To think that the private school VAT case is a waste of time and money?

[Yaaaassssssqueeeeeennnnnslay]

The government’s removal of VAT breaks on school fees is being challenged in courts - friend has been pinning her hopes on this, her DC ( no SEN, perfectly bright) are in an expensive private school. I told her it wasn’t likely to make a difference, and her children will be long out of school by the time any absolute decisions are made.

However, even if the judgement goes the school’s way it’ll court to the Court of Appeal, then the European Court - which could take years - and even then IF that court rules in favour of private schools our government is under no obligation to change anything.

IF a court is even willing to intervene in a social/economic policy that was in a political manifesto - a BIG policy - and voted for.

YANBU - it’s a waste of time/money if the goal is to get the government to reverse the VAT/ business rates policy in private achools

YABU - it could overturn their policy

Pinning any hopes on this is unreasonable. I do however believe in justice, even though the Tories don't if their actions and lack of able Justice Secretaries over many years is a guide. People should be able to have a day or more in court.

Well VAT is value added tax so it is a tax on education....

Those who send their children to private school pay tax twice for education.

Assume you meant that for the poster I tagged as we’re saying the same thing
👍

Wow

Thats an excellent comparison re vaping

Yes, sorry! I get annoyed by the inference that those who pay are exploiting a tax loophole and therefore should be penalised.

Or perhaps the explanation is that parents had already put in their notice to leave and / or they weren’t getting the usual number of applicants for future places.
Therefore they shut in the knowledge that the viability of the school long term was unsustainable.
The impact on the ni hike was a double whammy for them as well.

Why do you assume that people contributed blindly, without proper understanding of the issue?

It’s always dished out on these threads.
As if it’s never been explained before 🤣🤣🤣.

Tbh I just don’t understand why it has to be explained at all.

Er... university tuition fees were introduced in 1998 by the Labour government. People didn't vote Labour to stop tuition fees being introduced.

I was in my 3rd year at university then and didn't have to pay the fees because tuition was already covered if you'd already started.

They might not win but good on them for trying to
oppose a very poor policy.

Not wrong. The fundamental criterion is that the child needs support over and above what is normally available in mainstream schools. If, as the barrister claims, they are in private schools because they need that support then they meet the criterion. That includes a need for a calm, quiet environment, small school and small classes.

It may be that it would be difficult to get an EHCP, but that is not something the judicial review court is going to take into account.

No, she isn't. Not even the most pessimistic person in the SEN field believes that.

Again, not wrong x3.

According to reports of the hearing, counsel for the parents said that it was "not fair" to remove vulnerable children from a school where their needs are met, to an environment where they are not met, without "weighty justification". Based on that criterion, if the children's needs are not being met within a mainstream school environment, they would as a matter of law qualify for an EHCP with provision that puts them into an environment that meets their needs. Either that will be a private school named in the EHCP, or something like a special school or alternative provision. It is not that unusual for LAs to fund private schools precisely because the child needs small, quiet classes and a quiet environment, and independent private schools may well come in cheaper than special schools.

Issues around being bullied are not SEN in themselves, so the possibility of getting an EHCP for this reason alone doesn't arise anyway. If, say, a child with ASD is being bullied it may well be possible to make a case against mainstream school, not least because of the long term effects of anxiety and trauma on the child's ability to learn.

Isn't it reasonably clear that this is based on the comments of contributors?

There are no children who receive this so called exemption in Scotland because no local authority is funding mainstream private education for a SEN child. Not one. That is how narrowly it has been written. That is how stingy the government has been with its ‘we won’t let this affect SEN kids’ nonsense. I pay the fees to school a child that the government has washed their hands of, and then the government has the fucking nerve to ask me to pay VAT on top! Try fulfilling your statutory duty first! Provide my child with a safe school place that is calm and disruption free in order that they can learn. It shouldn’t be too much to ask. But it is, so I have to pay.

I have not RTFT OP, but I agree. And I have one child in state and one in private.

In April 1997 just weeks before polling, Tony Blair said “Labour has no plans to introduce tuition fees for higher education" and his sidekick Robin Cook said “We are quite clear that tuition costs must be met by the state.”.

This was a HUGE part of their campaign after a further education study had suggested that fees would need to be introduced. They got a LOT of votes from those with teenagers.

Two months after he was elected, TB then did a huge U-turn and introduced the tuition fees in Sept 1998.

I was the first year of tuition fees.

That's down to Scots law passed by the Scots Parliament: the SEN system there differs from the one in England. There are children with EHCPs that name private non-specialist schools in England. If that is the extent of your knowledge of the SEN system, I'm surprised you were so dogmatic in saying I was wrong.

From all the comments made by people who are donating .

Nothing you've said contradicts what I said. It is hugely difficult to get an EHCp and there is a fairly large swathe of kids who fall in the gap between what state schools can cater too and high enough need for an EHCP. You may be right that it won't be enough to sway the court case but it is still true and unless / until Bridget Phillips and co admit it, they will hide behind this small provision to justify the VAT stance.

VAT Exemption for Independent Schools, being withdrawn, is a 'non-debate', surely.

1972's, UK entry to the EC, spearheaded by Edward Heath's government, illicited the, necessary, requirement of VAT legislation, imposing a universal Tax on most Goods and Services. One main Exemption was always the Education Sector, again, in line with European requirements and Law.

Post Brexit, I am not surprised that this Exemption has been withdrawn from the Independent School's Sector now, which is perfectly in line with not being a member of the EU, and taking control, finally, of how Education Funding is enacted by a government. What is, also, perfectly in line, is the, generally, accepted democratic principle of 'Majority Rule', where your elected MPs vote in Parliament for such a taxation, legislation change.

The Government appears to be evening out the disparity between State and Private sector, funding and sustainability. 94% of schoolchildren in the UK, potentially, benefitting from all this 'upheaval'. Many voters from the last General Election could be saying, "that's one, valuable, return for my vote".

The 94% have made a choice, not, to pay for their children's education. That does not make them Human Rights violators. And for once, Staff and Children, in State Schools, stand the chance of wreaking the benefits of enhanced Conditions and Resources, impacting the majority of Schoolchildren, here, positively.

VAT 'Nay-sayers', appear not to have understood the basic, democratic, workings of the UK. Perhaps they need to pay a little more, to re-educate themselves.

@satisday please can you point to any specific tangible and measurable benefits the state education sector have received as a result of this? KS and RR keep saying this money is being spent in various different ways, including housing. I haven't yet seen a single teacher directly employed as a result of extra funding from this policy. I have seen half a dozen kids leave my own school and a huge increase on y11 leavers as a result.

The money’s gone to housing, not improving state schools. They lied. Until the next lie.

How much money.?

RhaenysRocks and Lorna11,

Thank you for your responses. I'll be interested to see how things progress here.

As I don't have much of an influence on Parliamentary Procedures and Government decisions until Elections come round, I too, am unsure as to how the VAT revenue has been spent. Since January, I suspect the millions projected to be raised, has not filtered through HMRC to the Treasury much, yet. My experience says HMRC doesn't move very quickly.

This whole 'thing' is, politically, motivated, of course, and if justification is needed for it's implementation, maybe you can both suggest a fairer way of bolstering the State Education System? If you don't care and are only interested in your own personal circumstances, then, like previous government's, you probably won't find any happy-making solutions to the challenges you face.

State School rolls are decreasing across the UK; funding is being reduced, commensurately; teachers are stretched to the limit and resources are lacking. There are many more, fixed-contract teachers than there used to be, and many of them will not be returning in September. There will be fewer classes to teach in, and less opportunity for schools to be able to afford Permanent , experienced Staff. The prospect of funding being injected into the System, will be a, long overdue, breath of Life.

The Private Sector will survive. It always does.

As to the lies that the Government tells, Lorna11, I have little idea, again. You, obviously, have inside knowledge as to the Prime Minister's, Chancellor's and Education Secretary's deliberations. Or you're just making things up, to suit yourself.

The Court Case was not a waste of time or effort (or money), because the ruling judgement confirmed the Government have not been operating illegally, in any way. Of course, the Supreme Court may get involved at some point, but that is the prerogative of those that have the funds to pursue further civil lawsuits.

Ask yourselves, whether you believe in State Education. If you do, then maybe reading the Left-wing press might be enlightening. If not, then you can expect nothing changing, for the positive, for you, anytime soon.