Labour confused and arguing among themselves over VAT on school fees

[Another76543]

This policy is getting more ridiculous by the day.

We have the shadow Attorney General who doesn’t understand the basic concept that the VAT position and charitable status are entirely separate issues. She also doesn’t understand that it’s parents and not schools who will pay the charge.

“the question is, is it appropriate in these circumstances for schools, such as in Eton or Winchester or whatever, to be seen as a charity and that, therefore, they should not be paying VAT on the huge fees”

This statement is factually incorrect on two things.

She also seems to think that any money raised will be spent on breakfast for children. The potential money has already been allocated to new teachers. They seem to think they can spend the same money twice.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/emily-thornberry-labour-institute-for-fiscal-studies-education-secretary-winchester-b2559439.html

The Party are also now fighting among themselves over this proposal.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/emily-thornberry-bridget-phillipson-labour-david-lynch-london-b2559684.html#

“sign of divisions within Sir Keir Starmer’s party over the policy”

Yay

Another vat thread

I think this one will definitely be different to all the others

Indeed. They are not even sure where the huge sums raised 👀 will go. Today I’ve seen it will go to nurseries in all of the spare school classrooms. Totally coherent policy.

I mean, if this is the only policy the Tories can criticise then I think Labour are doing ok.

Feel free to not follow the thread if it doesn’t interest you. There are plenty of people on here who are interested in this topic.

I think it’s fair to be asking questions when a senior member of the Labour Party has now come out with factual inaccuracies regarding one of their flagship policies, 3 weeks before a general election. It’s very basic stuff which they’re getting wrong.

Feel free to not follow the thread if it doesn’t interest you. There are plenty of people on here who are interested in this topic.

I think it’s fair to be asking questions when a senior member of the Labour Party has now come out with factual inaccuracies regarding one of their flagship policies, 3 weeks before a general election. It’s very basic stuff which they’re getting wrong.

Well colour me surprised that Labour thinks it can spend the same money several times. OR that they don't understand their own policies.

just another reason those that voting for Labour, need to understand it's not just about stopping the Tories it is actually putting these numb nuts in a position of power.

I call this post a feeble attempt to divert from the continuing media discussion of the fact that Rishi Sunak left the D Day celebrations early, for a non-urgent reason

@twistyizzy @EasternStandard
@Araminta1003 @misterchips

It gets more ridiculous each day

No one is defending that, and I don’t see many people claiming that the Conservatives have covered themselves in glory over the last few years. However, when the electorate are expected to vote in less a month’s time, I think it’s dreadful when Labour’s own senior figures don’t understand the very basics of their own policy and are, at best, misleading the electorate. We have more than these two parties standing as candidates. For them to be arguing among themselves before they’re even elected is ludicrous.

That was bad optics and is in the past.

The OP's thread is about an actual policy proposal that will affect people if it is implemented.

Totally different kettle of fish.

I am little wide-eyed that they haven't even bothered to make sure the relevant people have a clear understanding of the policy. That seems pretty basic election prep.

Emily Thornberry is deeply stupid. Ditto Rachael Reeves.

You're quite right. Tax and Education don't matter at all. 🙄

Sorry that should have read: “the economist” Rachael Reeves. A few years working in the treasury as a CS does not make you an economist.

It’s one of their main policies! How on earth can we trust them to run the country if they don’t even understand the very basics of their own policies?

There are so few policies to talk about. This is why this one is getting so much traction. And if the Labour Party doesn’t understand its own policy then that is a problem

You realise you can criticise a Labour policy without being a Tory don't you? Or are you saying that anyone who dares to criticise an ill thought out, confused policy must be a member of an opposition party? Doesn't bode well for democracy does it!

If you ask any state school it’s rich parents who are the ones to send kids in without breakfast, while poorer parents will give inappropriate breakfasts. So it seems Labour wants to use private school vat to fund the wealthy parents at state who can’t be bothered to feed their kids.

I can’t even get over the breakfast quotes in the article.

why are we funding breakfasts now?! wtf?!

Eh?
And how do all the state school parents know who all the rich parents are?
Have you done actual research on this or is it just 1 or 2 examples that you are aware of? Or indeed, any examples?

She also worked for the Bank of England and then HBOS. So she's not just been a CS.

Other than (a) it’s not fair, we can’t afford it, and (b) apocalyptic predictions of the state sector being flooded, what exactly are the arguments against the policy?

Because so many children are living in poverty and are arriving at school hungry. Why wouldn't we?

Well VAT is now funding:
Teachers
Leadership programme
Breakfast
Converting spare classrooms into nursery places

Except from their original figures they are now exempting any pupil with an EHCP plus state boarding schools and we aren't even at the election yet so they need to resolve:
Military families
Boarding
How they will deliver more with less

Exactly this.

By all means, you can feel very unhappy with the current Tory clowns and want them out.

But don’t think that KS/Labour is the messiah. That would be a huge mistake. Their spending is not funded. During Friday’s debate, Angela Rayner did not once refer to private VAT being a source of money for schools. And I believe that’s because she knows it’s an intricate mess of a policy that won’t raise money (and possibly never happen) - but it will win votes. She did refer to getting a lot of money off oil companies and non doms. What I don’t understand is how labour are going to be able to force very large amounts of money from those sources. It’s fanciful.

Anyway. OP is correct that Labour don’t know their arse from their elbow with this policy and it has not been thought through at all.