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

[MrsJamesMathews]

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?

Theresa May thinks that learning difficulties are a mental health problem, so I wouldn't feel too happy about her potential on that score tbh.

Jesus, does she? What the fuck? Really? Where did she say that, seek?

There's a clip of her accidentally having to meet some people - I'll try to find it, but the gist is that a woman who describes herself as having learning difficulties is angry about the loss of benefits which were helping her to work, and asks what TM will do about it, to which TM says that she's been very clear that mental health issues are important to her.

Here's an article

I am currently completing our income statement from DOE for next years MDS, aided pupil scheme.
Trying my best to get it in before the election, just in case Corbyn (hopefully) wins.
I know that with the increase to 38k it's a lot to expect the taxpayer to fund most of this. In fairness to all maybe it's better that this policy goes through.
I know there are plenty people who never had the chance in the first place, though. My dd will be heartbroken if it comes to her having to leave, and have no idea how I would tell her and what i'd say.
I'm hoping so much that it doesn't come to that.
I don't even know how I could find out what the proposals for schools like dd's would be.

"Oh do fuck off almond."

Right back atcha MrsJamesMathews.

Anyway, you say you came here for advice rather than goody fuckery if this is truly the case, I'd say don't live beyond your means. If you can't afford private education you will need to pull your dc out of a paid for school.

If you are unable to pay your dc's school fees for whatever reason be it VAT on school fees or you and your dh loosing assets, you will have to send your dc to state school along with all the common people. Or you could try and apply for scholarships for your three dc, they may get it if they are exceptionally talented.

It's very basic economics really.

the key point is somerville the tories aren't launching a huge amount of changes in one go. They have a few policies, and they are the current govt and the sky hasn't fallen in. Corbyn should've taken a, dare I say, Blairite, approach and made a big deal about how carefully and slowly the changes would be introduced to encourage confidence.

The one thing I do know is that he's committed to abolish 'free' tuition pronto for the 50% that get to university, and that's a choice he's made instead of immediately spending that money on health, primary/secondary education/ or improving life for disabled people, and on that evidence, he doesn't get my vote.

Almond could you afford your life easily if your first or second main monthly cost went up 20%?

Maybe invest your intelligence and energy into your local schools provision then you won't have sleepness nights on the offchance your children may have to be educated with the oiks.

There are some seriously ignorant, judgmental people on here. My DC goes to private school but I volunteer at my local state school (English, maths and reading) 3 days a week. Why would you assume that private school parents don't understand how lucky their kids are, and don't invest their energy in helping their local state schools? I do, and I'm certainly not the only one.

"I won't be told that labour is the party that cares about disabilities"

And who do you think is the party who care about people with disabilities?

They have a few policies, and they are the current govt and the sky hasn't fallen in.

Unless of course you are one of the silently ignored who have DIED as a result of their cuts. But we can carry on and say the sky hasn't fallen, right?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2941983-To-think-that-30-000-UK-deaths-should-be-bigger-news

i can agree that this is a terrible problem - but I don't agree that Corbyn has the right solutions or can implement them.

Look at the trouble the tories have gotten themselves into trying to make wealthier seniors pay for their care - all the time having a minimum asset guarantee AND a cap on total amount paid. Quite a fair tory policy in my view!

Some of the reason that we have these cuts is because people don't want to pay more tax for the same, better funded services. Corbyn is expanding provision massively, and we really can't afford that given the pensions and health spending pressure due to the aging population.

More terrible state provision is what we're being offered under Corbyn, at a cost we can't afford. I suppose saying 'we need to raise these taxes to fund what we've already got better' isn't very sexy.

"Almond could you afford your life easily if your first or second main monthly cost went up 20%?"

Not sure why you would ask?

because of your not living beyond your means comments. The people sending their DC to private school didn't all know that a party was going to run on a VAT on school fees manifesto pledge and then try and put that policy in, during the time-frame their kids were at school.

That's why significant changes should be well signposted, to give people time to make adjustments.

20% is a huge amount of extra money to find, you're also likely talking about a group whose income tax is also rising and if they own businesses then their corporation tax AND wage bill is also increasing.

We could therefore easily make sure the money we don't spend on private schools doesn't get taxed.

'easily' I guess you don't see how that would grate on the vast majority of the country who can't 'easily' arrange it that no tax would be paid on 24k.

Its also clear that you'll easily be able to find the additional 20% from your current investments.

Almond

What makes you think that those talented on bursaries or present gov schemes aren't going to suffer.

I hate and detest tory governments and their usual policies and Thatcher was the worst, but under her government she started the scheme that benefits my dd and thousands before her.
We are worried that the rug is going to be pulled from under us.
so great, talk about living within your means if it makes you feel better.

the key point is somerville the tories aren't launching a huge amount of changes in one go. They have a few policies, and they are the current govt and the sky hasn't fallen in.

We've only had 2 years since the coalition, and they've made some bloody huge changes. And unfortunately the sky has fallen in for many people. My husband was very ill 4 years ago and then died 3 years ago - the amount of benefits we received was barely adequate, but enabled me and our DC to stay in our home. A family who that happens to now will take longer to get the disability benefits, and they'll be lower. And then the bereavement benefits will only be for 18 months and then onto universal credit and expected to seek full time work. Likewise, the diagnosis time for DH's condition has increased under the lowered NHS funding in the past few years, and recovery rates have of course dropped as a result. One thing that hasn't got worse is the availability of specialist support for my children in school and through GP and CAMHS; because there wasn't any on offer back then and there still isn't now.

should've taken a, dare I say, Blairite, approach and made a big deal about how carefully and slowly the changes would be introduced to encourage confidence.

Maybe you're right on this. We'll know in a few days time.
But I have to say, as a floating voter who was inclined towards lib dem this time, corbyn's manifesto and demeanour have both really impressed me and I'm voting Labour for the first time since 2001.

The one thing I do know is that he's committed to abolish 'free' tuition pronto for the 50% that get to university, and that's a choice he's made instead of immediately spending that money on health, primary/secondary education/ or improving life for disabled people, and on that evidence, he doesn't get my vote.

I never liked tuition fees and am pleased about this, but it's probabaly a debate for another thread.

Any changes to the VAT status will not have a significant impact on 7% of children, just the sub-section of those 7% whose families struggle each time their chosen school puts the fees up above the rate of inflation. Few schools will pass on the full VAT %, only the marginal amount after recovering VAT on items which they cannot recover VAT on at present. Many families with children in the private sector can comfortably absorb the extra cost.

Those saying that they will tutor for the 11+, most of the country exists quite happily without grammars and the remaining ones will be in the firing line as grammars are more divisive than private education. The only people I have ever met within the state sector who are in favour of grammars are those whose children would easily pass the 11+, after all, nobody actually wants their child to receive a second rate education in a secondary modern. It's the equivalent of turkeys voting for Christmas.

I can sympathise with those of you who have been able to afford to use the private sector for a SEN education who may face disruption. Those who chose to use the private sector simply because of the horror stories they had heard about their local state school may have to make difficult choices or perhaps just some easier ones. A quick look at my former school's website lists a 30 day World Challenge trip alongside, surf trips, hockey trips, music trips etc, all of which are discretionary if paying VAT will be an issue.

My son gets a 100% bursary to an independent school. A significant number of pupils at his school are in receipt of significant means tested bursaries. If vat is charged on fees I
Imagine that a lot less children will be able to get a bursary and those struggling to pay fees will no longer be able to afford them, essentially meaning that private schools become only available to the very wealthy. I could almost stomach the plans if the money raised was to be used wisely but the proposal to use it to give fsm to all children, regardless of need, is not good use of the money IMO.
I do agree with most of corbyns manifesto but I don't agree with this proposal or the scrapping of all uni tuition fees or his stance on national defence. In comparison to the Tory manifesto the labour one is my preferred option though.

To IfYouGoDownToTheWoodsToday, I wasn't moaning about the amount of tax. I included the number as a date point to illustrate why people like us (net contributors) moving abroad might be bad for tax revenue generation in this country.

somerville, sorry to hear about your DH.

What about the point though that all these (bad) changes have been made because voters aren't facing the reality that due to the aging population putting pressure on the NHS and the cost of pensions we need to pay more tax for the same amount of (decently provided) services?

The tory response to rising NHS and pension costs is driving down costs in other areas - Corbyn's bizarre response is a massive expansion of what the state is doing.

Neither party's position makes sense but the conservative one is the least harmful one for now on the whole in my view as Corbyn is taking us into higher taxes, but promising much higher provision which I don't believe is in any way sustainable (or desirable).

My main problem with free tuition is the opportunity cost. I'd rather the money had been spent elsewhere.

We will be very pissed off at 20% increase
And dc will have to move to already stretched spare schools

Mine would have to come out. I could get behind it if he scrapped faith schools at the same time, why does he think they are fair?

They will not be going to the shit hole offered to us because we are not religious. I'd home school and pay for tutoring. Luckily I can run my business around it.

Thank you, pottered.

I don't think its voters not facing that reality, so much as the Conservatives being ideologically opposed to tax rises/bigger state. I think there's also some recent history playing into it, in that the perception is that the benefits bill got too generous under Brown (I wasn't claiming any back then and don't know if it's true or not). The coalition made some cuts that were possibly necessary, and then the Conservatives have gone on to ruthlessly exploit public opinion on benefits to make further cuts.
However, they hadn't realised perhaps that such a high proportion of the country - especially the younger generations - have now experienced services on their knees from the cuts, as it seems to be rather a shock to May that Corbyn's manifesto has been well received.
It feels like everything is crumbling - I've got a letter from the village primary school asking me to set up a direct debit for my youngest child. My child with a chronic health condition is being poorly managed, as the weekly clinic has now become monthly. My child who has anxiety and PtSD has been told she doesn't meet the threshold for help from CAMHS yet again without them even bothering to meet her even once! And the friend I made when our husbands had chemo in adjoining beds is facing only getting bereavement benefits for 18 months as he didn't die before April - Corbyn will undo these changes and she'll get proper widowed pensions allowance like I received (I remarried recently and mine rightfully stopped then) which is part of the reason I will vote for him.

I'm now back to being a higher rate tex payer and I would love to get a higher tax bill. I believe a society should be judged on how it treats its weakest members, and whoever said that at the moment the books are being balanced on the backs of the most vulnerable is completely right.

havingahorridtime

I understand where you are coming from.
it's the same at dd school, the majority receive help with fees, there are only a few who can afford the full fees.
These will go with a 20% increase, leaving those who are poorer/ poor.
Of the next cohort, there will be those who can't afford the increase due to other financial commitments, leaving those who are practiaclly fully funded.
For the poorest even a few hundred pounds may mean they can no longer afford fees.
The school will have to continue with the extremely rich people who have 38.5k in their pockets.