Thread 2: VAT on school Fees- High court challenge

[EHCPerhaps]

Following on from thread 1
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5160565-vat-on-school-fees-high-court-challenge

Background to legal challenge (not yet a case):
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13824931/amp/Single-mother-autistic-child-launches-High-Court-challenge-Labours-private-schools-VAT-raid-claiming-violates-daughters-right-education.html

Sorry to begin a new thread, OP, but your thread filled up very quickly!

@Sunshineonarainyday80

"I'm really not sure how by sending mine to state and having fancier holidays it is going to benefit others."

Or equally :

How paying off my mortgage quicker is going to benefit others or
How working less days is going to benefit others or
How paying my into my pension so I can retire quicker is going to benefit others

If the left want to abolish private schools then crack on I say. I will simply send my DC to evening school like they do in Japan and Korea or get private tuition (which is normally cash in hand) and make sure my DC are signed up to various after school sports etc etc.

It won't change anything or improve social inequality it will simply make things less efficient and ultimately cost the tax payer more.

“I understand the anti independent schools feeling in society, maybe especially in current times. However I think that pragmatically this is a terrible policy to introduce right now. It is extremely likely to gather no net revenue and, at worst, to cost the state money as people move to state over the next 1-5 years. It risks worsening the infamous 22bln black hole, right at the time the Government is telling us to freak out about the black hole.

It is not logical nor good economic practice to do this right now. Min return max risk”

@Shambles123 - I completely agree.

Train drivers though were given raises to stop strikes to get people back into work to raise money and productivity. Junior doctors were given raises because there is a flight risk and their education is a huge sunk cost so we have to pay to keep them.
WFA got through although unfair on many, it is too difficult to means test and those persons no longer contribute economically. A pragmatic decision.

This VAT policy flies in the face of common sense entirely because it is a target on the back of taxpayers we rely on immensely (rightly or wrongly) and there is flight risk as well. Furthermore, the “Fair” argument does not even stack up due to the SEN crisis.

The assumptions underlying their ideology are flawed - or at least lack nuance

So when they follow it, you end up with a position that blatantly makes no sense.

"private wealth = bad and unfair (actually, whatever wealth we have is OK - but any more isn't). So private schools = bad and unfair. So try to close them. But that's illegal, so try to diminish them. Consequences? What consequences? "

Maybe they hope all the new houses that are being bought in better catchment areas might raise some more SDLT?!

@Shambles123

I understand the anti independent schools feeling in society, maybe especially in current times. However I think that pragmatically this is a terrible policy to introduce right now

It's exactly the same ill thought through populist emotion driven politics that caused Brexit that leads to cutting off your nose to spite your face.

It was pointed out that Brexit would likely make everyone worse off and make travel harder. But the right wing voters still supported it in order to put two fingers up to the "establishment ".

Equally it is being pointed out that VAT on PS fees is likely to raise minimal or negative tax revenues and not do anything to improve state schools. But the left wing voters still support it in order to punish the rich.

I agree with the Brexit comparison! I think of it as cutting threads, like if a thread on a jumper is annoying you and you cut it without thinking about it and make a hole.
It is hard to think through unintended consequences of changing parts of society overnight (leaving single market, pricing out a swathe of kids from independent schools who have to migrate to state). Things that aren't even being discussed will be realised at a later date as consequences of this policy.

I assume for Starmer this is more about trapping teachers they have trained up in the state sector than anything else.
A junior doctor cannot work privately until consultant level. There only option is to go to eg Australia.
A teacher if they cannot stand the stress of a large state school, could go and work in a private school. However, as PS will move abroad increasingly and those PS offer extremely generous packages, to British teachers in particular, I doubt they have really considered this properly.

There are 9 public schools in the UK - out of over 2,500 private schools. They are truly a world apart from your average day independent, as are the people who attend them. The VAT will make no difference on the types of families whose children attend them. Really, they should be treated as a separate category. Day independent schools are crammed to the rafters with the children of public service workers and SEN kids, a world away from the Boris Johnson types. After all, not all independent schools are in the SE with the eye-watering fees that accompany them and plenty of children are only in private for primary (especially in grammar areas) which is a hell of a lot more affordable than secondary. It’s an absolute fallacy to say that anyone who has a child in an independent school is necessarily wealthy. The fact also remains that the vast majority of high earners in this country have their children in the state system, albeit in leafy catchments with outstanding schools. Forcing the children of those who can no longer afford the fees into massively overcrowded classrooms is hardly going to suddenly change the dynamic of the parent voice in the school (unless it’s a failing school, then maybe) and as it will then actually be costing the government to educate those children, everyone will be worse off. If you agree with taxing education then fine but let’s not pretend it’s not going to worsen outcomes for everyone.

The other thing, of course, is that for all their faults, the Tories, despite severely underfunding schools and bashing teachers, have massively raised underlying educational standards in parts of the country and have raised PISA/literacy and maths standards. Due to the pushiness of the curriculum and the more difficult GCSEs and forcing teachers to get 6-7 year olds up to certain standards. Labour will probably scrap all of that. So anyone hoping to get an academic education in the state sector? Will that actually still continue? Or will parents be expected to tutor on the side to keep their DCs up to international standards which appear to be increasing, especially out of Asian countries. It’s a global world we compete in for top jobs now, right?

I really don't see how having more pushy middle class parents in state schools will improve standards for other people. They can advocate for their own child, pay for tutoring & extra curriculars & might join the PTA and slightly increase fund raising - but they can't increase the school budget, staffing or alter the behaviour of other kids or parents. Most bright, nice kids are already in state so how does adding more bums on seats help?

Yeah, I remember uproar when Rishi said that we need to improve Math skills...

I literally said the opposite. They are good for those that use them, bad for everyone else.

@DadJoke - please give an analogy.

So for a thief aka a criminal, he steals something to help his child who is starving at home. He commits a crime but a social good for his own child. However his act on the person he steals from is clearly a social harm.

So is that what you think about private schools?

I don’t need to give an analogy when I’ve given an explanation, multiple times.

I went to a state grammar school and I felt it was good that there were plenty of independent schools in my city as it inevitably freed up more space in the grammars.

I love this pushy parent stereotype. It simply infers that existing state school parents are disenfranchised and uninvolved with their DC’s education. It’s lazy and ignorant and doesn’t help the anti-PS argument one jot.

@DadJoke - am I committing a social harm by sending my DC to grammar school as well then?

if people with money, power, influence and a sense of entitlement are invested in anything, it improves. I suspect you have no connection with social services, the charity sector or schooling if you think that it does not have an effect, or that people less able to navigate the system are somehow “uninvolved.”

If what you say is true, then penalising them with a post-war high tax burden is hardly an incentive is it?

In life, I have observed that the carrot generally works better than the stick.

I don’t otherwise like your ‘sense of entitlement’ comment - it’s unnecessary.

Arguably parents of independent school kids don't have a sense of entitlement as are not (currently!) claiming all the state funded services they are ENTITLED to. Ho ho.

That’s it.

It’s just inverse snobbery.

The estimated tax raised isn’t going to fund SEN. It’s already been allocated to non SEN spending.

@DadJoke

Would you be ok with me spending £250k on a house for my child and paying their university costs in full (which only benefits my child), rather than on education (a well educated child benefits society as a whole). Is it just private education which is a social harm?

@mids2019

as much I'd love to see this policy reversed, I'm not hugely optimistic - it was the only proper policy in their manifesto so failure would be a huge humiliation, Labour will through everything it at. And lawyers involved with this case have a history of fails.
At very best we can hope for some delay, one or two terms possibly, but not much more.
The damages being done already though, the move of kids to state is significant (at least based on what I'm seeing around me)

“if people with money, power, influence and a sense of entitlement are invested in anything, it improves. I suspect you have no connection with social services, the charity sector or schooling if you think that it does not have an effect, or that people less able to navigate the system are somehow “uninvolved.””

I agree that if I give my time as a governor or to help DCs in my children’s state schools with job applications or interview practice that it may help. However, I completely disagree that my children’s presence acts in any shape or form to level others up. If anything, they take the resources from others away by demanding attention, because they have always been given lots of attention at home.
I can also give numerous concrete examples from years of state schooling where my DCs have in no uncertain terms being explicitly told to check their own privilege.

I remember being called in, in Reception, with my eldest to discuss a “matter”. Eldest was a free reader before school. School were expecting an Ofsted. So they had to put eldest on a suitable reading pathway. A whole lot of kids in the playground from older years had cornered DC to demand that they disclose what reading level they were on. DC being very young, felt obliged to tell them. Teacher told us in no uncertain terms that DC should not be going around telling others what reading level they are on, as it might “make other children feel sad”.

Then same DC in future years was always, at the beginning of the year, sat next to the naughtiest boys in class to help them out in maths. Because apparently that helps DC master Maths according to some framework at the time. DC is generally very compliant, but after a while just refused to do this. It happened every single year. So the teacher had to provide extra resources and time for DC, not to their full potential, but it was extra time invested.
Same DC was awarded effort stars in singing and violin lessons by teachers in school, but again the teacher would not record the effort stars “because not everyone can afford music lessons”. The extra effort stars have to go to the kids below expectations, so they show up to intervention groups.
Once they got to grammar school and sets, things improved for DC. In primary, they had lots of friends but were not stretched at their level or to their full potential. The attitude was far more to check your own privilege.

I distinctly remember reading the Railway Children with DC when it starts with the kids in an “ordinary” red brick house who can go to the Zoological Gardens and Mme Tussauds. And then the bad stuff happens straight after. It is like we have to have collective guilt somehow, in case the bad is coming. And we have to apologise for the redbrick house and the stained glass windows. Victorian collective guilt.
It won’t wash on anyone not fully British though. I do not think they have the full cultural context. And that is where I strongly believe this policy will fall flat on its face.