Labour’s private school tax raid ‘likely illegal’

[Zizzagaaaaaww]

Thought some may like to read this article

archive.ph/i1XD3

Sir Keir Starmer’s planned VAT raid on private schools is likely to breach human rights law, The Telegraph can reveal.
The Labour leader risks falling foul of European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) law <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/i1XD3/www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/labour-private-school-tax-moronic-policy/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">over his party’s flagship policy, one of Britain’s top constitutional and human rights lawyers has warned.
Lord Pannick, who has taken on some of the UK’s most high-profile court cases, backed legal advice warning that making private schools subject to VAT was likely to breach ECHR law.
He told The Telegraph: “It would be strongly arguable that for a new government to impose VAT on independent schools would breach the right to education.

“That is because all other educational services will remain exempt from VAT and the charging of VAT on independent schools alone is designed to impede private education, and will have that effect.”

The KC and crossbench peer said that the Labour policy risked breaching two articles in the ECHR which protect the right to education.
He referred to legal advice written in response to Labour policies as far back as the early 1980s, when the country’s most senior lawyers warned that plans to end tax exemptions for private schools or abolish the institutions altogether would likely breach international human rights law to which Britain is signed up.
Previous leaders of the party have floated the idea of taxing private schools as part of plans to integrate them into the state sector. Under former party leader Michael Foot, the Labour manifesto of 1983 pledged to “charge VAT on the fees paid to [private] schools”.
The policy to abolish the schools was eventually shot down by senior lawyers, who argued it could be at odds with the ECHR and spoke specifically about the risk of imposing VAT.
While Sir Keir has ruled out abolishing private schools, he plans to force the institutions to pay business rates and 20pc VAT on tuition fees.
In an unearthed legal opinion from 1987, seen by The Telegraph, the late Lord Lester and Lord Pannick, prominent human rights lawyers, concluded a government “could not lawfully prohibit fee-paying, independent education or remove the benefits of charitable status or impose VAT in respect of such education” while a member of the court.
A foreword to the opinion written in 1991 by Lord Scarman, who served as a Law Lord in the precursor to the Supreme Court, said it would “encourage a challenge which could be mounted by taking the argument to the [ECHR]… if ever a government should seek to abolish or discriminate against [private schools]”.
The opinion was jointly written by Lord Lester and Lord Pannick as advice for the Independent Schools Council (ISC) and later published in its journal. Lord Pannick confirmed his belief that the argument still stands today.

It is extremely common! It happens all the time to my children (also happened to me when I was at school so it’s not new).

It may be extremely common where you live but I really don't believe that is extremely common in general. Where I live nobody would bat an eyelid at any school uniform.

Well considering I now live in a totally different place from where I grew up, I have direct experience of two areas where it happens. It does happen. A lot.

Two areas are not really representative of the whole of the UK.

I don’t think jeering at school uniforms is particularly common.

This is one example of so many in these threads when those of us with children at private school are told that our own personal lived experience is wrong. The students at the very good comp on the other side of town from my son’s private school specialise in shouting insults at our school’s students for being posh twats.

Then there all the other things we’re told on these threads. We are informed that we are deliberately buying our children an advantage over other children, we’re buying them better results, of course we can afford the extra 20%, of course they’d be fine in a state school, we can’t possibly have had a terrible state school experience, my child with multiple complex disabilities would be fine in a state school.

The main thing for me that stands out in all of these threads is those of us explaining our own situations and being told by people who don’t know us, or our children, that we’re wrong about our own lived experience. My personal current favourite was the poster on another thread who referred to private school parents creating (I quote) ‘carefully constructed sob stories’ about why our children are in private school, and then being fascinatingly offended and annoyed when I referred to their comment as snide. My disabled child is not and does not have a carefully concocted sob story. But apparently there’s no spite on these threads. OK then.

I would imagine how common aggression towards public school children is displayed depends much on location and local attitudes to the schools involved. Certainly it’s not something I’ve experienced or heard discussed.

if schools pull back on their charitable contributions then they will lose their charitable status. Since many of them do little for their local communities that seems just.

If schools cut back on staff I’m sure those teachers will be more than welcome in other schools.

Populism works by defining an unpopular minority group as 'elite'. It can be either right wing or left wing, and the choice of 'elite' group will vary: it's often the upper class/rich, but may be a cultural elite like intellectuals or cosmopolitans (Trump) - or may be both (Russian Revolution). They persuade their followers that this elite group is the cause of all the problems of society, and that 'the establishment' are selling them out.

It's a technique which is about othering a small unpopular group, whipping up anger against them, and then punishing them. It's crouched in the language of helping the majority, but the focus is more on taking away from the unpopular group. Sound familiar?

Democracy describes the system of government, rather than a particular policy or political behaviour. But the reason why an independent judiciary and free press are said to be the pillars of Democracy is that it isn't just about voting. It's about having the means to hold a government to account. Making sure that what they do genuinely is in the interests of the people.

That's why I say that this policy is populist rather than democratic. It's not been proposed to benefit the people - since it's not actually going to raise any revenue by the time private school students migrate to state. It's certainly not an efficient way to create a desired social benefit - no one is under any illusion about that. Instead the intention is to punish a small, unpopular group of people in order to consolidate support through anger.

Populism is gratifying, but it's generally harmful to the long term interests of the population.

@CatkinToadflax

”I don’t think jeering at school uniforms is particularly common.”**

This is one example of so many in these threads when those of us with children at private school are told that our own personal lived experience is wrong.

Surely YOU are telling me that my experience is wrong? I’ve literally started the sentence saying I don’t think why do you think my “lived experience” is wrong or shouldn’t be expressed?

Do you have a child in private school? If so, have they been jeered at for their private school uniform?

I think what the poster meant was that the policy was an integral part of Labour's manifesto and Labour were democratically elected and in that sense it was democratic. One can't really argue with that.

Your interpretation of the policy is that it is populist but that is as yet subjective because we don't yet know if it will raise money or not. We don't know how many DC will migrate to state or how much money it will or will not raise.

Do you have children in private school, or attended private school yourself?

Would you consider it reasonable for someone white to say "I don’t think racism is particularly common."

Is it really "denying their personal experience" to point out that them not haven't experienced it or seen it themselves is pretty meaningless - and that it's pretty shitty to downplay a prejudice you don't experience yourself.

I’ve not been jeered at for my uniform nor have my children or sibs/parents that I’ve ever heard about. It’s not shitty to say you don’t think it’s common or to relay your own experience.

Earlier I asked @timetobegin whether this would still be a good policy if it raised £0 and the response was that it would benefit society for everyone to go to state school. I've seen plenty of other posts where it's clear that the support for the policy is about taking away from 'the rich', not about any benefits (which some posters seem to not even know).

Any time I've asked 'why' these proposals are beneficial to society, there's no rational answer. It's emotion, not reasoning.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it just may be a duck.

I think the acid test for Labour will be how they respond to any data or analysis which shows that the policy will raise less than they initially said.

I don’t think that’s what I said. I think there should be the option of state school for everyone and honestly believe it would be a good thing if everyone spent some time in different schools but I think the option of fee paying schools is a good thing, I just agree they should pay tax (and honestly don’t think they are charities).

Yes. Not quite the same but I’ve been told that my perception of our local secondary is wrong, in that what I consider to be a bad school must be a one with good results and Ofsted grade but in a poor area, and I was just being snobby because I would prefer a lower performing school in a leafy area. In reality, the school has awful academic results, a bad Ofsted rating, behaviour issues, zero extra/curricular activities and a rapid teacher turnover. My DC went/go there but I had to move one to private, due to bullying that the state school didn’t even try to address, leaving my child suicidal and school refusing.

I would happily have moved DC to another state school but there were no places available, so we are scrapping the money together to send them private for a few years - and yes, I get that we are lucky to be able to do that, DH I both come from working-class backgrounds and worked hard to go to university and get ourselves okay but not amazing highly paid jobs.

The poster couldn’t seem to comprehend my situation and that state schools like that actually exist.

The first to mind is SEN and other special care or special educational opportunity. Many - or is it most - private schools are small special needs. Music and choir schools - generally where there are comprehensive schools you can’t select on the basis of ability.
Boarding schools - about 40 of the state schools tend to be not close to areas of population. And I suspect they would be far too small in number to cater for the boarding need of many of our children.
Any any child where the state provides a school that is quite wrong for them - all those refuseniks - where the parents find a smaller kinder school that works.
And ..

Another day and more whining and desperate straw clutching from the greedy who think they should not have to pay vat!

And my daughter tells me that lots of unis and employers including the civil service take it into account negatively.
Will we see pupils moving into sixth form colleges especially if they are selective. (I do find the comprehensive - no selection - at 11 but followed by selection 5 years later - odd).

Another post with posters trying to explain why someone else should pay more tax. People are very keen to have more state school funding, as long as someone else (those not using the state system) are the ones to pay for it,

Many institutions are moving to blind recruitment but that is a very different thing from discriminating against private school DC. Have a look at the foreign office and tell me the Civil Service is against private schools!

Neither is it true that 'lots of unis take it into account negatively'. This is because people either do not understand or do not want to understand widening participation. Private school DC are not discriminated against. Prospective students' academic results are viewed within the context in which they were achieved, which is absolutely fair. Outreach programs work with state schools to help DC understand the process, which is a run of the mill provision in many private schools. It's just that fair feels unfair when unfair has been the norm forever. Also saying that universities are biased is an easy way to save face when private school DC don't get the places they wanted. It is harder for them now as competition is tougher as naturally very bright state school DC are being encouraged to apply to places they would never have thought were for them in the past.

If people are moving their children from private to state sixth forms then they are deluded. The GSCEs already sat will be contextualised in the private school cohort within which they were taken.

Yep

@Tabtopcurtains is it the same school with a historic enmity? It sounds awful. What have the school done to help?

@Rabbit62 I don’t think that’s the case with employers at all. Given the small percentage of people who attend public school they at least appear to be very over represented in both Oxbridge and jobs like the ones you describe.

Do you have a better source other than your own area? Otherwise, Mr Pot, may I introduce you to Mr Kettle.

Okay Mr Witty, if anecdote is the order of the day, I have many friends with DC in private schools the length and breadth the British Isles and I have never heard of any abuse because of the school uniform they were wearing. I'm not saying it never happens but I do not believe for one minute that is the norm. My whole family is privately educated and none of us has ever experienced it. My DH went to a top boarding school and never experienced it.

Ditto @BasketsandBunnies though my dh didn’t attend a top boarding school.