Play date with mum who agrees with education tax

[BonnuitMy]

Please let me know if I’m overreacting. I recently overheard a new mum at school talking about a local private school closing down due to the education tax and how this is somehow a good thing. She’s now invited my DD for a play date, would you accept?

Other than ‘it’s not fair’ and cats, I’ve yet to hear a single attempt at justification for limiting education choice, closing 100s of schools, increasing state education tax burden and forcing children who are settled and happy to move schools. You need reason and logic to have a reasonable and logical discussion.

https://natcen.ac.uk/news/significant-questions-raised-about-future-britains-democracy

• Age and education have displaced class as the principal demographic dividing line in British politics. Only 6% of 18-24 year olds voted Conservative, compared with 36% of those aged 65 and over. Just 5% of graduates voted for Reform, compared with 25% of those with less than an ‘A’ level.
• How people voted reflected their views about ‘culture wars’ or ‘equalities’ issues just as much as it did where they stood on the traditional debate between ‘left’ and ‘right’. Those with liberal attitudes on equalities issues mostly voted Labour (53%), Liberal Democrat (17%) or Green (14%). Among those with more conservative views, the most popular parties were the Conservatives (32%) and Reform (28%).

Class no longer as relevant, like I have been saying.

Education should be extremely relevant to the Labour Party if they read this properly. So more money into state education and support for universities, at the very least. And why they would openly say they are diverting any supposed money from private school VAT to housing instead of state education, is really beyond me.

It was @Araminta1003 who brought cats into the equation, suddenly proposing a £2k a year tax on owning them. I'm guessing because of @Grumpyoldpersonwithcats name suggests they have cats.

Actually I was just trying to change the topic to cats, because the posters love a “cat picture tax” on some of their threads.

And the point stands that the Government could raise a significant amount of money for a licensing fee for pets and probably deter some more dubious dangerous dog owners.

And like I said on all these threads I am a liberal anyway, but why taxing some people’s SEND kids out of their school is somehow socially acceptable, is really beyond me.

They are businesses - even as charities / NFP orgs (and we do know how the rules are able to be stretched to allow profit to be taken out, these aren’t run for the greater good, let’s be honest).

The issue was really around allowing the loophole of charity status to be exploited by organisations that are really not charities in the true sense. The UK is unusual in having allowed that in a disproportionately high number of cases.

As for ring-fencing VAT we don’t generally have ring fenced tax intake, but any increased tax is pooled and decisions made. I would argue that a full shake up of a unfit for purpose education system is needed and rebuild the whole thing from the bottom up, with a vastly reduced number of private schools and better education for all is what’s needed, but then that’s probably too extreme for most.

Hmmm. Private schools and SEND kids is a funny one. EHCPs don’t apply in most private schools and private schools can also ask for SEND kids to leave with no process so they are certainly a double edged sword for SEN.

Yes. I've known private schools refuse send kids and yet sometimes you would get the impression that most are charitably full of children with SEND.

Anecdotally one friend’s autistic son was flatly refused entry to all the local private schools despite being academically bright and parents willing to pay. Another’s friend autistic teen was briskly expelled from her private school as her behaviour was deemed not beneficial to the other girls. So I’m not convinced these schools are really that helpful for SEN pupils.

I think it must depends on one’s friendships groups and where one lives. In my group of friends and acquaintances a lot of parents of children with special needs on the milder end (do not really like using that phrase) like dyspraxia, dyslexia, autism but at least academically average to really quite clever have sent their DC to private schools and seem super happy, because the schools provide a quieter environment, more individualised attention due to smaller class sizes, a more creative curriculum, more space/sports, more focus on pastoral and well being. I also have friends with DC with mental health issues who have found private school a real saviour. As they tend to have more staff and more resources it makes sense. I also think things have changed and a lot of private schools did embrace pastoral care and a more creative curriculum especially post Covid.

At the other end of private education you have the academically and socially elite schools - where a lot of my colleagues’ children go and they seem very full on schools preparing the future elite. However, I think these are a minority of private schools catering maybe to 50000 children in total.

But I will happily admit that I am in the demographic of middle class parent who will either move into the catchment of a really good comprehensive or move to an area with access to grammar school and that those tend to be the type of schools of choice and so the parents choosing private education are the ones who need to for other reasons. I guess in some cases it was also simply cheaper and more convenient than to move into a good catchment.

As I said before:

why does no other country apply VAT to private schools?

Why do you think the policy backfired in Greece, causing school closures and a loss in tax revenue?

If you think that what doesn't work elsewhere would work in the UK, why do you think that?

If we apply VAT to private schools, then why not to universities?

@ParentOfOne - there is no economic justification, hence that question never gets answered by supporters. There is just a random IFS report that politicians use to cover their backsides.

You can see it in the poll that this is a cultural war issue. That is why the politicians went with it in the first place. The simple answer is that it does seem popular with the majority (and hence it is an attack on a minority albeit a better off one, overall).

And there was a levy proposed in the White Paper on international student fees at 6%. So the doors for taxing some forms of education are firmly open and the thinking is now somewhat established. As we have seen with uni fees over the years it is a slippery slope. Once the doors are open, they are open.

It is rather depressing @araminta1003 . Every country has the government it deserves indeed.

But aren't you targetting this mother's child by refusing to allow your daughter to have a play date with her simply because you disagree with her mother's views?

Disagree with her all you want. You can even tell her how offensive you find her gloating about the closure of a private school, but by ostracising her daughter, you are punishing this child who hasn't done anything wrong.

But that wasn't the question in your OP. You asked whether you should accept the invitation to a playdate with a nice child that your daughter gets on with even though you strongly object to her mother's views on private education. 93% of the people who voted say that you should accept.

No-one has to make a case for or justify the application of VAT on private schools to your satisfaction (which, given your own views, would be impossible anyway).

I agree that allowing a child to play is a completely different matter.

But what do you mean when you say that no one has to justify their views? Can you answer my questions above on VAT, Greece etc?

The way I see it is very simple : those who are driven by evidence can answer it.
Those who are driven by ideology cannot, and feel triggered specifically because they cannot and because this question exposes the fallacy of their position.

The issue was really around allowing the loophole of charity status to be exploited by organisations that are really not charities in the true sense.

It really wasn’t. The change in the VAT stats has absolutely nothing to do with charitable status. Many schools don’t have charitable status anyway.

why does no other country apply VAT to private schools?

Because other countries are sensible, and recognise that a great education at no cost to the taxpayer is a good thing.

Don't you try to protect your young child from being exposed to malignant views?

If it's just distaste for a group of people, I'd have a conversation with my DC so that she understood. If it was laughing at their misfortune, I'd consider that abhorrent enough that I wouldn't want her exposed to it.

If the mother had been gleeful about the anti-immigration riots last year, would you still let your DC go on the playdate?

I wouldn't.

I wouldn't have a problem with the mother having a different political opinion to mine on appropriate immigration levels. But I wouldn't want my DC anywhere near someone who enjoyed the idea of harm to a group they had 'othered'.

Do you see the difference?

The uncomfortable fact of the matter is that in this case, you agree with the mother's bigotry. So you don't see her glee at children being harmed as a problem.

@seadragon17

As for ring-fencing VAT we don’t generally have ring fenced tax intake, but any increased tax is pooled and decisions made.

Interesting that you think closing private schools is worth the UK investing money in - ie when the policy costs the state money instead of raising any. Personally, I'd prefer that money to be spent on improving state schools than closing private schools.

I would argue that a full shake up of a unfit for purpose education system is needed and rebuild the whole thing from the bottom up, with a vastly reduced number of private schools and better education for all is what’s needed, but then that’s probably too extreme for most.

I'd argue that the size and number of private schools is none of your or Labour's business.

But I'm fully on board with Labour improving state schools: which are the ones they are responsible for. Out of tax income paid by everyone - yes, including you. You don't get to require other people to pay for yet more stuff for you. How do you think Labour are doing at that?

The children are going to have to attend a new school. No one is ‘harming’ them.

We all know that changing school is harmful.

Why do you keep pretending it's not? Weird.

Next you'll be saying that hearing people insulting and 'othering' you isn't harmful. Or bullying. Just builds resilience, don't you know!