The councils need to find spaces for all children!!

[HooverIsAlwaysBroken]

https://bmmagazine.co.uk/news/surrey-runs-out-of-state-school-places-for-private-pupils-as-vat-raid-bites/?amp

I am relieved to see that the Surrey is also looking at options to expand class sizes and use transportation to take children to other areas. They really need to get their act together quickly.

all children has a right to state education.

Much more likely that a few portakabin classrooms go up than that there are lots of new schools

Much more likely that a few portakabin classrooms go up than that there are lots of new schools

Why would Labour think this is improving state education?

I've homeschooled and schools don't have to accommodate a child who wants to return to school or change from one school to another. It's not easy getting a state school place.

Some parents are adamant that they will never allow their child near a state school ever. This particular poster is one of those parents.

That's right - there have always been bulges and fluctuation in demand for school places, and councils have always had to plan and adjust accordingly. This will not be any different.

The so called housing analogy is complete crap from posters with no experience of the real world.

Anyone can get free social housing if they want it? Yeah give that one a try and report back how it went!

I think you may be overlooking the poor and needy criteria. And the shit show that the genuinely poor and needy go through, despite meeting the criteria, often living in skanky b&q in one room with DC before they are allocated a house in an area where they would not choose to live.

Your privilege is showing. If you are employed and earn above a certain amount or have savings above a certain amount and can afford to own a mortgaged house or pay private rent you won't qualify. If you sell your house and have equity you won't qualify. You would need to be on the bones of your arse to even get on a waiting list.

And this is somehow equivalent to comparing private school and state education? Paid for or 'free'?

State education is a right. You don't have to meet criteria of poverty. Not so for social housing. To make your analogy work social housing would have to a right with no criteria.

It again smacks of privilege that relatively wealthy parents who previously sent their DC to private schools assume that council funds to social care will have to be cut as a result of their 'SPITEFUL' decision to remove their DC from private school for political reasons.

I think it all faux outage unless you don't care about your own DC well-being. Not that going to state school harms it but the stress of not having a place, being taxied to a far away school so you have no peer group to socialise with needs to be weighed carefully.

Let's be frank, you never cared about the social care budget before you thought it could provide capital. Just like SEN kids not funded through ECHP. I bet you moaned about them prior to VAT unless their needs are invisible.

I struggle the understand the spite shown towards this mum who wants to homeschool her children. Parents will know what's best for their own children. Maybe there are no suitable schools to suit her children's needs in her catchment area. I personally don't feel this policy will benefit state schools materially. We could afford the VAT but would mean cutting back on holidays and other 'luxuries'. We have therefore made the difficult decision to move abroad. Everyone makes decisions which best suit their family. For us we don't see the point of working harder just to stay afloat.

Umm, I did say that it was a thought experiment.

And in order to make the thought experiment closer to the reality of education, I said we would pretend that social housing was freely available to anyone without a mortgage. The pp I was addressing it to very clearly understood.

Maybe re-read the posts? Might make more sense to you.

Like I said before, what I think and believe is irrelevant here.

What I care about/don't care about.

Why I'm sending my DC to private school.

None of this changes the material reality of what the consequences will be.

Why are you supporting a change where the real life consequences - ie what actually happens, not what people think should happen - is that life will be worse for everyone?

It isn't just impacting schools

https://feweek.co.uk/30-colleges-risk-private-school-vat-trap/

It also pulls in some private nurseries and first years at uni depending on age as it goes up to 19 yrs of age

Why is it Labours fault we haven't enough school places? or do you think Labour are responsible for underfunding state education?

But to be fair, Blair Brown also didn't spend enough either but at least they had a schools building/renewals program, scrapped by Cameron.

This is exactly why we need this 6 to 7 billion over the next 5 years.

For too long educating our children has been pushed to the back of the classroom.

Eh? Where's this 6-7 billion coming from?

Little chance there will be any building work happening given the drop in rolls in primary years.

“It again smacks of privilege that relatively wealthy parents who previously sent their DC to private schools assume that council funds to social care will have to be cut as a result of their 'SPITEFUL' decision to remove their DC from private school for political reasons.”

@PocketSand - it is called the straw that broke the camel’s back.
Now I am the kind of person who could work more but if I did, then I would be in that tax bracket where they take the highest marginal rate, so I simply refuse to work more and spend time with my DC and on MN instead. It is a waste - but it is what happens with a tax system that penalises additional work.
My neighbour is a consultant doctor too and she is cutting her hours back again and doing state Sixth Form . That is what they have incentivised us all to do, that is what they are going to get. It is not privilege. You cannot keep milking the same cow over and over again. The udders run dry. It is called the dry period. If you want a dry period, you get a dry period.

This is the problem for Labour from the FT

'Private sector employment in December fell more than during any month since January 2021, according to the S&P Global flash UK purchasing managers’ employment index.
In the third consecutive month of contraction, the index fell to 45.8, down from 48.9 in November. It was far below the key 50 mark and the lowest since 2009 if the pandemic is excluded.'

Borrowing is already maxed. Public sector won't grow if the private sector doesn't

OK, here's a different analogy, adapted from one upthread. I picked scoliosis as a random example only.

Imagine that the NHS's success rate in treating scoliosis in childhood is on average 50%. Some hospitals do much better than this, some do worse but overall 50%.

However, a specialist private hospital has a success rate of 80%, so unsurprisingly a number of parents who can afford it self-fund their children's treatment, though it's pretty expensive and a stretch for many.

Then Rachel and her pals introduce VAT on private medical costs. They decide private medical care is a luxury, and it's only fair that those paying for their children to have private treatment pay some extra to pay for others' children to have NHS treatment.

This result is that - say - 15% of parents are priced out, they can no longer pay for private treatment so move their kids over to the NHS.

The amount of VAT raised from the private medical treatment unfortunately is insignificant - Rachel said it would raise enough to pay for 1/3 of an extra doctor per NHS region but in the end it's not quite this much because the NHS also has to pick up the treatment costs for a more kids transferring over than expected.

The effect of the policy is:

• waiting lists in some areas increasing for all NHS treated children because of the influx of children from the private hospital.
• in other areas the NHS trust has no more capacity in its paediatric spinal units so they have to pay for taxis for children to be taken for treatment in hospital in a neighbouring trust area.
• the NHS rate in successfully treating scoliosis remains unchanged because less than 1/3 of a doctor per NHS region is just a drop in the ocean and is balanced out by the above effects
• the kids who were already in the NHS system still have only a 50% prospect of being successfully treated
• the kids who transferred over from the private hospital see their prospect of being successfully treated drop from 80% to 50%
• the kids whose parents remain at the private hospital continue to have an 80% prospect of being successfully treated.

Would you say that is a positive and fair outcome, overall?

Or would it be better for Rachel and her pals to find a way to raise a meaningful amount of tax that would be enough to fund improvements in the NHS leading to a 60/70/80% treatment for its scoliosis patients?

This isn’t about whose fault it is.

It's about whether the decision made now makes people's lives better or worse.

And that decision is 100% on Labour. Current Labour. Right now.

And that decision is 100% on Labour. Current Labour. Right now.

Exactly it's a poor policy which has negative impact on dc' education

If they'd worked it through rationally they wouldn't be here.

Same as the other policies contracting the private sector at speed and decreasing growth

Yes every bloody policy these clowns have implemented is making life worse pensioners farmers private school parents every bloody thing is just dire ill thought out bullshit

Of course its about blame or fault... you might not want to know why the Tories didn't fund education correctly but i do.
They need to be held accountable and beyond the ballot box too.

If they hadn't fucked the economy, these tax increases wouldn't be needed.

The 6/7billion over the next 5 years this policy will raise, will help the schools budget for the very poorest in society BUT if it doesn't and leads to worse outcomes, then Labour should be held accountable too.

Now i appreciate Tories don't give a shit about the poor but i do and it appears that Labour do too.

Apart from a few posts on here I'd say polling reflects that, going by one released today

And that's why we can never improve anything, because politics is all about blaming the previous government and using that as an excuse for bringing in ideological policies. That applies to parties of all colours. So we get no consensus, no true cross party agreement and meanwhile the country gets shitter.
That is what will allow Reform in. If Labour and Conservatives could stop blaming each other and work together then Reform wouldn't stand a chance. Labour ran a populist political campaign and are bringing in shit policies whilst blaming the Tories. Tories do the same and all the while Reform rise because people are sick to death of 2 party politics where nothing actually improves.

You can apportion blame and use that to decide who to vote for next election.

If the government uses blame and vindictiveness when making policy, they are failing in their duty. Their job is to make the best decisions they can right now, based on current reality, to improve people's lives.

In order to do that, they need to do some actual thinking and analysis, not indulge their pet theories.

These things are a continuous pendulum.

Move power or money to the centre and it's "Unaccountable faceless out-of-touch Whitehall bureaucrats who shouldn't be left in charge of a whelk stall are riding roughshod over local needs/democracy, we need decentralisation now!". Pressure builds from some campaigning newspaper (probably the Daily Mail) and various opposition groups. The government caves in and announces a decentralisation policy.

Fast forward a few years and some other campaigning newspaper (although it's probably still the Daily Mail) and similar opposition groups are denouncing "A postcode lottery... how can it be fair than cancer survival rates/GCSE passes/potholes per mile are twice as high in Derby as nearby Sheffield? The government must step in to stop the madness of incompetent local councillors who shouldn't be left in charge of a whelk stall!"

Rinse and repeat, for ever. But at least it keeps the clicks coming in.

Completely agree @twistyizzy - what really galls me is that Labour aren’t even trying to make things better - they are driven purely by ideology and by the glorious struggle against their class enemies. That’s it. Zero interest in anything vaguely pragmatic or constructive or, you know, trying to grow the economy for the benefit of all.

And as you say, where this will leave us at the next election is with Nigel Fcuking Farage in charge. Thank christ I married an EU national so can make an exit plan.

Jesus literally wept.

you might not want to know why the Tories didn't fund education correctly but i do

Just putting this graph here again.

And reminding you that Education spending per student is 20% higher now than it was in 2003. In real terms.

GDP is only 10% higher than in 2003. It's actually gone down per capita in real terms.

If you want education spending to increase even more than it already has, then GDP needs to start rising.