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?

Where are these areas with indie schools that lower house prices? In a 20 radius from where I live there is 1 private school. Do indie parents drive their kids out? I love that DD (13) walks to school.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/oct/05/grammar-applications-drop-despite-claims-swamped-after-vat-private-school-fees

Not a single thing has told me where the money will go? My dc are in state BTW.

@MrsMurphyIWish parts of Surrey, Croydon, Bromley are cheaper than say Wandsworth & there are school buses that go all over. Very normal for dc to travel some distance for private school

I don’t think that is true.

Having worked in education in a place with excellent state schools (even the ‘worst’ would be sought after in much of the country) but also multiple private schools, I don’t think it’s the case that the presence of a good state schools means nobody supports private.

There are some families that simply don’t consider state - at an extreme, the Royal family will not use a state school, and there are other families that simply would not consider it. Those who have been privately educated themselves, and have peer whose children all attend private, automatically choose private schools as ‘the option for people like us’.

Even within an ecosystem of extremely good state schools, there is a heirarchy. Where ‘the current best’ school
is unavailable to them, some parents will choose a private school instead of the ‘genuinely very good but not quite as good as X’ school.

Equally, some parents just want a school of their active choice, not one allocated by the admissions process - they may want a small school, or single sex, or that plays rugby, or that has very small classes, or that doesn’t have their child’s feared peer from nursery, or that offers flexi boarding, or longer days, and want to pay in order to guarantee they get their choice.

Some parents find the socially non-selective nature of comprehensive schooling quite difficult, and wish to protect their child by buying an education where they will be in a slightly separate bubble.

Some parents are looking for a school to provide eg high level music, sport, drama etc within the school day (rather than eg finding county or club provision out of school, which can be hard for logistical reasons). Some private schools offer these.

Some parents are looking to gain an advantage in the planned next stage of education- in the same way as some parents move their children to state for 6th form in the hope of advantage in university admissions, there is, in selective areas, an industry of ‘grammar crammer’ primaries offering the prep for 11+ that state schools are not allowed to offer.

None of the above is an argument for VAT-free private schooling, but it does explain why private schools flourish and are chosen by parents even where state schools are excellent.

So London?

Edit: Not to be rude btw. Just to point out what I said upthread, I live in the Midlands. Private school fees aren’t on anyone’s
radar - this may be a massive thing on MN but to answer the original OP, I don’t think the “middle class” care.

@cantkeepawayforever I agree with you, we have some of the best state options available but some of my neighbours could never envisage sending their dc to a state secondary in London as it’s an alien concept to them.

I am a middle class parent who .... just doesn't care about this.

I'm sorry, I just don't have enough bandwidth for the fate of private schools for the richest families in the world to matter to me. My own children have been in outstanding primary and secondary schools and are doing really well.

You know that’s not what I said. I merely pointed out that many of those who support don’t understand the policy, or how it works. That’s shown on these posts all the time. The government or media don’t fully understand it either (or are possibly wilfully misleading the public) so it’s no surprise that some people are confused.

@MrsMurphyIWish London, Surrey, Kent

People support it because they believe what Reeves has told them will happen. They believe that it will raise lots of money to be spent in the state sector.

We will have to wait and see what does happen, and if people continue to support it if the critics were right, and the policy doesn't deliver all the benefits promised.

I think it's not a well understood policy. Many people, including quite a few on this thread, seem to think that private schools were exempt from VAT (possibly because they are charities) and that the policy change removes that exemption. That seems a perfectly sensible policy to support but is a complete misunderstanding. The government obviously has no incentive to explain the policy and so have contributed to the misunderstanding. My guess is that most people who aren't affected don't care enough to take time to understand the detail. Lots of people vaguely support the idea that private schools aren't really charities and so should pay VAT like everyone else. The fact that this completely misunderstands the issue is irrelevant to that support.
Of course there are also well informed people who do support the policy (and those who don't) but I imagine that BP is right to say that this is generally an area in which they have support rather than opposition.

People support it because they believe what Reeves has told them will happen. They believe that it will raise lots of money to be spent in the state sector.

I dont think people actually believe that but they don’t really care.

No I understand it perfectly, can afford to send my kids (and choose not) to and agree with it completely. I have been to both state and private so have experienced both.

Let’s not suggest that everyone who agrees with the policy doesn’t understand it because they do.

Apologies for assuming London-centric, however, there’s a lot of country the Midlands upwards and I don’t think private education is the biggest concern over housing, transport, roads etc

Well if they don't care then they don't support it.

If they do support it there must be a reason why they think it's a good thing.

@MrsMurphyIWish I never claimed it was?

Nope. Too simplistic. Not a Badenoch cronie and fully support the policy.

I'd fall under that description, and to be honest I think private schools shouldn't exist, so I'm happy for them to be taxed out of existence personally.

Well if they don't care then they don't support it.

I don’t think many voted labour for this policy though, they are just indifferent as it’s not on their radar.

I suspect that the middle class parents in favour of VAT are those whose children have access to excellent state schools.

Unfortunately we don't all have that luxury.

That was my whole point!

This thread is asking if Phillipson's claim that most middle class parents support the policy is justifiable or not. You cannot include people who don't care as supporters.

Having seen the result of private school cronyism in the industry I am in - despite being a high earner, I wouldn’t countenance sending my children there. It makes me feel sick and the quicker these schools are depleted the better

It’s deeply shameful that we will be the only country in the world to tax education. Even music lessons have had VAT added, which is even more spiteful.

The worst thing is that Labour signalled before the election that the change would be brought in for September 2025. As soon as they were voted in they changed it to January. Bringing it in mid-year was indescribably shitty.

Anyway Surrey has already said they have zero state places for any child over 13. Our local outstanding sixth form has been deluged with applications from private school pupils, displacing many lower income families.

And the richest people will be completely unaffected.

The private schools which are run as businesses and are not charities (around half) are required to pay tax any on profits as far as I’m aware.