Whitehall “braced for private schools collapse” 7

[ICouldBeVioletSky]

Continuation of previous threads discussing VAT on independent school fees. The thread title is a headline from a Times article last autumn.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5237575-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5242586-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-2
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5280646-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-3
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5301690-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-4
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5317397-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-5
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5337850-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-6

White, Male? No. Privilege, yes. Just because a disproportionate percentage of pupils are from minority ethnic groups, and are broadly representative of the sex division in society, does not make private schools democratic engines of social mobility.

Thats intersectionality, folks. There are privileged, black, females, you know. Look at Kemi Badenoch. She is an uber-privileged woman from generational wealth.

It is funny how ethnic minorities tend to understand clearly how education is key in elevating the social mobility of their children, either via private schools, grammar schools, top state schools etc. That with a push from the parents (just as key as the schools) is what makes “social mobility”.

You cannot take a step back and blame private schools for the lack of social mobility in white working class boys in the deprived regions, because insert 14 years of Tory Government and Boris & Dave went to Eton.
It is so much more complex than that. You simply cannot do social mobility without the “pushy” parent factor. Everyone knows that. The black boys on FSM who became socially mobile as a result of the London Challenge was because their parents were on board too. No teacher/school can elevate alone.
Private schools are going to be engines of social mobility by definition because the parents largely value education fundamentally, that is why they are parting with so much cash (rather than buying holidays, cars, a bigger house).

The more social mobility you have the more the country grows. One person being socially mobile does not prevent another. The opposite is the case. The Marxist worldview sees the economy as a closed shop, they do not understand the current fast moving globally mobile world and the push of billions at a drop of a button. They really need to get with the times.

We still have lots of private schools in this country, but social mobility is poor, so that’s really not a great argument. Why are you reducing this to working class white boys? Why agree money spent on the London Challenge and decades of weighting funding for state schools in favour of London state schools has made a difference to social mobility in London, but then blame working class white boys for all the woes of the rest of the country? You are aware that social mobility is poor in ethnic minority groups outside of London (where so much central government money has been poured), aren’t you? Are you suggesting that the entire population of the UK should cram themselves into London?

We do not have a high percentage of kids in private schools compared to other countries, that is another lie. We have a lot of small private schools (number wise) and it appears the Government is intent on destroying them for no real gain, to anyone.

London state schools are good, money was invested centrally, but not necessarily in Outer London boroughs. Eg Bromley has some of the lowest cash contributed nationally.
As schools are good and do improve social mobility, the Government should really be making sure social housing is allocated to families primarily, if they care about economic growth. Because the children will then get to benefit from those good state schools.

The regions should be working on social cohesion primarily. The reason we all live side by side successfully in London is because we promote and celebrate diversity. That does not cost a lot, that is an attitude.

The idea of a London Challenge should of course also be brought to the regions but unless you deal with the division and suspicions there both towards education etc you are not going to get anywhere.

I didn’t say we had a high percentage of children in private schools?… Are you now arguing we should have a higher percentage of children being educated privately?

Maybe fewer, bigger private schools would be a better economic model.

As schools are good and do improve social mobility, the Government should really be making sure social housing is allocated to families primarily

What do you mean by this? That any social housing near good schools be reserved for families?

This would put those fewer bigger private schools at the centre of good transport networks… such as those in London!

Which goes back to London having good transport networks because more government money has been spent on it. 🤣

London councils are busy buying up social housing outside of London, of course, so that they can export their problems to cheaper parts of the country. This makes London look better for social mobility than it actually is.

I do not think the big elite private schools are a model other than for the international rich. I certainly do not think big schools are the natural choice for kids with SEND.

London councils do not have any money either. Central Government should be buying social housing from developers and allocating it to families. If the schools are good and dying due to falling numbers, that is clearly what they should be doing.
They should also be planning social housing in the regions and have a clear plan to elevate ambition and resilience and educational standards there and social cohesion. Yet they have chosen division. And that needs to stop.

The problem is, the private sector is always preaching economic efficiency to the public sector, and for one reason or another, the British public as a whole don’t view private schools as genuinely charitable. If treated as businesses, private schools have to become more economically efficient. Or a new way of perceiving them is required.

Ok….

The book Failed State is very good on how we, as a country, across successive (and largely conservative) governments have mismanaged what matters are central government responsibility and what matters are local government. AFAIK there is no mechanism for government to buy social housing from developers and allot it generally.

Central government doesn’t have the money or authority to do this, either. You’re talking about decades of bad policy on council and then social housing, starvation of Local Authorities, and a complete failure of foresight coming home to roost. This is thanks to the Tory mantra of: a small state and the private sector can be trusted to sort these things out (except, of course, in London it is worth spending lots of government money, because the private sector says so). Can you imagine the furore if Labour, eg, forced down land value through the compulsory purchase of building land and investment properties identified as inadequately occupied all round the country in order to take it out of the private sector and build much needed social housing? Or if it paid over the odds for prime building land (which is all land, due to the need for more housing)?

It is not really about “furore” - you cannot implement policies which then lead to pulling their money out of the UK because it is seen as a crazy Communist state. But you can work with the private sector to build social housing models and you can get public buy in and eg pension fund buy in. You can try and implement a more Singaporean housing model adapted to the UK.

Also the whole elevation of the City of London etc was also a Blair/Brown thing, definitely not just limited to the Tories. And we did benefit, we got a lot more money out of it, it meant we kept the NHS, just like all these successful immigrants coming in and working here keeps our NHS going. We need all of this as we are a small country with not many natural resources. We only have talent, education etc higher level skills to build on.

And we do also have a real strength in diplomacy, it is playing out right in front of our eyes right now. And you probably do have our public schools to thank for some of that.

@Walkaround i think there is also quite a lot of ignorance about highly limited social housing. There was a recent thread where the Op had (reasonable) misgivings about her 19 year old DSS moving in, and several posters suggested that she refused, so that he would be homeless and the council would then find him something.

Private sector business is, essentially, short-termist, and has no loyalties to the state, only to the pursuit of profit for shareholders. Governments should have taken more responsibility for the long term, but unfortunately, our bi-partisan politics hasn’t helped achieve that. So everyone has acted for short-term gain at the expense of long term viability. The same applies to the elevation of the City - yes, it created huge wealth in the short term. We can, however, now see the consequences of this obsessive focus in the long term (including the consequences of the massive bust after the massive boom). Only a Londoner could think a Singapore model would work here - because too many people who have worked in the City can imagine London being like Singapore, conveniently forgetting the rest of the UK, which bears no resemblance to Singapore whatsoever.

As for natural resources - astronomical wealth has come out of the North Sea. We squandered it, whereas Norway has invested oil money over the years for the benefit of its population. No wonder Norwegians trust their state more than Brits do, and are willing to pay high levels of tax.

(I meant two party, lack of bipartisan!).

@Araminta1003 ,

I sometimes think that, although I suspect we live within 5 miles of one another, we live in parallel universes!

‘And we do also have a real strength in diplomacy, it is playing out right in front of our eyes right now.’

Really? I am not sure you would agree our trade negotiators were top notch during Brexit!

‘Private schools are going to be engines of social mobility by definition because the parents largely value education fundamentally, that is why they are parting with so much cash (rather than buying holidays, cars, a bigger house).’

Most have all of the above. In addition, although many value ‘education’ in theory, they don’t actually want to get their hands grubby being involved. I wish I had recordings of some of the angry parents from parents’ evenings who cannot believe the school alone cannot get their child a 7-9, even though the parent has undermined the school support at every possible instance!

And, is going from rich to even richer in a generation real social mobility?

And, as for Londoners rubbing along well, the pupils needed a large teacher on duty outside the local council estate every morning and evening. And that is leaving out the blatant growing antisemitism that I am sensitive to, being culturally Jewish.

If you isolate yourself in a leafy suburb and use immigrants for your cleaning, Deliveroo and extension building, it all looks lovely. Not the whole picture.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/10/super-rich-abandoning-norway-at-record-rate-as-wealth-tax-rises-slightly
@Walkaround

What is the point of harping on about what happened in the past?
I think what is urgent for the UK right now is defining a shared value system based on what our heritage was good at and our principles of tolerance, diversity, free thought, resilience, creativity. But we certainly should not be embarrassed about what we are good at eg. Our education system including our top universities and yes, that includes our top private schools and our monarchy. And I think the wider Christian principles that underpin our society’s values of tolerance and sharing and helping the poor and charity are really important. And you find them in other faiths too anyway.
What I am saying is that Londoners still seem to have an identity based on shared values that connects us broadly and there is no need to be jealous of that. It needs to be exported to other parts of the country.

You also need to redefine community, because it is quite an invidual society based on nuclear family units and you have to create a sense of community based on a value system, but without othering of what you are good at. Don’t other your own successes like private schools, banking etc, because that is just more self harm like Brexit. The legal system generally is also something to be proud of. Really we are a diverse and tolerant society but somehow the narrative has been twisted and we need someone inspirational to redefine the common values, without resorting to the island of stranger/division chat.

What is the point of harping on about what happened in the past?

To what/who is this directed, @Araminta1003 ?