Corbyn, vat, private schools

[NoisingUpNissan]

So... Just worried about corbyn and private schools.

I'm naturally labour but couldn't vote for him with this.

We have two kids in prep, couldn't really afford any extra cash. As it stands we have a leaking bathroom (no bath for a year) and old unreliable shitty car, certainly not entitled or priveledged people. Not that it should matter.

Very annoyed as they are only there because ASD and they had 33 kids in their classes!

So, just wondering... Does anybody think this is a real risk?

I don't care if I come across as being all out for myself, I'm all out for my kids. My son is just too autistic to deal with a big class size and needs the extra work as he's v bright.

I seriously wouldn't worry.
I have always voted Labour. All they had to do to gain power was not fuck it up and come up with a manifesto which would appeal to those broadly centre/left of centre. But of course they have fucked up

I've never voted Labour in my life, but I agree with you @AJPTaylor. Labour has only been electable in the past 40 years when it moved to the left of centre and broadened its appeal, so that middle class people felt safe voting for it. The kind of Old Labour hard left leaders like Kinnock and Corbyn are anathema to most people in this country who don't want to live in a socialist state whose leaders talk about 'redistributing wealth'. Statements like that ARE straight from the Communist manual and will strike fear into the hearts of any moderate voters out there.

I'd worry about this a lot more if I thought there was a snowball's chance in hell of Labour winning an election, tbh. Might even be a good thing to force them to work out in detail what's possible (and what's not).

Even if we get a Labour government I doubt anything will happen in time to affect my own DC. For my DC's DC (if any) this will be one factor that affects whether they settle in the UK or elsewhere (there's more than one way abolition would damage the UK economy).

Looking back, if abolition had happened in time to affect us, my DC would have gone to the excellent state school on our doorstep, thereby pushing out some other family's DC. It wouldn't have been as good for them (especially for one DS's SEN) but it would have been OK. Perhaps I would have given up work to have time to organise any enrichment/tutoring/trips that would give my DC the very best education I could manage (that would still have been my top priority and given our resources they would still have been very privileged, but it would be harder to get universities to discriminate against them on that basis), perhaps we'd have had more money for holidays, or some combination. Less tax for the state, but I'd enjoy some extra leisure time and/or some extra holidays.

Before anyone suggests I could have used my skills to improve our already-excellent local state school: hardly, it has masses of highly skilled and engaged parents already, so no need for me. Naturally I also wouldn't be paying to it any of the money I spend on school fees, and even if I did, that wouldn't help the poorer schools that actually need more money.

Does this really sound like a good idea? Why?

*...Germany dont have private schools and do very well"

That's nonsense. Germany not only has private schools but the right to establish private schools is written into the Constitution (Basic Law). It's almost as if there is something in their history that has made them wary of allowing a situation where only the state can educate young minds.

And can we please declare a moratorium on the expression “politics of envy”?

Nope - the people who came up with this policy are the epitome of spiteful, envious class warriors.

“Nope - the people who came up with this policy are the epitome of spiteful, envious class warriors.“

I’m pretty sure they could all afford private education for their children if they wanted it. As could I- before you raise the point! Some people have principles. People on the right, with their “i’m all right, Jack. Devil take the hindmost” mindset seem to find that hard to understand.

What was that nonsense you used to say about this not being Labour policy and there being no chance they would adopt it? Totally wrong about that, weren’t you?

I bet your kids aren't at a failing school though BertrandRussell. Just because you choose to state educate doesn't make you holier than thou. Round here (a wealthy part of the SE of England), there are the people who educate privately and there are the people who spend the same amount of money buying a house safely within the catchment of an excellent state school. Or they drag their DC to church for a few months to ensure a place at an outstanding CofE school. Are they more your type, those ones who say 'Oh I don't believe in private school', but are happy to buy privilege in other ways?

If I did say it wasn’t Labour Party policy it was because I didn’t think they’d have the courage to do it. Fair play to them for proving me wrong. It still won’t happen, i’m sad to say. But it might result in some change in the ubiquitous tax position of private schools so there is some hope.

I think it was the right to buy for private tenants I kept saying wasn’t in the manifesto.......

How many thousand pounds a year and how many hours a week do you donate to state schools, Bertrand, not counting taxation, your job, or anything solely or mostly for your own DC's benefit? Inspire us, why don't you?

“I bet your kids aren't at a failing school though BertrandRussell. Just because you choose to state educate doesn't make you holier than thou.”
Not failing, no. But one of them went to a school that Mumsnetters would describe as “failing” by its exam results!

“How many thousand pounds a year and how many hours a week do you donate to state schools, Bertrand,“

Not sure what you mean, or why it’s important. But I am a governor at one school at the moment- it was two until recently. And I volunteer about 6 hours a week and have done for some years. You?

Surely this calls out Corbyn's position as being pro-brexit? So basically SEN kids can fuck off as can Jews and women. Nice. No thanks. We have always been labour voters but never again while Corbyn is around. Why not focus on funding state schools better? Why not focus on proper SEN provision for all? Because they don't give a fuck. But they will never get in power like this. They're alienating too many people. Fools. The Tories could not fuck this up harder and Labour cannot capitalise on the situation because they come out with ludicrous policies like this one.

The point I'm making is that abolishing private schools will definitely NOT abolish privilege - the kind of people who are prepared to pay for education (on top of paying higher rate taxes - so effectively paying twice), aren't going to just enrol their DC in the local state school. They will just buy privilege in other ways, thus displacing other DC whose parents don't have that option. Either that, or they'll just leave the country (which is what we'd probably do).

So no money then, and less than say 8 hours a week, even though you have more than one DC and are the same kind of parent this policy is supposed to force into state schools to improve them. It's relevant because "those parents will bring money and influence to bear to improve state schools" is the only argument anyone ever has about how abolishing private schools will improve anyone's education. No, I don't provide state schools with either money or time and I probably still wouldn't if my DC went there - like you, I might do something minimal if it suited me. Hence "politics of envy": this is a policy that's all about making some people's lot worse, not about improving anything for anyone.

But one of them went to a school that Mumsnetters would describe as “failing” by its exam results!

While you could afford to provide a much better education? I’ve said it before in these debates, but that’s such a cruel thing to do - let alone boast about!

Of course, there’s “failing” as in not getting a straight run of A stars, and failing like good old “2 Es” Corbyn. I’m guessing we’re not talking about his level of success!

I’m in Scotland so I have no idea if this will impact us or not with education being devolved, but I can’t see abolishing private schools having much impact on privilege. We would have instead moved to the catchment of one of the top state schools They would have still had any extra curricular opportunities they wanted, extensive travel, parents who can give good advice and direction for a path towards well paying professional jobs, house deposit when needed etc. No, they wouldn’t be in an environment which I think, for DS in particular, is perfect for them, but they’d still be every bit as privileged in every other way.

Would this narrow the gap between them and the other students in their hypothetical state school? Possibly, I suppose, but I’m not really seeing it.

What about the staff other than the teachers employed by the school- the admin staff, catering staff, librarians, groundskeepers, janitorial staff? How easily will they find alternative employment or are they just collateral damage?

It's all a f*cking smoke screen as they don't want to address the real problems in our state schools.

Is it indefensible for all charities to charge for their services, or only educational charities?

Charities I can think of which charge for their services:
NCT
Relate
Some residential care homes - either for elderly or for disabled
Many theatres and arts organisations including Opera Houses
Abortion services providers like Marie Stopes will charge for abortions for those who don't qualify for NHS treatments yet are still a charity.
The National Trust.
That's just the few I can think of without going through a list.

There are 160,000 charities in the UK. Vast numbers of them make charges for the services they offer. In many cases those charges will exclude people who can't afford the charges. There is no requirements in charity law for services to be offered on a free or "needs blind" (ie only pay if you can afford it) basis. Only that no profits are extracted.

If this is OK for non-school charities but not OK for schools, why?

It costs money to do things. You can either have them paid for by the state via taxes, or bought from private enterprises making a profit, or bought from charities making no profit.

Services paid for by the state will always need to be subject to a balancing act pitting quality of services against the general tax burden. Some people are richer than others and may want to opt for something better than the state is willing to fund, depending on what their priorities are this may be in the area of health, social care, personal security, education, sports and fitness, arts and leisure, pensions etc. In all these arenas there is a basic state provision from taxation and a myriad of paid-for options you can opt for if you can afford it, some offered by profit-making entities and some by non-profit-making charities. I do not see why education should be particularly singled out as something where it is wrong to want more than the basic state provision.

I would be particularly interested in a response from @BertrandRussell to my above post.

@YobaOljazUwaque makes an excellent point and I imagine the legal challenge would in part include what you've laid out. This could have some fairly serious unintended consequences for all charities.

Or even some arguably educational charities. National Youth Orchestras Scotland charge for participation and it can be quite pricey-£700ish-£1000ish pa. Like private schools, they offer bursaries, but understandably, funds are limited. Should they be banned from charging fees to participants ?

“I do not see why education should be particularly singled out as something where it is wrong to want more than the basic state provision.“
If you want more than the state provision, then you pay for it. You do not expect other people to contribute to it.

“While you could afford to provide a much better education? I’ve said it before in these debates, but that’s such a cruel thing to do - let alone boast about!”
Why is it cruel? He got the same grades he would have for in any other school.

“like you, I might do something minimal if it suited me”

Hmm. Significantly more than a day a week doesn’t seem “minimal” to me!