How many kids do you know definitely leaving private for state?

[Quodraceratops]

I'd be very interested to know how many children people know of who are definitely leaving their private school for a state school - not people with plans to do so in future years, solely those definitely going now / in 2025.
For myself - large Scottish all years school, I only have knowledge of my early primary kids's classes - no-one leaving so far (but I'm guessing early primary may be less affected as Labour have been signalling this policy for a while so you wouldn't start if you couldn't afford VAT).

Or, surprising idea - families who are forced to exit private route are still resourceful enough to get their kids to well heated top state schools? be it grammars or top comps

No it’s not a self-defeating argument. My DC’s school fees are more than half my salary after tax. The other half is not “spare”. I have other bills to pay. When I stop paying the fees, I won’t be going to the Maldives with the income I free up, I’ll be putting more into my pension or reducing my hours - I only went up to full time to pay the fees in the first place.

It’s easy to see why taking your DC out of private school can free up a lot of cash, but that doesn’t mean you have lots of spare cash to pay the VAT if you continue with private education given that it takes up such a chunk of many people’s salaries.

I won’t be taking my DC out until sixth form but I am very much looking forward to the day that I free up more than half of my income and can save properly for retirement.

Not true. You can have super selective grammars with great comps in the same area. It doesn’t have to be a “full” grammar school system.

Your post is offensive. Lots of private school parents do give a shit about state schools because we use both sectors and/or we have removed our DC from the state sector because it let them down despite all our efforts to get them the support they need.

Zero. I don’t know any who are leaving.

No, I stand by 'trauma', or perhaps extreme stress, if you think the word trauma is inappropriate. We live in a world where a headteacher killed herself over an Ofsted judgment. There's huge pressure on school staff, in both the state and private sector. Imagine being the Chair of Governors who presides over the fee increase decision that causes a school to close, and the concomitant disruption. Or the Headteacher that has to tell all their valued colleagues that they're out of a job at short notice (because when private schools close, it's usually at very short notice). Or the mortgage paying teacher who finds out overnight that they've lost their job - particularly if they work in a subject that's non-shortage or non-existent in the state sector - and particularly if they find out in the same moment that their kids are also without a school place, because many private school teachers have their children in the school where they work. I have enough empathy to imagine that all of those situations would be extremely stressful.

That's quite apart from the stress for parents and children who are forced to move school, particularly in situations where a child may have joined that school in the first place because they've been deeply unhappy elsewhere.

We had very little choice but to join the private sector. I’m sure someone will come along to say of course we had a choice, but we really didn’t. We earn a fraction of what most private school parents earn. We can’t afford the VAT and are lucky that my mum is helping us out. We are lucky also that we’re nearly through.

It frustrates me that I will be paying for state schools to not improve. If my several thousand pounds - and the funds raised overall by taxing private school fees - was going to make a positive difference then I would not be frustrated. Genuinely. I wish the local state school provision had been suitable for my children. I do think it’s wrong that families who earn vastly more than we do, whose children’s needs are well met in their excellent local state provision, won’t be expected to pay a penny more to help improve state standards whilst those of us who no longer use state education are footing the entire bill. To not improve state standards at all.

What makes you think it’s not going to improve state standards at all?

Because by labour’s own calculations it’s going to pay for half a teacher per school.

I would never, ever gloat over damage being done to any child.

State standards will
Improve either way.

Either everyone will stay put in which case the tax revenue can be redirected.

Or, more middle class children move to the state sector and suddenly it becomes a political priority again because they have a stake in the system.

The reason the conservatives were able to neglect and underfund it for over a decade was because a lot of their voters didn't have to use it.

@CatkinToadflax

It’s probably a bit more sophisticated than that but the outstanding schools probably won’t need their half teacher and all the halves can be collected together and directed to the schools that do need them.

I am a working class person who has already had a child in state. Their special needs were not catered for and their mental health deteriorated so badly we restructured our lives to afford private. What I fear is being forced to put them back in the same shit hole again. I fear that my younger child may have a similar experience. I fear watching a small child self harm again. I fear having to uproot my family and move to a whole new area, when we like where we live and put effort into settling into this village not that long ago.

I don't scorn anyone, unlike all those whose condescension of private schools completely fail to acknowledge the many reasons why very ordinary people chose private education. And I would never scorn any child. It is a pity the same cannot be said for others.

But at the heart of it, @CatkinToadflax is right that we will have a system where wealthy people are using the state funded system and paying less towards it than parents using private. I have not read a single justification on these threads as to why these wealthy people using excellent state schools shouldn't be paying more rather than sponging off people already using private schools.

As I've said up thread, I live in a grammar area (not super selective, top 15/20%) where both my children passed the 11+.

The grammar system won't be expanded because there are only benefits for the children who pass. The children who don't pass might succeed despite the system, not because of it.

Everyone knows that.

And here the only children going to private secondary are the ones who didn't pass, so I'm not sure how 'we'll just take all the grammar places' is going to work out for you.

If you don't already think the grammar is right for your child (especially the super selectives) they are going to be miserable.

Wealthy people pay more tax, some of which is spent on education. This is really basic stuff.

What is basic is that I pay 45% tax. I still pay that whether I use state or private education.

That's a fair point. I do struggle somewhat to see the point of the super selective grammars though, because they are not going to do much for social mobility, even if they do little harm to comprehensives.

The conversations I've seen on super-selective grammars in MN suggest that they are overwhelmingly the preserve of well-resourced, switched-on families, whose children would have done fine in the top sets of my comprehensive school, and which are capable of organizing and paying for some tutoring if they feel their kids need some extra "stretch."

Yes. But that is entirely your choice.

Should people who don't have children get a rebate too?

What about the people who do not have disabilities? Should they pay less tax?

That's not how society works.

@Hattieho That’s right. There’s a place available for your child but you choose to spend on private school instead of holidays or a car or whatever. Your choice.

Dear lord. It's basic - increase the higher and additional tax rates and fund better state schools that way.

I completely agree. You were the one claiming unfairness because of all the spongers.

Somewhat ironically I was that really poor kid who got 100% on my 11 plus and went to grammar. I am now a professional earning a high salary but without the family wealth. Its those very people who this policy aims to punish.

For me, it’s giving my DC the level and pace of education that he needs to suit him. I think he would have been bored in the top sets of most comps. I was in top sets and he is far, far more academic than me. He got a 9 in his first GCSE at age 13 with about two hours of revision.

That’s why I think super selectives are great for the most academic of kids, whatever their social background is. As it happens, one of his best friends lives in a council house with parents who barely speak English so not all the kids are from middle class backgrounds.