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”

Oops sorry, a quick google shows Princeton too.

@user149799568

That's actually very good that they don't include the family home, some do.

Who said “they’ll all get scholarships”? There are scholarships available, and it’s another reason in a long list why students might start looking internationally at universities. It’s not unusual for 20% of private school pupils to be on bursaries, so they may well qualify even if some financial help is means tested. Introducing a system akin to the one you suggested (charging private pupils international fees for UK university) is likely to give high achieving students an extra push.

@Another76543 which schools that you know of have 20% of pupils on bursaries?

The problem with some Labour policies is that they consider them to be great as long as they don’t affect them or their families.

Labour abolished the majority of grammar schools. Keir Starmer came from a left-wing family but attended one of the remaining ones that subsequently went private rather than go comprehensive and he continued to attend for free afterwards. Ed Balls’ left-wing father was instrumental in the closing of grammar schools in their county and then sent his sons to private school.

VAT - I can’t imagine that Keir Starmer and other top Labour politicians would consider sending their children to a state school like our local catchment secondary, which lurches between “requires improvement” and “inadequate” but where there is no local alternative due to the high birth rate years currently passing through secondary.

I come from a working-class background and would never vote Tory, not least because my prominent Tory MP is hideous, but I find Labour hypocrisy difficult to stomach and am really not sure who to vote for right now.

"Who said “they’ll all get scholarships”?

This is something I've heard, and repeatedly here the statment was made that the Ivies are very generous with scholarships. They really aren't easy to come by.

"Introducing a system akin to the one you suggested (charging private pupils international fees for UK university) is likely to give high achieving students an extra push."

As I said it would have unintended consequences, but could also have benefits.

I haven't followed the scene that carefully, but wikipedia claim that Princeton is also currently need-blind for international students, and Brown have announced that they will get there in 2029. They need to keep up with the Jones. It's likely that Penn, Columbia and Cornell will have more trouble rustling up the resources, though.

The four (eventually five) Ivies on the list plus MIT still make up most of wikipedia's list, so I will stand by my claim that the Ivies are much more likely to offer this than the tier below. And I can't seriously consider Minerva, whatever that is, to be in the tier below.

😂proportion of brightest middle class students who tend to become high tax contributors leaving the county is unintended consequence which is worth having for the greater good

But you don't do that.

I am one of those middle-class engaged parents. My time is spent organising DD's extensive extra-curricular classes and endlessly plaguing the SEN department to actually provide her with some help.

My money goes on paying for extra-curricular and tutoring for my child to fill in the gap between what school provides and what private vocational schools would offer.

City of London (it's about 40% actually)
St Pauls - 10% on 100%+ bursaries (means uniform, trips, parents tickets etc included), more on partial bursaries
The list is really long

"Labour abolished the majority of grammar schools."

Wasn't that under Heath's government with Thatcher as minister? I'm sure I've read that somewhere.

Although Grammar schools never had the great impacts on social mobility that were later claimed, the Crowther and Robbins Report showed this.

And realistically after all this bitterness does anyone think those parents are going to want to do all those things - and who could blame them after some of the things that are being said.

The act to abolish grammar schools was published under a Labour government in 1965.

@user149799568 Duke and Vanderbilt also offer need blind as far as I'm aware, Vanderbilt are also doing merit scholarships too.

Although as said, need blind and need based in many, many cases means that private school students in the UK would be exempt, as they tend to come from households in the top income decile.

The comments here about "Ivies being generous with funding" completely ignore that its actually rather hard to get.

"The act to abolish grammar schools was published under a Labour government in 1965."

Yes, but I'm sure I've read that actually going ahead abolishing them happened under the Heath government, who could have repealed the act.

@Grace1980xxx

"And realistically after all this bitterness does anyone think those parents are going to want to do all those things - and who could blame them after some of the things that are being said."

Realisticly do you think private school parents have garnered support for their cause by the things they've said here and in other threads? Who could blame people for supporting this when private school parents have made all the threats under the sun, and disparaged the people who send their kids to state school as well as the institutions themselves.

@Aladdinzane what point are you trying to make? That PS student won't go to Ivy if they're asked to pay international level of UK uni fees here? because they won't get US bursaries?

Some of them are able to pay UK and US fees, they won't WANT to stay in the UK because of attitudes of society (like yours)

But I do. I work part time, bust a gut after school to juggle sports, music and drama commitments, but I still do career talks at our local secondary school, mentor and help with readers at primary school.
If it matters to you and you aren't working full time you make it happen and I know many parents like me who do. And as these posts show many parents seem to be retiring from jobs now they aren't going to be paying fees, so let's watch this space. Forget national service here come the newly liberated former private school parents army.

Well, as someone deciding between state and private, I have to say the arguments made by those against this policy are far more compelling. You have just flung insults and rubbished everything they have said.

@nearlylovemyusername

The point I was making is that people always bring up funding in relation to US unviesrsities and often ( as there has been here) make claims about the numbers who get it that are completely incorrect.

"they won't WANT to stay in the UK because of attitudes of society (like yours)"

Did you misread my post about the fees? I said it was a policy idea I'd toyed with, but just tossed out here for the debate sake, there is no attitude. There is also no "attitude of society" towards the privately educated that would force anyone to leave the country, they do the best out of this society remember?

Not all of us are private school parents! The opposite is the case - we understand the shortcomings in the state system and we want people to make choices! We are also very grateful that others are willing to work really hard and pay a huge amount of tax. So thank you to those on this thread who do precisely that.

What we do not like is academics and politicians with a certain agenda telling us how to think.
The world works best when people can make choices.
In this country, you cannot even take a job in a new area because you cannot guarantee getting a good school for our DC. It is so obvious this will put off job mobility as well as all the other negatives.

Finally, things like wealth taxes work in countries like Switzerland and the US because people get a choice! You can stay a US citizen and move to a different tax regime in a different state, the same applies in Switzerland. You can live in Basel or Geneva or move to Canton Zug and pay hardly anything. People need to be given some choice at the very top end. Otherwise they just leave so those countries have cleverly decided that choice within the country borders is a healthy compromise.

@Grace1980xxx

If there is one thing I haven't done is flung insults.

I have questioned a lot of the sweeping statements made by private school parents here as being unlikely reactions to the increase of 20%. The catastrophising that has gone on has been ridiculous. I've challenged the ideas that house prices will spike and schools will be swamped, as well as the idea that major savings are made by the state by people sending their children to private school.

Don't forget that "liberated former private school parents army" are very bitter as well (and I'm very open to admit it) and don't feel compelled to help society which was so happy to get my taxes but didn't feel it's enough and pushed my G&T but ND DC out of school where they were happily settled to the environment which doesn't work for them as well. Up to you to think if I'm the only one.

So all this proverbial help might not materialise after all.

As repeatedly pointed out, if 94% or parents didn't make the change happen, it's a bit self insulting to think that 1.5% (assuming that 25% of PS kids will move to state) will make it

Our school for a start! I’ve just checked Eton (as it’s the school frequently mentioned) and they’re around the same figure. Quite a few of those 20% are on full bursaries.

"The world works best when people can make choices."

This policy does not remove the ability to make choices.

"We are also very grateful that others are willing to work really hard and pay a huge amount of tax. So thank you to those on this thread who do precisely that."

Thank you. I've spent an entire career, and running a family business on the side, paying large amounts of tax.

This is a bit sycophantic though, everybody pays tax, the vast majority of people work hard, much of society would not function without those who pay low amounts of tax but do entirely essential jobs.