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”

@SchoolQuestionnaire one of the issues with initiatives like this, it is putting an extra burden on state schools. These schools seem to have become the place where all of societies ills need to be sorted (including taking in pupils from elite schools!). Schools are having to cover for social workers, lack of CAMHS, lack of resources for SEND children, behavioural issues, dysfunctional families, inadequate parenting, child poverty. This all falls on schools now. And all on a shoestring budget. Education in school seems to be of secondary importance.

In that case, its fair for me to ask how much tory hq is paying you to post all this crap

Taxpayers foot the bill for loads of unnecessary shite. I feel far more sad about my tax money being spent on expense payments and kitting out mp’s second homes than I would if we prioritise spending on children. Plus it isn’t always neglect, sometimes good parents find themselves in tricky situations. They need support and I couldn’t begrudge anyone that.

Yes, this is such a great point

I understand that but where else could the burden fall? Children are at school every day anyway, the resource needed would be far higher if we had to get food to children in their homes.

Schools are having to cover for social workers, lack of CAMHS, lack of resources for SEND children, behavioural issues, dysfunctional families, inadequate parenting, child poverty.

The ideal would be that spending is increased in all these areas but unfortunately I think that’s pie in the sky.

The burden needs to fall on their parents.

There are charities, foodbanks, churches all which could help and take the burden off schools.

How much is a packet of weetabix and a bottle of milk? A whole lot less than the endless bureaucracy that would be the outcome of feeding breakfast in schools.

@Anxiousheartbeat
"I struggle to believe someone can’t afford toast or cereal."

I struggle to believe those already paying fees won't be able to find 20% extra.

I also know which one is more likely.

In short we are fucked.

@SchoolQuestionnaire but children aren’t in school every day.

And where are staff coming from to administer all this help school have to provide. Recruitment is a nightmare across all areas in school (even if schools can afford to pay anyone). Yes this initiative might stop teachers having to dip into their own pockets to feed hungry children (good thing) but probably means it will be another thing to add to their workload (bad thing)

I may be mistaken but I thought all school children receive free school meals up to the end of year 2. I’m unsure what financial issues this is causing for the country but I don’t see many parents complaining about it. Why should breakfast be treated any differently? If your kids don’t need it and you can feed them at home, surely you just won’t send them.

Surely we’ve already established that the money will be generated from VAT on private school fees.

The money school receive for meals isn’t adequate, this initiative will probably cost schools more than the funding they receive for it

ANY state school? You've done that have you?

This is where you share with us the survey data that shows it's actually rich people who have to skip meals (because they're too busy beating the servants for not cleaning their Mercedes properly), rather than poor ones. So we don't mistake this for just another case of The Entitled Ones making shit up to bleat about a policy that treats their private expenditure as what it actually is.

And what if the parents are addicts. What if they don’t actually care about their children enough to ensure they are fed. Should we just forget these children.

After the way the current shower of shit has damaged the country and its finances, I'll happily take my chances with Labour. It can't possibly be worse

Up to you if you want to accept to be shafted for pure envy. I sweat every penny too and are taxed highly already. Labour are much much worse than the conservatives.

Btw where is David Lammy? Did he leave or something? I have not hear from him in a while.

Exactly this. We need clear blue water between what Labour will do to mend the state Education system (funding) and VAT on independent sector school fees. One is not a solution for the other.

The estimated money from VAT has already been allocated to new teachers, so that every child gets specialist subject teaching, and for mental health support staff. They seem to be allocating the money twice if they’re now saying it’ll be spent on breakfast as well.

In real life, ive not heard anything about this school fee makarkey

Yet on Mumsnet, its a hot topic

Every
Single
Day

Is the HBOS reference supposed to be an asset on her CV?

Ms Reeves, an economist, worked on the retail mortgages team of HBOS between 2006 and 2009.

HBOS timeline: the countdown to collapse

June 2007 HBOS’s share of new mortgage lending halves to 8%, its lowest level for seven years. Pricing errors are blamed.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/nov/19/hbos-timeline-countdown-collapse-lloyds-takeover

It’s not my policy to implement but surely the Labour Party will have considered this.

Fwiw, I don’t think that we should scrap a policy to ensure that the most vulnerable members of society are fed just because implementing it might pose a bit of a challenge.

Cute! You will get double whammy.

@Another76543

What do you think of the Lib Dem ideas from the Manifesto? Would love to get your stance on their offering, you seem very engaged with education policy.

From Schools Week;

The Liberal Democrats have pledged to increase school funding above inflation, spend an extra £1.9 billion a year on buildings and include arts subjects in the EBacc.
The party’s manifesto also commits to reform Ofsted, curriculum and assessment, and the expansion of extra-curricular activities and extension of free school meals and the pupil premium.

The party has said its revenue schools policies will cost an extra £2.17 billion by 2028, while its capital plans will cost £1.9 billion a year. But beyond capital, no breakdown for individual proposals has been provided.
Schools Week previously estimated that proposals signed off at last year’s Lib Dem conference could cost more than £9 billion.
However, not all of those policies have made it into the manifesto. For example, extending free school meals to all primary schools is a longer-term ambition.
The party said it would raise revenue by reversing cuts to bank taxes, reforming capital gains tax, taxing oil and gas profits and raising the digital services tax, among other initiatives.
Here’s your Schools Week round-up of all the schools policies …

• School funding and payIncrease school and college funding per-pupil above the rate of inflation every year
• End the “scandal of crumbling school and college buildings” by investing in new buildings and “clearing the backlog of repairs”. This will cost £1.9 billion a year, with £900 million coming from redirecting capital funding “for unnecessary new free schools”
• Reform the school teachers’ review body to make it “properly independent of government and able to recommend fair pay rises for teachers, and fully funding those rises every year”
• Teacher training and developmentCreate a teacher workforce strategy to “ensure that every secondary school child is taught by a specialist teacher in their subject”
• Fund teacher training so all posts in school are paid
• Introduce a “clear and properly funded programme of high-quality professional development for all teachers, including training on effective parental engagement”
• Curriculum and assessmentEstablish a commission to broaden the curriculum and “make qualifications at 16 and 18 fit for the 21st century”, drawing on “best practice such as the International Baccalaureate” and ensuring children learn “core skills such as critical thinking, verbal reasoning and creativity”
• Strengthen careers advice and links with employers in schools and colleges
• Include arts subjects in the English Baccalaureate and give power to Ofsted to monitor the curriculum so that schools continue to provide subjects like art, music or drama
• Expand extracurricular activities, such as sport, music, drama, debating and coding, starting with a “new free entitlement for disadvantaged children”
• AccountabilityReform Ofsted inspections and end single-word judgements “so that parents get a clear picture of the true strengths and weaknesses of each school, and schools get the guidance and support they need to improve”
• Implement a new parental engagement strategy, “including a regular, published parent survey” and guidance for schools on “providing accessible information to parents on what their children are learning”
• SENDGive councils extra funding to reduce the amount schools pay towards the cost of children’s education, health and care plans
• Set up a new “National Body for SEND” to fund support for children with very high needs
• Free school meals and pupil premiumExtend free school meals to all children in poverty, with an ambition to extend them to all primary school children “when the public finances allow”
• Introduce a “Young People’s Premium”, extending pupil premium funding to disadvantaged young people aged 16-18
• Extend pupil premium plus funding to children in kinship care, and guarantee any child taken into care a school place within three weeks, if required to move schools
• Other policiesGive LAs the power and resources to act as “Strategic Education Authorities” for their area, including responsibility for places planning, exclusions, administering admissions including in-year admissions, and SEND functions
• Put a “dedicated, qualified mental health professional in every primary and secondary school”, paid-for by increasing the digital services tax
• Introduce a “Tutoring Guarantee” for every disadvantaged pupil who needs extra support
• Set up a register of children who are not in school, and work “to understand and remove underlying barriers to attendance”
• Tackle bullying in schools by “promoting pastoral leadership in schools and delivering high-quality relationships and sex education”
• Appoint a cabinet minister for children and young people
• Return to the Erasmus Plus programme as an associated country
• Set up an independent advocacy body for children’s safety online
• Addressing the “underfunding and neglect” of children’s mental health services, youth services and youth justice services

Then it’s their situation to resolve. But fwiw, I think feeding children is an excellent use of funds and if they commit to this it may just convince me to vote for them.

Oh dear @Clavinova - is that the best that you can do? I'm sure RR wasn't single-handedly responsible for that. But it does illustrate that she has a background in finance, and therefore to deride her by using speechmarks to say she's an economist (i.e. implying she knows nothing) is really not appropriate.