "many kids with SEN" won't be able to access education in state. Most have already tried. Do you think I WANT to be in huge long term debt? Do you think I enjoy taking a hit on my pension contributions for the five years it's going to take to get my kids through? But it's necessary because the alternative is EBSA, self harm and me giving up my teaching job where I benefit hundreds of kids a week to be at home with my two. The ignorance and blithe assertions that it's a tiny minority (it isn't but even if it was, do those kids not matter then)? are far more offensive than any "bleating" about SEN.

Oh, I see. We’re not supposed to complain about a Government policy that we disagree with and that we believe will have a detrimental impact on some children (and their families). That is hysteria! Mmm….

This almost never comes up in conversation in my circle. All very engaged parents supportive of excellent state education. There is only one option for private school in my city. It is attended by many overseas students and children from affluent families who travel into the city by train and taxi from outside the city. The VAT policy is rarely mentioned, but when it is, people are supportive. Private schools are businesses.