Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Original poster

If Labour win... are your DCs coming out of Private Education?

394 replies

MrsJamesMathews · 04/06/2017 00:29

Sitting here doing some maths.

It's not looking great.

With increased corporation tax and VAT on school fees, I think we'll be having some very awkward conversations with our DCs schools on Friday.

Anyone else worried?

OP posts:
pottered · 05/06/2017 10:57

well nastiness isn't one sided keep, I've heard private school kids referred to as 'posh little shites' by people i'd otherwise thought were nice people.

Somerville · 05/06/2017 10:58

And yes, private schools with already imbalanced books will probably close over this. Or actually, convert to academies.

dotdotdotmustdash · 05/06/2017 11:02

On balance I think the 93% of children in state schools have more to lose with a Tory government than the 7% of extremely well supported, mostly middle class, mostly high achieving children in private schools have to lose with a Labour one

Absolutely this.

gillybeanz · 05/06/2017 11:04

mini

Can you not see that the inequality and social divisiveness created and perpetuated by the existence of private schools is a cultural and political problem which impacts on the life chances of children? It's not just about the individual lifestyle choices of adults - it's about fairness towards children.

Yes, the existence of private schools have given my child a wonderful opportunity, this life chance will be removed if we have to leave the school.
To work so hard, have such a talent and the chance for a specialist education was a dream come true for my dd.
But hey ho, I'm sure someone with less talent but heaps of money will take her place.

I vote Labour btw, will continue to, have always done.

pottered · 05/06/2017 11:05

i just don't see it as a necessary choice - f*ck the 7% for the sake of the 93%. Sensibly designed policy could've avoided disruption easily.

i don't know we would want anyone's kids to be punished really.

Not giving blanket free tuition could also have avoided this policy (and others) being slapped in without due consideration.

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace · 05/06/2017 11:08

I don't think anyone wants to say 'fuck the 7%' - an expensive thing will become a bit more expensive, but of course the aim would be that things done for the sake of the 93%, the 7% are welcome to!

pottered · 05/06/2017 11:12

Sounds like that from some on this thread - causing disruption to up to 7% of children in education is pretty bad, whatever you think about the eventual rights and wrongs.

If this had been done slower and more sensibly people could have made informed decisions at the start of their kids' schooling.

20% is a huge hike in fees, it'll put it beyond the reach of a lot of parents.

The way this policy has been designed and handled is exactly why hell would freeze over before I voted for Corbyn. If we can expect similarly badly designed policies for the rest of his manifesto, the UK will very quickly be a worse shambles than it is now.

user235 · 05/06/2017 11:18

the aim would be that things done for the sake of the 93% The aim is explicitly stated in the manifesto. The Vat on fees would be to give free school meals to those children in yrs 3-6 who don't already qualify for free school meals. It may well be that we don't give enough children free school meals and that the boundary needs looking at but I can't understand why giving free meals to all state junior pupils warrants such disruption to children at private school. It is not a benefit targeted at the most disadvantaged but at the better resourced families with children at state school.

Desperad0 · 05/06/2017 11:23

We'll probably take ours out and tutor for 11 plus- or move to a catchment for a high performing. Not really the best thought out plan of his is it?!

pottered · 05/06/2017 11:25

yes that's a great point user, increasing the boundary to bring more families into FSM isn't as easy an idea to sell but it's much more sensible than a blanket free for all.

And let's not even talk about the fact that the corporation and min wage hikes are being implemented far too quickly.

I wouldn't have an issue with the general direction of these changes if they were more targeted to help where it's really needed and being introduced carefully.

pottered · 05/06/2017 11:26

have we found a well thought out plan in the labour manifesto? Everything I've looked at screams not thought out, not careful enough, not smart enough, even though some of the right questions have been asked.

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace · 05/06/2017 11:27

But Pottered - it hasn't been done!

Private education is already beyond the reach of a lot of parents (partly the point) - it seems a bit arbitrary to say it should be accessible to so many and no more, in a way.

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace · 05/06/2017 11:29

Have we found a plan at all, in the Tory manifesto? I mean, Theresa May is very good at telling us that she's 'been very very clear' about the broad principles, but I'm not sure I've seen much in the way of plans.

I doubt there'll be any that are focussed on making things better for ordinary children in state schools, though, so I suppose you can rest easy on that point!

gillybeanz · 05/06/2017 11:29

People talk about fairness for all, and I totally agree.
But if this was the case schools wouldn't have been closed that specialised in education for children with sn.

children would be made to go to their nearest school, if that was full the next. We wouldn't have parents moving to take the best schools as they'd already be full of local children. The roads would be clearer, children would be healthier as walking to school.
Yes, I'm all for a fair system.
For those who wouldn't use state schools as they don't fit my child, would H.educate.

pottered · 05/06/2017 11:29

sorry seek I'm not getting your point. I don't have a problem with VAT on private school fees eventually being brought in if it was done slowly: exemptions for SN, introduced for year 1 students in 3 years time say so that parents could properly re-optimize without disruption.

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace · 05/06/2017 11:33

Do you know they're not going to do any of that?

Somerville · 05/06/2017 11:33

It will be done slowly, pottered - it can't be implanted until we've properly exited the EU. So absolute minimum two years.

And even the Tories (under David Cameron) have been discussing it, so it's not like it wasn't on the political horizon.

Somerville · 05/06/2017 11:34

Implemented not implanted Grin

pottered · 05/06/2017 11:36

why should I trust that they will? There has been no talk of introducing this slowly to allow parents to re-optimize education plans without having to pull children currently at school out.

Why should I trust Corbyn when he can't unite the moderates in his own party behind him? Why should I put my trust in Corbyn when there has been no rhetoric saying that he's introducing changes slowly and carefully. 'Free' university tuition is being slapped in immediately - that'll cause havoc in the university sector.

Labour needs another 5 years in opposition to refine these policies and get some proper thought and evaluation of them personally.

pottered · 05/06/2017 11:38

So we're applauding the fact that we believe that this can't be implemented for 2 years because of the constraints of EU legislation? I'm not giving Corbyn any credit for the fact he's been delayed by the EU.

Something being on the horizon is way different than a party running on a manifesto to make something happen. As I said, I don't have a problem with much of the general direction of the manifesto, but I don't trust labour to implement it carefully.

Almondbrew · 05/06/2017 11:40

Upthread somebody asked me why the Biscuit.

"There's no need to be facetious simply because you don't like someone else's personal lifestyle choices."

All i can say is goady fucker/gf.

KarlosKKrinkelbeim · 05/06/2017 11:41

Corbyn hasn't even thought about the impact of this on kids with SN, or the specialist schools in the private sector which aim to meet various special needs, I'll bet. For him, as for the bulk of the population of the country, it's easier not to think about them.
I won't be told that labour is the party that cares about disabilities. They are the party that uses people with disabilities in arguments to suit their political ends.

user235 · 05/06/2017 11:44

I don't think there's clarity on the EU legislation point is there? Phr47bridge certainly makes a good case above to say it is not a problem. I think it's about the interpretation of Art 132 of the VAT directive which is not written with clarity. Didn't Greece put VAT on school fees without problems?

Somerville · 05/06/2017 11:44

The Tories haven't exactly made their changes thoughtfully and carefully either, have they? And when they do consult they then ignore all the recommendations. The farce they made of cutting bereavement benefits are a case in point.

And actually, what we've seen of Corbyn since this election has been called is that he is a deeply thoughtful man, who listens. I think he will on this, and that it won't be imposed overnight after we leave the EU and it would be lawful.

And I don't think you're right about Corbyn being unable to unite his party. They're looking pretty united now! (I agreed with you until this election was called, and we saw more of him ourselves and his manifesto came out, so I know where you're coming from.)

BunsBumpBlur · 05/06/2017 11:44

Corbyn hasn't even thought about the impact of this on kids with SN, or the specialist schools in the private sector which aim to meet various special needs, I'll bet.

And you know this, how? Is there any evidence to this oneway or the other?