To be completely shocked by this - Bridget can’t tell us the impact of the government’s VAT on Education?

[Sasskitty]

Bridget Phillipson dodges question on impact of private school tax raid

As parents and schools complain of chaos, Ms Phillipson refuses to spell out details of the assessment made by the department for education

Bridget Phillipson failed to spell out the full impact of the government’s private school VAT raid, dodging the question when asked about the possible implications for special education schools.

While she said the government has “looked at all of the potential impacts”, her answer failed to provide any real detail on the expected consequences.

It comes as parents and schools complain about the implications of the tax raid, which came into force on New Year’s Day and is expected to raise £1.5bn for the Treasury.

YABU - Bridget Phillipson has it all in hand. She just didn’t feel like answering the pesky question. The point is to piss rich people off. Leave Labour alone, they want nothing but erm oh I’m not sure.

YANBU - Phillipson clearly has no idea what the impact of VAT on Education will be. Nor does she really care as long as she’s seen to be punishing those horrible rich people. Or even better (it seems) the not really rich ones just trying to improve the education of their children as the available state schools were not suitable.

https://apple.news/AO7fcmrzuRaik4stLaPQxwA

(sorry paywall but there’s not much more in the article)

PS. I’ve removed the poll tally, no one needs to see real data. Do they?

Unless you are Bridget Philipson I think we don't need to get overly concerned. I remember the treatment of Dominic Cummings/Boris Johnson.

If you think that is okay then it says a lot about you and the double standards on such threads. The outrage is clearly very selective and self-serving.

It says nothing "about me". Try and have some empathy for the people on here whose kids are having their education ruined by a bitter zealot who refuses to listen to anyone affected. And then who try and talk about it and are constantly spammed by people who just seem to enjoy the "sport" for whatever weird reason and seem to enjoy the misery of children. You have strange double standards I'm afraid.

@AgathaPanthus gave you not seen dislike of politicians on mn? Some get a lot of it

I agree with pp @twistyizzy posts are reasonable and not as suggested to other posters

TBF I suspect the feeling is mutual..Bridget Philipson doesn't seem to like children very much herself.

She is a poor choice for education. She had a bad school experience herself and no experience of work or study in the field of education. Sadly for her (and I feel sorry for her as I understand she was badly bullied) she doesn't know what a good school is, to try and aim the country for. Keir Starmer should have appointed Katherine B as she does know what a good school is as she's made one herself.

More hyperbole. Everyone I know will just pay VAT and STFU about it. You have the audacity to demand empathy from me when you think it is okay to viscerally hate another person. Who has the strange double standards?

Yes her comments on X were very telling, and more detrimental to children's education than anything on here

Redistribution of wealth only works to some extent, it has to be proportionate. Taxation is always a balance of risk and return.

If you ask the general public whether to tax the non doms, of course they will say yes. But if you re ask them the same question and ask if taxing non Doms means you end up poorer, then they will answer differently. It is essentially the same question with private schools. Nobody will agree to private school parents being taxed if it actually ends up as a net cost to the taxpayer and a detriment to the state sector. And that is where Labour have failed to do their homework. If the overall benefit to the UK is less from taxing private schools, then no thanks. Lofty ideals of fairness are not worth the price tag if it actually ends up costing. And that somewhat includes both the moral & financial cost of pushing SEND kids into the state sector.

So which ones is it going to be? Because this was sold as a policy that makes money and recruits teachers and feeds state school children. If it does not do any of that, it has been missold. Private companies are held to account for misselling stuff to the general public. The jury is out on how politicians are held to account. I think things are changing in the social media era. I think politicians need to have evidence to back themselves up, call it cover your own backside. So I think it is a fair question to ask.

You have decided to come on this thread and post the type of things you feel people would be interested in hearing from you for some reason. On a thread about private schools.

You then try and police the language of the people who don't agree with you.

You then take offence at the expression of understandable upset about the architect of this spiteful policy by pretending to take some sort of moral high ground.

You remind me of The New European article by Peter Hyman about the seven deadly sins of the left. Check it out if you haven't already.

I think if she had ring fenced the VAT income for schools so we could see how much was raised and where it went she may have had a better chance. But she hasn't. So she doesn'. And we all know where that money is going. Down a big black hole...

I can post about what I want as long as I am within talk guidelines. Once again, YOU ARE NOT THE THREAD POLICE. It would seem that some consider themselves so entitled that they think they can rewrite the rules of MN.

Oh such hyperbole..and don't be vitriolic, either.

Writing IN CAPITALS suggest you are going a little over the top.

And calling me "entitled" has upset me a lot. Say sorry.

Your posts are beyond ridiculous. I wasn't much of a fan of Bridget Philippson to start with. I am warming to her more by the day.

I'm afraid I can't engage directly with you now any more as you are being hyperbolic and vitriolic and you've been very rude.

Well by page 35 I reckon you "know" me and others in my position by now. So not "everyone you know" at all. Let's not get distracted about posting styles and get back to actual issue. @AgathaPanthus will you please explain why you are so reluctant to accept that
A) there are kids with SEN in private due to unmet needs in state that don't have EHCPs often due to the appallingly and deliberately difficult process.
b) Some of these kids, quite a number it seems, will face more disruption and possibly effective exclusion from education if their parents cannot meet the additional costs or their school goes under
C) that not everyone's situation can be understood on the basis of who you personally know or what others have done...the whole "mine have SEN and are fine in state" argument.
D) that this policy has been introduced in a way that is badly researched, deliberately disruptive and does not have the best interests of ALL children at heart.
Thank you. .

The personal attacks and attempts to catch posters out on this thread are just vile. I - and many of us - have shared our lived experiences in the hope that other posters will understand. There’s nothing to catch out or pick holes in with my family’s situation - I have always been completely open about why we are in the private school system. Clearly there’s no point in any of us sharing our stories. Our lived experiences are nothing compared with spiteful opinions.

I think that suggesting that somebody is probably not left wing because they are highly intelligent is offensive but not all that surprising.

I am lucky enough to know highly intelligent people from all parts of the political spectrum. It gives me a balanced view of things.

Barbalsingh grew up in Canada, they tend to be at least centre left leaning and she was in the Socialist Workers Party at Oxford, according to her wiki page. So yes, says it all to me. She may ascribe to more of a more small c “conservative” education policy. Tories are better at education, that is well known.
People are not blindly in the camp of either party. It is perfectly possible to agree largely with one, but disagree on certain policies like this one, for example.

Well done. Good for you.

Yes generally offensive but to be expected from the narrow-minded and somewhat limited mindsets that are in abundance on threads like these. Thank goodness for real life and balance!

Reported for smugness.

@AgathaPanthus - you have not put up a single argument to prove that this VAT on education is progressive and pro growth. It is therefore a direct contradiction of Starmer’s progressive growth plan.

I have said this before. The policy is only pro growth if those using private schools believe the policy to be good and fair and want to pay the VAT for the greater good and actively want to work additional hours to fund the private schooling for their DC.
If they, as a group, do not want to do that and are unhappy about it, the policy fails.
So either way the Education Secretary should have engaged positively with the independent sector and those parents.

You are making some assumptions there. Of course I haven't because I am not a champion of the policy. I started out thinking that it was not a good idea but as the months have gone on I have become increasingly irritated by the attitudes towards it and this thread is a perfect microcosm of that. I still don't think it is a great idea but I care less by the day and VAT is already in place so it's pretty much yesterday's news.