Private school fees

[studentandparent]

Labour will scrap charitable status on private school fees when next in Government. Anyone got any idea how much this will increase fees?

private Schools seem to fit the criteria for charitable status just as well or more than other ‘charities’. So how are they going to remove the status? Sounds like a disaster to me and it won’t affect the elite schools where the influential go anyway.
it’s almost like labour don’t want people to vote for them!

Most charities you do not have to pay for their services. Where you do they have to do a significant amount of work so those who can't pay can access it. This is often through schools programmes, work with community groups, etc.

But my point is it shouldn't be allowed. If schools were allocated by lottery, and there was a chance you'd get a "bad" one, a lot more people would be interested in improving all schools.

I'm well aware in some areas of the country it is a reality.

That's why I said "if that were changed".
I'm not convinced it would have that much an impact to be honest. Tinkering with private schools and expecting engaged education-valuing parents in the state system to sacrifice their own children's education in pursuit of mythical fairness isn't going to solve anything because so many of the issues played out in schools aren't caused by schools.

Those with high amounts of wealth are always able to use their money to avoid the issues that affect the rest of us. So then you're left with bussing children all over the place in an attempt to create fairness whilst doing nothing about the much more pressing issues that affect why some children do better than others

Having spent many years being quite opposed to private schools, I've come to the conclusion that it's a red herring.

I'd sooner give up work, downsize and home educate than send my DC to some schools in my area.

I’d say there’s a big difference between someone who has a phd and specifically chooses a job role as a teacher and an academic who is expected to teach as part of their role or is called upon by colleagues to explain concepts. Many job roles are expected to teach others because of the academic qualifications or experience of the person but that person hasn’t actually chosen to teach and doesn’t necessarily have much motivation to do so. Eg a number of university professors/ phd students etc are primarily there to do research, they can’t do that without some teaching commitment

@LolaSmiles If that is true then the parents will be prepared to make more financial sacrifices to pay increased fees.

I cannot believe that anyone objects to this policy apart from selfish rich people who want to save a few pounds they can easily afford. In any case, anyone who sends their kids to a private school should be ashamed of themselves.

It's created a two tier system and those who have power and influence won't do a damn thing about improving the state system because their kids are being well looked after, thank you very much. The same applies to private health. Only by providing a universal education and health system for all bar none will there be any incentive to fix the problems beyond the wit of this incompetent Tory government. At least Labour have a plan to sort this mess out, starting with VAT on private school fees, the money from which will be used to employ 6,000 additional teachers.

How do you know the selfish rich people can 'easily' afford a 20% increase. It's not a 'few' pounds. Ds' fees are £2k a month so an extra £400 a month isn't a few.

Obviously the Uber wealthy can but not everyone that uses private schools can.

Most parents I know pay the fees out of earnings. It's a big cost every month. If 20% is added we could probably manage it for one but 2 would seriously hurt.

As some one up said if private schools are going the only fair way to allocate state school places is a lottery system, scrapping faith and grammar schools.

@Cazbo55 I am neither rich nor selfish and like many parents at my DC’s private school, I have one child in private and another in a state school. We don’t send our kids to private school because we think we are better the than other people or because it is some kind of status symbol. There is no endless pot of money (I wish). We budgeted and saved. Then redundancy, then COVID and then cost of living crisis hit. There are plenty more like us. This policy is not going to create loads of extra revenue to be spent in state schools and it may make things worse for some.

I said nothing about selfishness, those are your words.
I have seen the stats. Nearly all private pupils have parents who are in the top 10% of earners. So they have enough money for an increase in fees if they prioritise their spending. They may not be able to afford the big house and holidays and pay fees, but their choice what they spend their money on.

And redundancy and failing businesses happen to everyone, including people with children in private schools. This is not new however sad it is for the family.

@Cazbo55 why should we be ashamed of sending our children private?

@Cazbo55 At least Labour have a plan to sort this mess out, starting with VAT on private school fees, the money from which will be used to employ 6,000 additional teachers

where are those teachers going to come from?! ITT recruitment is no where near meeting it’s targets. In my subject it hit 36% of it’s recruitment target this academic year. I keep saying it, but no one seems to hear. This means those new teachers will have their pick of jobs - top state schools, independents. Sod all need to be working in even an average school (which most of our children attend), let alone one that is RI or SM. The gap will widen even further whilst you’re dazzled by 6,000 extra vacancies that can’t be filled. Not to mention potentially considerably more competition for places at your best local schools as some parents are forced to opt out of private which will impact your children’s ability to get in. Smoke and mirrors. Nothing but smoke and mirrors.

anyone who sends their kids to a private school should be ashamed of themselves

why? Because they can afford something you can’t?

@Cazbo55 is just being goady for reasons of his/her own and is probably best ignored.

anyone who sends their kids to a private school should be ashamed of themselves

DS2 goes to a private school because we had a choice of the grammar/upper school system in an incredibly expensive area or private vs really-not-great comp in a much much cheaper area. We chose the private schooling in a cheaper area because it worked out a lot cheaper than buying a modest house in prime home counties commuter belt territory. Should we also be ashamed of ourselves if we'd bought a large house in a very expensive area and got our son a grammar education for free?

DS1 <whispers> has his place at a specialist independent school fully funded by our LA. Should I also be ashamed that he has multiple complex disabilities which can't be met in the state system?

@Cazbo55 as has been explained a million times already, this policy is very unlikely to generate any money. It is actually likely to cost the government. Children who can no longer afford to be educated in the private system will need to be educated in the state system at a cost of 7k a year.

I am a total lefty, however, I am not in the slightest ashamed of sending mine to private. I don't think mine would have thrived in the state system so I chose a school where I believed they would thrive.
The same amount if vitriol isn't hurled at parents who choose to opt out of the state system by homeschooling. So it isn't the opting out of the state system people object to, it is the buying of a service- a private school education. However plenty of parents who use state schools use their money to buy their child the services of private tutors, sports lessons, dance lessons and music lessons and this isn't condemned despite these services also being out of reach of the most disadvantaged.

At least Labour have a plan to sort this mess out, starting with VAT on private school fees, the money from which will be used to employ 6,000 additional teachers
That's great, but there's currently groups with over 90,000 teachers thinking of leaving teaching or have left. 50% of teachers leave within 5 years of qualifying.A lot of experienced teachers are being bullied out or are choosing to leave because they can do other things without the additional stress and high workload. I've known state school departments where nobody has more than 3 years experience, including the head of department. Where are 6,000 more teachers going to come from when most subjects aren't meeting their initial teacher training entry targets?

People aren't selfish for making whatever they feel is the right choice for their children and the best choice they can with whatever resources they have.

On the upside if private schools are effectively abolished I'll be able to buy a lovely big house in the best catchment area. I'll spend the money on holidays and tutoring and tbh will buy a 2nd property for the children.

On the downside, we'll be taking a place from a child whose parents can't afford the catchment.

Now I've listed out the pros and cons maybe we are mad after all........

The National Trust springs to mind. We have to pay if we want to visit any of their properties so they are not really any different - only those that can afford to pay can benefit from their charitable works.

Same!

Agree with @LolaSmiles and @Blankscreen

The National Trust aims to safeguard historic houses and places of national beauty for the nation. Loads of its open spaces are free to access.

@Unicorn1919 A fairer comparison would be if every private school let the public have free access to their grounds.

BoardingSchoolMater? Bit of a giveaway, isn't it?
I made no secret of who I support politically. 7% of the school population go to private schools and yet 65% of Sunak's cabinet were privately educated. 70% of the top military are privately educated and about a quarter of FTSE100 CEOs.

So are children of rich people cleverer that everyone else or could there be some other reason, I wonder?

This parallel private/state school system creates social divisiveness offering a privileged system for the better-off and a ‘get what’s left one’ for the rest of us. It gives them disproportionate access of privately educated pupils to Oxford and Cambridge and then to the top jobs in society.

The so-called charitable work amounts to the dispersal of bursaries largely to the cash-strapped middle class and the numerous dodgy tax schemes enjoyed by both private school parents and the schools themselves that amount to large state subsidies to the most privileged in society.

We need to take a leaf out of Finland’s book at abolish private schools completely. When they did the achievement gap between the richest and poorest narrowed. In my view this policy is too soft and we should follow Finland’s example and abolish fee paying schools, starting with Eton.

I do think people buying into private education should be ashamed of themselves because they are perpetuating this gross inequality. Maybe you never gave it a second thought, but you should.

I cannot think of a subject more important than the future of my children - our children. Suggesting my opinions are best ignored whilst you preserve this colonial relic is no more than I expect from the defenders of privilege. Come and debate the matter like a grown up, BoardingSchoolapologist, but how dare you suggest that I’m being pointlessly provocative.

That doesn't answer Catkins question. Subsidising private school places and the charitable status are unrelated, if you think they are please explain (not being charged Vat is not related to the charitable status - my kids school doesn't have charitable status and we aren't charged VAT).

I do think people buying into private education should be ashamed of themselves because they are perpetuating this gross inequality. Maybe you never gave it a second thought, but you should
Just to clarify you genuinely believe that parents should look at the current system as it is and actively make decisions that are not in their children's best interests?
You actually think that parents should send their children to schools that will not educate their children appropriately, or that have long standing issues of terrible school culture and poor behaviour despite having the ability to offer their child a safe and calm learning environment, and if they don't do that they should be ashamed?

If so that's absolutely all kinds of messed up.

I don't think private schools should have to exist and have a whole load of issues with the way top private schools dominate many areas of public life, but saying run of the mill parents should be ashamed if they don't sacrifice their children at the altar of ideology is bizarre.

Can you imagine the safeguarding implications of this ?