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”

The problem is, if you start a thread on the problems in schools and education, nobody's going to tell you to 'stop whining' and start a pile on. I guess that's the unfortunate side of how news and social media works. A bust up is so much more entertaining than people simply agreeing that there's a problem and something needs to be done about it!

“Those of us who have been campaigning against the difficult situations in some state schools would love to have got this level of attention.”

But you want these people to shift their kids into the state sector and then start complaining and fighting for more funding? That is the whole point is it not?

Except they will not - what you are going to get is the opposite. X and Y now send Z to the lovely leafy state school and both have reduced their working house to 80% and they are so much more balanced and happy and blah blah blah, they are so grateful as state education is lovely after all. And they were so misguided before etc etc - there are already voices in the press along those lines. So get ready for more!

The real deprivation in the state sector is not in every school. Plenty of good schools do rather well. That is why some posters are complaining about how non sensical this policy is.

The reason these threads keep going is because people keep posting on them to say how little they care about the topic, and there are so many more pressing problems!

I think it's much harder to notice a slow reduction in real-terms funding and worsening of conditions than a single harmful policy. Immediacy makes a difference.

But for some reason, even policies which are immediate and harmful to schools don't seem to really be shouted about.

Eg, I was fairly shocked at that sleight of hand which Boris Johnson pulled a couple of years ago, where he accepted the recommendation to increase teachers salaries, but said it had to come out of existing school budgets. That could have been a point to make a fuss at how outrageous that was - but I didn't really hear any serious arguments against it. It seemed more like a resigned shrug from the schools. I guess everyone was pretty weary of the conflict by then.

Closing the schools for covid was another missed opportunity to raise awareness of a disastrous policy. Everyone knew that was going to cause huge problems down the line with kids mental health, lost education, and lower readiness. And sure enough: that's why conditions have become so much harder for teachers in state schools now.

I'm not sure why those obvious, harmful choices weren't specifically jumped on by teachers at the time. They were talked about, but I didn't see teachers really pushing against them. I don't work in education though (although I do have several family members who are teachers) so I'm very willing to recognise that I might just not have been aware of pushback.

There was one in the Spectator the other day from a parent who was asked to buy a rugby shirt for her 7 year old costing £90. She thought 'I'm sick of this!', took her kids out, put them in the local suburban primary with lots of green space, bought them an airtex from Tesco - never looked back! I'm not sure how that helps the kids in the inner city schools who haven't had breakfast, but this is the way things are heading. Certainly at primary level.

I think even when private schools are discussed state school kids are welcoming of private school kids. At my local state primary 1/3 of kids go to a private secondary school. So all the kids are well aware of both private and state schools. The kids that heading off to different schools continue to stay in touch with their old friends and all get along. State school kids would absolutely be welcoming to private school kids just as I am sure private school kids would be to state school kids. I don’t think kids care much about social backgrounds.

@MyNameIsFine "The problem is, if you start a thread on the problems in schools and education, nobody's going to tell you to 'stop whining' and start a pile on."

You've never seen a thread that discusses problems in education then!

"That could have been a point to make a fuss at how outrageous that was - but I didn't really hear any serious arguments against it."

We did, repeatedly, unions, headteachers, LEA leaders etc. It gone none of the attention this policy has, which actually won't be damaging whilst this one will be. It certainly never made the front page of newspapers.

Teachers repeatedly get told that they have it good, that they moan etc. That they claim they work harder than anyone else.

The second quote isn't from me. However, I entirely agree with you. Any thread where pp came out with that tired old nonsense about 'teachers get long holidays' I would be 100% on the teachers' side!

For those saying that there are plenty of spaces this is from Buckinghamshire

@twistyizzy Well there are spaces.

@twistyizzy BTW I know the head at Chalfonts Community College personally, its a good school and she is a fantastic leader. Buckinghamshire still has the grammar system ( and it isn't one), probably wouldn't want to send their kids there.

I was so glad my children were in private when they closed the schools! I was wondering if I'd made the right choice before then, but the school really had our back. Just proved to me that you can't trust the state.

Should read "private school parents probably wouldn't want to send their kids there" Not for any bad reason, but because its not a grammar.

Not necessarily where you need them to be though and then the state has to fund transport.

It'll be an interesting couple of years. My thought process is, start off in the "outstanding" state and then we can always move to private - but if you start off in private, you then risk not getting a place in the school you want if you have to move to state.

Probably a good plan. Just make sure they're at the level to pass the entrance exams for the target school. It gets harder the older they get.

"Not necessarily where you need them to be though and then the state has to fund transport."

Still, there are spaces, despite the denials.

We didn't!

Surely the Buckinghamshire grammars will make plenty of spaces for private schools coming in at Sixth Form?
Can private school parents really not appeal for a very bright child before that too if they are passionate about languages or Latin or the AdMaths GCSE? I mean the appeal panels may kick in? Will the grammars have to make more spaces? It’s an anomalous situation and could be really detrimental for a child having to move out of a selective private school? Due to a sudden change in law? Which is what this is?

Hardly numerous spare places though and there may not be any in the year needed

@Aladdinzane
You mentioned upthread that you worked in private’s schools and state schools.
Why on earth did you work in private schools when you so dislike them and particularly the parents who use them?

@Defenestre · Yesterday 13:44

An emotional thread on an emotive subject. But unless I've missed something, noone seems to have addressed the actual point -
Private schools shouldn't have charitable status because they're not charities. With the exception of a few minor fringe activities here and there, they don't actually function as charities.

The ‘actual point’, as you put it, as if you’ve come up with some original idea, has been discussed at length both on here and the news - I’m surprised you haven’t seen it.
Keir Starmer said a few years ago that he would remove charitable status but then evidently he hadn’t done his homework as he then changed his mind because it would be too difficult.
Maybe you could come up with a way to remove it?

Probably because the pay is higher?

Probably because the pay is higher?

Maybe, but if I really disapproved of something and despised the customers then even higher pay wouldn’t tempt me.

You've confused per-pupil measures with aggregates. The accommodation exemption is little-used because boarding schools aren't growing, in fact demand for boarding accommodation is declining, and in any case that exemption is nothing to do with education. Average VAT will be £2.7k plus £0.1k on business rates because as the IFS and Adam Smith Institute agree the effective rate is 15%, due to the VAT reclaim you profess to understand but prove you don't.

Apart from that, you've clearly thought this education tax through about as well as Bridget Phillipson and Emily Thornberry.