What if Keir Starmer had been forced to move school part way through?

[Kitsot]

I find it interesting that Keir Starmer attended a state grammar school and was allowed to stay on for free after it moved to private whilst he was there. He doesn’t seem to consider it an issue that children will need to be moved from private to state school part way through their time at a school due to the VAT imposition. I wonder how different his life would have turned out if he had instead been forced to leave his school and move to the local comprehensive or wherever had space.

Further to this, to me it would make more sense if VAT was only added to fees for children joining at the usual entry points from next September and then going forward for those years from that point. It would still be an unpopular policy but it would at least give parents time to apply for state schools within the normal entry rounds and children wouldn’t need to move school part way through, which can be hard even if it is between two similar types of schools. The downside is that it wouldn’t initially raise as much money as planned.

Just for transparency to add that I am in a fairly neutral position regarding this and have experience of both sectors. I myself am from a working-class background and went to a bog-standard comprehensive in the 1980s.

“Everything else we buy (apart from some necessities) has VAT slapped on it, so why should buying education be any different?“

Because if I buy a Ferrari and pay 20 per cent on top, I am not getting a Ford for free am I? I choose between a Ford plus 20 per cent VaT and a Ferrari plus 20 per cent VAT.
I am not choosing between a free car on the one hand and a Ferrari plus 20 per cent?

This policy makes ZERO fiscal sense and harms DCs with SEN in small private schools. It makes super elite schools even more elite because let’s face it - those paying are now only going to pay for the super lux branded product and to stay amongst their own.

And as a state school parent I am angry that there is zero real help coming for state schools and that we are meant to rely on the private school VAT money tree which is a complete lie. And what exactly are their plans for kids out of schools and with SEN who have been failed? Shove them back into overcrowded state schools.
That is why some of us who are state schools parents do not like this policy. It is not just private school parents who do not like it. And I think some on these threads have one kid in state and one kid in private, for example, and know the differences. Lots of people move between the sectors anyway and for those who have chosen private because the state failed their DC, it is shocking to whack on a 20 per cent penalty for something their DC should have received for free and should have every right to receive for free.

What is the fb group please?

I understand that you think the manifesto point is irrelevant. Fair enough. You're entitled to consider or ignore whatever factors you like when making your own financial decisions. I can only comment on how I approach my own decision-making.

I am not sure why you're so bothered about whether or not there were threads on MN at the time. I see this website as a chat forum rather than as a primary source of information to inform my financial decision-making. I would not really recommend anyone using MN as their only source of information when investing large sums of money.

For me, it is relevant that this policy has been discussed as a possibility by a mainstream political party for at a number of years. It doesn't matter that Corbyn didn't get elected or that other policies were dropped etc. The idea was clearly being considered and that would have been enough to put it on my radar. It isn't particularly surprising that Labour has decided to implement it now, and I'm surprised to find that it is so unexpected for so many private school parents.

The other thing which is interesting in this discussion is how many people are outraged people are at the idea of some kids having to move school because of the VAT increases, and yet we are reminded that some private schools have more than doubled their fees in the last five years. Presumably a lot of kids must have had to move schools because of that as well... have there been lots of threads on MN expressing outrage about this as well?

You must have missed my post on using good state to get to good university. We are happy with that decision.

I can still feel for dc impacted by this policy and if there is no extra funding think it a mistake by Labour.

I don’t think those who didn’t use the 2019 manifesto as you did are not sensible. No one was talking about 2024 VAT in 2019. And you alone may have been thinking it as claimed but without posting anything along those lines you may not.

as I consider private school fees to be a monumental waste of money for most people

This seems more relevant than a 2019 manifesto. You were not someone considering it anyway.

I'm not sure you are deliberately missing my point or just not getting it.

It's fair enough for you to disagree with the policy. We are all entitled to our views. Sometimes, in a democracy, things don't go our way and we are entitled to be angry or annoyed about the decisions that we disagree with.

FWIW, I also have sympathy for any child having to move schools for any reason - it isn't ideal and I would understand them being upset about it. However, I am much less worried about the children of relatively wealthy families with supportive, aspirational parents having to move to a different school than I am about the many other children facing much greater disadvantages in our society. It isn't about being vindictive in the slightest - it is simply about priorities.

I do disagree with the policy but more so if it raises no funds. Then I think this impact to dc is a mistake by Labour.

If it does raise funds then maybe, but I still would have limited impact on dc in a better way than correctly indicated.

To add I’d also assess damage to the sector after a few years.

My posts though about your 2019 foresight are more about the idea you were sensible and others who didn’t say in 2019 that VAT was coming in 2024. I doubt many stand out in this way if at all.

I did consider private for dd at one point, as I wasn't wowed by local state offerings for secondary, and my DH was keen to consider all options. While I do have political objections to private schools, I have always been clear that my responsibilities as a parent come first, and in the absence of a perfectly functioning state system, I would have sent dd private if necessary. This is why I never judge parents on these threads for making decisions and what is best for their children.

However, we went and looked around the local private schools and I was pretty underwhelmed by all of them. The "advantages" that they promised seemed very superficial and not in line with the things that we considered important. Other parents might be looking for something different, which is fair enough. Like I say, I'm not judging anyone for doing what they think is right for their child.

But we were looking at schools pre-2019 so no, I wasn't considering private education at that time. That isn't the point that I was making though - I was making a more general point about how I make financial decisions in general. Is it not fairly normal to consider what changes might be coming and to think through various scenarios?

Well, I agree with you that it will be a mistake if it doesn't raise any money. Of course there would be no point in that case.

But I believe it will raise money because I actually think most parents who use private schools are probably fairly financially savvy, and that most of them will have planned adequately for contingencies of this nature. Certainly, that is true of the privately educating families we know.

Ultimately, only time will tell. If no revenue is generated, I will happily hold up my hand and say that I was wrong. But I really don't think we're going to see the mass exodus from private schools that people are talking about.

I don’t have judgement on people choosing private or state I feel pretty neutral on it although I think the UK private sector is well regarded, (and universities go together with that)

I also have a slightly different take as I know a centre left Aus gov that actually dues tax rebates as it reduces the state burden, which makes economic sense to me.

I wouldn’t go by groups of people anyone knows for prediction of behaviour. It’s really hard to judge but I’d not underestimate the behavioural impact of any 20% tax.

If I had to guess though I’d say smaller schools will find it harder and those with higher non EHCP SEN will too. Since it is going ahead it’s a pity it couldn’t be done with more thought to dc

You're right, we can't judge what will happen on the basis of people we know, and it was lazy of me to suggest that the market as a whole will behave like private school parents of my own acquaintance. But recent history would suggest that the demand for private education is relatively inelastic - fees have risen at a much faster rate than people's pay, and yet we haven't seen a mass exodus from the sector just yet. Of course, it's possible that the VAT might be the final straw that breaks the camel's back, but I suspect not. We'll have to wait and see.

And yes, agree that small schools are most likely to be negatively impacted as many are already running on a business model that is barely sustainable. Parents of SEN children would do well to start applying for EHCPs now if their DCs' needs are significant.

I will reserve judgement that this is a government that will care about the lengths people go to because of necessity to try and cope with the failings of state provision - forced to take up private gp services because they can't get an appointment, forced to take up private education because their child is failing.

The Tory government was willing to spin lack of choice as choice. I hope the labour government will see 'choice' as a failure of appropriate social provision.

@Jonesthebootmaker "If you need to move into state schools- you can move location to a Grammar school area or better school. If you do this before the natural period of transitions you’ll be guaranteed a place. Don’t panic"

This is categorically not true.

“ "If you need to move into state schools- you can move location to a Grammar school area or better school. If you do this before the natural period of transitions you’ll be guaranteed a place. Don’t panic"

This is categorically not true.“

Why is some of that not true? Most people who can, position themselves for good state secondary schooling and move in catchment. Grammar is never a guarantee, you have to pass the test first. Until now, where I live it was grammar, move house for state catchment or pay private (although some of those are also selective, but less selective than the grammars we have). So if you remove one option because it becomes untenable, not just price wise, but because the Government is sending a clear message to put people off and is deliberately earmarking it as an amoral choice, then you are left with the former 2.
In most areas, there are no grammars so you are just left with pay up for catchment or sometimes go to church for years, to ensure your DC gets into a good faith school.
This is what most people who have options and are educationally motivated do in this country. There are only a few people willing out there who have money who just send their kids to the local school if it is not great already. In fact, most people research very carefully what school they might get before they even purchase a house.

So if you narrow choices for more people, you increase competition in the remaining choices.
So the statement that you exercise a choice is correct in essence.

@Araminta1003
@Jonesthebootmaker said "you will be guaranteed a place if you move into the area. This is not true.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

The other thing which is interesting in this discussion is how many people are outraged people are at the idea of some kids having to move school because of the VAT increases, and yet we are reminded that some private schools have more than doubled their fees in the last five years. Presumably a lot of kids must have had to move schools because of that as well... have there been lots of threads on MN expressing outrage about this as well?

I assume this was referring to my comment? I believe I said it will have doubled its fees in 5 years - i.e. after VAT is applied.

I actually went back to my records to check, and if increased as expected then 2025/6 (our final year) will be 1.8 times the cost of 2021/22 (the year we applied).

So no, not “more than doubled in the last 5 years”.

I do believe the factors behind the rises have been well discussed at the time though (energy costs, cost of living rises for teachers, teacher pensions, RAAC etc).

I am also not an “outraged people” so perhaps you are conflating different points.

I wasn't directing the "outraged" description at you - it was a more general observation about the amount of frothing that we've seen in relation to this issue on MN.

I haven't seen the same amount of frothing in relation to school fees being hiked up way beyond the rate of inflation, so I wondered if I had just missed lots of threads on this or whether people only get upset about kids having to move schools when this is because of tax rises and/or decisions taken by a Labour government.

It’s 20% in addition to usual increase. Private schools haven’t hiked by that amount in one year.

And ‘frothing’ I think that only applies when someone else is paying an extra tax, the old mn fave, which is handy.

Am I only allowed to support taxes that I personally pay?

On that basis, I should not support VAT on things like fancy cars or designer handbags either, given that I don't purchase such items. Surely we are allowed to have opinions on things that go beyond our own immediate choices?

In any case, I'm always the first to argue that people like me should be paying more tax, and if this particular increase doesn't affect me, that won't stop me advocating in favour of other increases that do. We aren't all desperate to pay as little tax as possible - some of us would gladly pay more if it meant better public services and a more equitable society. VAT on school fees is just one measure amongst many that should be taken in my view, as a means of ensuring that those of us who are more privileged contribute a bit more to the overall pot.

Am I only allowed to support taxes that I personally pay?

It’s far easier to support ones you don’t. It’s practically an mn pastime on here these days.

@EasternStandard "Am I only allowed to support taxes that I personally pay?

It’s far easier to support ones you don’t. It’s practically an mn pastime on here these days."

Many of us do not regard the taxation system as a personal savings account. Taxation is for the good of society, not the individual.

That’s great. It’s still easier to be happy about someone else paying an extra 20% tax unless you’re offering the same of course

@EasternStandard "That’s great. It’s still easier to be happy about someone else paying an extra 20% tax unless you’re offering the same of course"

No I'm not. I would if I was using the service that had been benefitting from a tax loophole for years though. I pay my taxes willingly.

Are you seriously saying that we can only have opinions about issues that directly affect us?

Wow.

Well no I’m saying it’s not surprising you and others are enthusiastic about a tax other people will pay.

Maybe the next tax rise will make you both happier and you can pay more. Or there’s voluntary payment too