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?

Potterered

Well if you aren't moaning about taxes, why are you thinking of moving abroad?

that's randmon IfYoGoDown I have previously lived aboard - I'm not planning on relocating at this point...

Somerville I think this is about unpalatable choices - the conservatives are losing ground because of daring to try and get wealthier pensioners to pay more to their care. The aging population is the big driver in future affordability.

Corbyn is promising a whole slew of state expansion. In reality I want neither tories nor state expansion under Corbyn.

I would just like a moderate center left to fund existing provision properly. That is not on the table.

also it's not just about a 20% rise - as I said, if you're in the bracket of being a 'few' in any way, we can anticipate many rises to make us pay for Corbyn's policies.

I'm not against the current income tax rise, but I don't for one second believe that this is adequate to fund Corbyn's policies now or in the future, he has no record of competence in anything in which to put my faith.

My post isn't random, it is referring to your earlier post where you spoke about moving to Monaco.

Eh? That wasn't me. I've never been to Monaco. Similar user name, another poster? I'm not glamorous enough for Monaco!

Monaco isn't actually very nice unless you have a yacht, a helicopter and are a gambler. You aren't missing out, pottered! Monaco is soulless.

yeah it has never appealed - hate gambling :) personally i'm hoping a tory victory gives the labour party the kick up the bottom as it did in 1992 to make the necessary compromises to come back to the sensible centre and time to think through their policies and modify/ditch the worst ones...

i partly think brexit could make this a good election to lose too, it's a poisoned chalice that will cause hardship, there's no glory to be had there for any party.

All schools should be able to enjoy smaller class sizes, autonomy over their curriculum and the perks that naturally follow such as more time for sports, arts and differentiation. And SEN children should have access to appropriate schooling and support.

Cool, then you'll happily pay more taxes to make that happen then.

to make the necessary compromises to come back to the sensible centre

Labour is a left wing party, not a centrist one.

it certainly is trying to turn the clock back to the 1970s, yes, if that's what you mean by left.

DH & I were talking about this last night. A 20% increase in school fees + increased corporation tax (DH is a small business owner) + potential increase in council tax through Labour's Land Value Tax would pretty much push us over the edge. Not least because DH is also part-funding social care for his elderly mother at the moment.

Likely outcomes would be:

• DS2 likely to go to State 6th form instead of staying on at independent
• DH will need to let go of some permanent staff in his firm and replace with contract since some of his work is largely seasonal
• DH will start claiming more benefits for his mother's care (e.g. she hasn't been claiming Attendance Allowance) and will need to get social care costs covered by council (which is possible since his mother has assets of less than £23k)
• will probably have to cut or cancel our lovely cleaner's hours ( she has been with our family for 8 years)
• won't spend any ad hoc money on gardening / decorating/basic DIY etc - will do it ourselves

My next door neighbour is very worried as her twin boys are just starting GCSE courses on bursary places at the independent school and things are already really tight for them at the moment.

As the third or fourth poster said....I'd be more concerned about the appalling funding in state schools which mean children with additional needs are not being supported properly.

No raises would be immediate so no knee jerk reactions needed.

It's all academic anyway because TM is still likely to be PM on Friday ...unfortunately.

On the upside, Jng1, your DS2 wouldn't have to pay tuition fees at university, once he finished at sixth form. So this policy might be net positive for your family.

I'm trying to find a polite way to say that not being able to afford to pay other people to do
your cleaning gardening and decorating, and having a relative claim the benefits they're entitled to, aren't exactly a hard luck story.

I have emailed our MP to ask about future funding for the schools that attract assisted places.

If the worst comes to the worst I'll do what the David Walliams character did, sell shoes and go on the game

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 oils.

that is so judgemental. For years I was a primary school governor, and worked carefully with the school to improve teaching. Now my DS is at our local secondary and it is grim. As parents we are allowed to email the school and get very little response. Every day my child comes home unhappy. The secondary is oversubscribed and underfunded. DS begged us to send him to a private school next autumn and we will do so with great difficulty (unless the 20% tax happens, then we won't). I resent what the Tories have done to our school systems. If I thought taxing private school would provide the money to fix education I'd get right behind this tax. This tax won't make a dent, and won't fix things for the other 93%. There is no evidence that all kids benefit from FSM or that school kitchens (especially secondary) could even cope. It would be a stupid way to spend money. My kids don't need free school meals. They need teachers with great flexibility and more time . I'd love a discussion about how to improve schools, but giving FSM to everyone is trivial.

I don't like Corbyn but would rather Labour win than Tories.

Yes, in the grand scheme of things not being able to afford to pay for help - I think the point is that rich feckers like us not being able to afford help IS a hard luck story for the people receiving the hours cuts.

I wouldn't bank on free tuition if your dc are at univ more than 5 years in the future.

You know what might've made a dent? £11.2bn being spent on free tuition if it had gone to benefit all at primary and secondary...

Somerville - true, about uni tuition fees, but regarding your other point -
as others have said, lots of people take a pride in their jobs, be it cleaning, gardening or decorating. I feel sorry that their livelihoods are likely to be diminished by Labour policies which tax the middle income groups who employ these trades. This is what most people just don't seem to understand - if you tax the so-called 'top' too much it inevitably impacts on the lower end of the labour market.

Our family has always taken the view that benefits are a safety net, and not something to be claimed as a matter of course just because you are 'entitled'. That's why I've always been opposed to things such as universal free school meals and we'd have been happy to pay our own university fees for DS2, but sure, if Labour decide to start taxing us more, then we'll need to review that stance.
We know lots of people who are obviously paying their taxes for education, health and social care, but not using state-run services at the moment. If tax rates were to start rising disproportionately under a future Labour government you can be sure that they would start flooding back into the state sector...

Assuming that the vat is ring fenced for school meals, I'm not sure how more demand on the state system (from those who cannot afford the increase) is going to mean any more money for schools themselves. and if those who cannot afford the increase also cut hours in work, the tax take will go down but the cost to the state up. I cannot see how this policy is going to help create a level playing field. It'll just be the super rich who can afford it, so a smaller minority who get the advantages. If JC had the courage of his convictions that private schools are so undesirable from a social mobility perspective, surely he should have a manifesto saying he will shut them down.

I understand the point you are making Jng but I have never seen any evidence that trickle down economics really works.

Self-employed jobs like cleaning, gardening and decorating are notorious for low wages and zero job security. It means, like with low paid jobs in industry, that the state is left picking up the pieces - giving tax credits to boost the individuals income, and further benefits for them to fall back on when ill health or old age inevitably come along.
I favour a higher minimum wage that means that businesses/wealthy individuals have to actually pay a living wage for the work they want doing, rather than sponging off to the state to have it subsidised.

BTW this isn't a dig - maybe you pay people who do self employed work for you a living wage. But most don't.

zero hours contracts have always tacitly existed - I don't know how it helps my babysitters (who get £10ph, fwiw) if the income tax rise means I can't afford to hire them to go out with my dh once a month. Or the cleaner I've just taken on 2 x a month who will lose £160 per month.

Yes it's nicer if people have properly contracted jobs for as many hours as they want to do but I don't see how Corbyn's policies add up to anything other than job losses and hours cuts.

Pottered I'm so sorry, I did confuse you with another poster who was talking about the family tax burden and was thinking of moving to Monaco.

Apologies again.

No worries, it gave me a laugh about the idea of us fleeing to Monaco - now I've been to the British virgin isles, that's a beautiful tax haven - not that we will be going!

There seems to be a widespread assumption that if JC gets in, he'll suddenly have lots of money to spend on schools. All that matters is the will to do it.

The fact is that if JC can't raise the revenues he currently predicts by raising taxes - and history is not on his side on that one - and he has a negative impact on the economy by doing so, there will be less money for schools and the NHS in the long run. That's why I can't support him, not because I'm some old meany-pants Tory (I'm not a Tory!) who wants to see money drained away from the state sector.

If this debate shows anything, it's that his assumption that private school parents will simply suck up the extra cost is erroneous, which puts his sums in jeopardy. That means borrowing has to go up to meet his commitments, which may give us a few years of good times but will mean the same 'tough choices' later in the day.

I would also add that I don't think the decision to send your kid to a private school is fundamentally different to the decision to pay extra for your house to be near a good state school. There is considerable self-selection in education wherever you go. Private schools are simply the easy target.

I've done a quick straw poll amongst my close school parent friends. Most have more than one child at the school. One family has an only child.

3 families said they simply couldn't afford another 20 percent and that they would have to seriously reconsider sending their children to the school. Two of these families have 3 DC.

2 families (mine included) have said that they would cope but spending on other things would have to give.

2 families have said they would be annoyed at such a significant change but it wouldn't affect the schooling decision for them. One of these families only has one child and also has assistance with fees from grandparents. The other family is loaded.