Is anyone else worried about the effect of rising private school fees on state schools?

[BabyIcecream]

Where I live there already aren't enough school places. Three big state secondary's, one is catholic, they are all over subscribed and bursting at the seams using old buildings with not enough funding.

Ive seen reports that at some private schools upto a third of pupils might leave if the fees go up due to VAT.

I'm worried about all these extra pupils needing places, DS already finds his school overcrowded and whilst I don't agree with private education putting extra pupils into the state system is just going to further disadvantage our children.

Unless money raised by increasing private schools costs is going to be used to fund state education? Does anyone know?

What are these 'significant benefits'?

Absolutely, we already have a plan for when we finish paying school fees in seven years time. All the additonal disposable income will be paid off the mortgage or put into my pension. If we take DS2 out of his private school earlier, we’ll do that earlier. No extra money will be spent on VATable goods or services. I’ve bought one pair of shoes for myself this year and one new dress. I don’t have extravagant tastes!

% of students in private education by decades:
1960's = 8.0
1970's = 5.7
1980's = 7.5
1990's = 6.9
2000's = 7.2
2010's = 6.9
2020's = 7.0

I would say very much affected by the economy!

@OhCrumbsWhereNow c.£1.7bn for state education for a start....

they've assumed that people who leave will spend the money on VATable goods instead

Nope - as pp have said it is far more likely to be spent on moving into a sought after school catchment (not VATable, maybe some increased stamp duty collected, but no extra if they would’ve moved house anyway at some point) or on tutoring (VAT free).

And absolutely, those parents who stay will cut back elsewhere- on luxuries, which are VATable.

@CurlewKate but it won't go directly to education, Labour haven't said that they will ring fence it so it just goes straight into the general taxation pot.
1.7 billion won't even cover the concrete issue let alone pay for more teachers as there are bigger issues causing attrition rate: Ofsted, pressure from SLT, behaviour of children in classrooms, lack of support from parents etc. Just chucking money at an advertising campaign won't guarantee an increase in recruitment.
1.7billion is only 1.5-2% of the education budget and spread between the 100s of 1000s of schools it will be meaningless.
There is also no guarantee that it will even achieve 1.7 billion. I have been reading several sources today who say it will be considerably less.

Except that it won’t raise £1.7bn as some pupils will transfer to state schools at a cost of £7k per pupil per year. Then there’s the potential capital costs of creating extra school places - not every state school will have capacity for extra students even with falling birth rates. Then there’s reduced VAT collection from private school parents who choose to stay and cut back on non-essential goods and services. Then there’s the reduced income tax receipts from parents who decide to give up work or reduce their hours….

It was suggested in a previous post that roughly 700,000 students attend independent schools. 10% of them is 70,000. Are you suggesting that there are 200,000 state schools?

Having looked at the last set of accounts filed by the school we are considering, they pay out just over £2million per year on bursaries and scholarships. Now I don’t know obviously how that is spread around, as some pupils will be part-funded and others in full, but even assuming that those figures represent full scholarships only, that would still account for 10-15% of the pupils at the school (1,000-ish aged 4 to 18) if you take an average on the yearly fees (these obviously rise as the children get older).

The school has a waiting list every year at Y4, Y7 and Y9 intake so the school would not suffer by scrapping the bursaries/scholarships, in fact they’d make money with the places taken by students paying full fees.

There is absolutely no guarantee that the money raised in doing this would even be spent on Education. I’ve heard several different Labour shadow ministers talking about the myriad of things it could be spent on, from the NHS to green projects, to transport infrastructure. It’s the loaves and the fishes all over again!

@CaveMum it is also the 350 million for NHS pledge with Brexit all over again!

That was my error @user149799568 - apologies.

I quoted that there will be 700,000 fewer state school pupils by 2030 - more than currently in private education. I didn't mean to suggest there are 700,000 private school pupils.

For clarity there were 581, 427 children in independent schooling & 9 million in state school in 2022. I read that in the Times.

perkynuts

I live in a very affluent area. Think SE picture postcard town, with a direct rail link to the city of London. Its population is full of bankers and lawyers. There are only 250 kids in my prep school, and there are 4 other state junior schools and 3 senior schools with 2,000 kids each in the surrounding area.

Quite a few of my friends are married to men who work in the city of London. They live in 1m pound + houses, drive round in Range Rovers and go on holiday 3 times a year. All their DC go to the local state school, and the local religious school. They do this out of principle, or they don't believe in private schools. Not everyone does. Many people are against private, but have 2 or 3 properties rented out.

These parents have all had their DC bullied, drug problems, teacher strikes during exams etc. etc. These articulate, educated people haven't had much luck when it comes to improving the standards of our local state school. It isn't just a handful, it is a lot of people like this at this school.

One of my friends DC is a very good athlete and academic, and he is always getting bullied by others who see him as a threat and want to bring him down a peg or two. Again, hardly raising standards is he? Rather than raising standards, the others would rather see him fail.

I take it you are aware of the housing conditions of migrants to Singapore?

In my experience the people crying out against the 11 plus system are the people who realise they are unable to manipulate their way in. This is either through turning 'religious' or buying into the required postcode. In Kent/Medway where there is still a full 11 plus system there are many/able children that have been given the opportunity to have an education that meets their needs. My brother works in a grammar school and there are children from all walks of life not just those that would normally be found around leafy comps.
Why as previous posters have mentioned is there a race to the bottom? Why not have different schools like in Europe that cater for different children? There you have a choice of a more academic school (similar to grammar), secondary modern type schools and technical schools. Surely this would provide a better system. Just like we used to have here before the lefties decided they wanted to abolish these for a one side must fit all comprehensive that they can 'buy' their way in through postcode. In neighbouring East & West Sussex where there is no 11 plus. You still have good comps/bad comps with corresponding problems and results. The good comps being near the more buy your way in 'expensive' housing and the bad comps in more deprived areas of the county. I'm afraid getting rid of 11 plus won't solve these problems.

And start building some proper houses Singapore style for all.

Singaporeans mostly live in small government flats which are decorated very basically. They are good because they are kept nice, have some facilities and shops nearby. They are cheap, and they can buy them. Only seriously loaded ones buy houses.

I doubt very much Brits will all want to live in flats.

You are forgetting the dormitories that economic migrants have to live in, which I suppose is also part of the proposal.

We used to live in a flat abroad. It was brilliant. Brilliant soundproofing, well built, loads of well planned storage cupboards built in, clean and well kept communal areas, and a well kept and safe co.munal garden and play area.
There is nothing wrong with flats. The issue is the typical British flat.

But they won't be spread over the UK will they? There'll be influxes into state schools that are close to the private schools. You're hardly going to be able to send Marcus from a London private school to a crap comp in Morecambe are you?

Well said. Trouble with the UK, is that lots of people are ridden with envy, so they want everyone down to the same low level for the sake of equality. Perhaps parents in other countries where they have different types of school are less blinkered and more open minded??

The trouble with British flats is that there isn't enough money to be made from them by the Tory party donors who determine planning policy.

The trouble with British flats is that there isn't enough money to be made from them by the Tory party donors who determine planning policy

I’ve seen lots of new flats being built. I take a train from Paddington to the West Country and on the way out of London there are huge recently built tower blocks. Also on the outskirts of Reading, and beside Newbury racecourse there must be 40 or 50 acres covered in blocks of flats. That’s just what I can see from the train.
In Nine Elms there are vast developments (not welcomed by everyone in the area) so some developers are building them.

Is planning policy in London determined by the Tory party donors? Isn't that a matter for the councils and for GLA?

Anyway, there are mushrooming everywhere.

Of course there are

Loads here near me in London including affordable type

Councils apply planning policy as it is set out by the government, which is why the Tory donors are so keen to pay for their ministers.