Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

Guest post: 'Yes, private schools could do more to bridge the opportunity gap - but it's not as simple as it seems'

142 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 27/11/2014 14:04

Tristram Hunt, the Labour shadow education secretary, has this week argued that independent schools need to be doing much more to form meaningful partnerships with state schools. If they don't do so, they will risk being stripped of up to £700 million in tax breaks, should Labour be elected in the general election next Spring. He said, ‘the next government will say to independent schools: step up and play your part. Earn your keep. Because the time when you could expect something for nothing is over’.

Hunt's comments have been predictably vilified by leaders of independent schools in a way that will confirm the impression - in the eyes of the world at large - that independent schools are out of touch. Independent schools are an easy target for everyone to attack. They have few friends in high places - no Prime Minister would dare to send their child to an independent school now, nor indeed any Education Secretary. National leaders in business, banking, the media, the church and military may have disproportionately attended independent schools, and indeed send their children to them, but it's very rare that any of them stand up and defend them.

In fact, most independent schools are not as privileged as people assume. They're not the Etons, Marlboroughs, Harrows or Wellingtons, of which I am head, with long waiting lists and priceless land and buildings. Many operate close to the financial edge, and have suffered significantly since 2008. Look beyond the South East, and it is unusual to find an independent school in rude financial health. Parents have found it harder to find full fees, while improving state schools - including new academies and free schools - prove ever more attractive. A national wave of new grammar schools would kill off many independent schools.

Despite this, many independent schools are already doing a great deal to build bridges with the state sector and to try to boost social mobility. Some 90% of independent schools report that they are working with the local community and with state schools. What Hunt has failed to recognise is that they're not doing it because they've been threatened – they're doing it out of a sense of moral purpose, which many on the Left find it hard to believe is sincere.

Nevertheless, independent schools could be doing more to build bridges and engage with the state school sector, which educates 93% of children nationally. Our country is still too polarised, and it risks becoming more so. In my view, every independent school should join a ‘teaching school’ federation with neighbouring state schools. It wouldn't cost them anything, and it would materially improve both sectors. Every independent school could found an academy in association with a proven sponsor chain, which would provide the expertise that the independent school lacks.

Hunt's rhetoric enforces the idea that it's independent schools which have everything to give, and that state schools have nothing – what about what they can offer pupils like the ones I teach? The opportunity to mix with a more diverse range of children and teachers, for example. The emphasis shouldn't just be on independent schools reaching out – with extreme sanctions if they don't – it should be on both types of schools working together to benefit each other. Both have valuable things to offer.

Social integration and social mobility are vital to any flourishing society. Next year sees the 70th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. The dream that came out of that war, as well as the Great War, was of a New Jerusalem - a far more socially cohesive nation where opportunities were available to all regardless of birth and privilege. Tristram Hunt has identified the right problem, but the state sector equally needs to reach out to the independent sector and government needs to provide more resources for such exchanges to happen. The dream of an excellent education for all and a socially just nation need not remain a dream any longer.

OP posts:
MehsMum · 01/12/2014 10:21

Fair enough, tobeabat, I wasn't aware of those schools. No disrespect to them, but they are not the famous ones, which is perhaps why I hadn't heard of them.

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 10:30

OK, I have investigated and as far as I can see the main benefits of being a charity are:

  1. No income tax on investment income.
  2. No corporation or income tax on trading income/profit.
  3. gift aid on donations.
  4. Up to 80% Business rate relief.

Therefore if you don't have much money to invest and you don't make a profit (which you might not do if all profits go to assets on which you can claim capital allowances) and you don't have the kind of pupils and parents who make donations, there isn't much benefit except for rates reduction.

Equally, I would imagine that it would be perfectly possible to set up a separate charitable trust that was purely for the purpose of funding bursaries or enabling the school to makes it's swimming pool freely available to other schools.

It's not even true that all private schools are charities.

The whole thing seems a mess at the moment, and I suspect the advantage is heavily weighted towards schools that do have huge coffers and very rich ex-pupils.

chantico · 01/12/2014 10:30

"If the charitable status is removed then the next thing will be VAT at 20% on top of the fees."

Unlikely. This is one of the EU wide exemptions, and there's enough on the Government's plate without trying to get 27 countries to make a unanimous change for that. Especially as it's the same exemption that makes university fees VAT free.

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 10:34

Like health services, education is VAT exempt which means you don't charge VAT on it.

This isn't good for schools as they can't reclaim VAT on purchases, but that affects all schools, state or private.

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 10:35

x post.

Iggly · 01/12/2014 10:41

I would also scrap faith schools or make them more open. I.e. you don't have to have church attendance in order to get in.

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 11:10

Apparently rateable value of Eton is £1,100,100.

2014 multiplier is 47.1%. 1,100,000 x 0.471= £518,100 annual rates bill

Increase rates by 80% = £414,480

apparently there are 1,300 pupils at Eton, therefore that is an increase of £319/year per pupil.

Cost of Eton 3 piece tailcoat is apparently £230. (not sure what exactly what a tailcoat is or who has to wear it, but I imagine there is also other stuff that you are supposed to buy).

Maybe the answer is pay rates, but cheaper uniform?

Farahilda · 01/12/2014 11:28

Would Eton be likely to lose its rates exemption, even if brought in? It shares facilities, sponsors academies, participates in schools partnerships, shares sports facilities, has local schools using other facilities, runs summer schools, and employs a full time outreach officer encouraging bursary applicants, and has targets to increase the number of 100% bursaries (currently has 64 on no fees and 277 on reduced fees).

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 11:32

Possibly not - my scenario was if charitable status were abolished all together, but as you say that hasn't actually been suggested.

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 11:36

It's all a bit murky though - at the moment it's not clear how much any particular school gains from charitable status - there's just a vague idea that some schools are probably doing something and if they didn't have charitable status they wouldn't be doing whatever it is that they are doing.

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 11:41

And I'm really not convinced by the OP's remark that 'private schools don't have friends in high places' just because a few cabinet ministers are sending their children to state schools.

Alwaysinahurrynow · 01/12/2014 13:35

Interesting thread. For me, having been educated in both the state and private sector, the following points stand out:
1). How would the gov't fund all the additional places for pupils exiting the private sector if charitable status was removed (as other people have stated the business rates may just be a relatively small increase in fees in context of the annual cost)
2). How would the gov't address the 'catchment' privilege? By this I mean, if it costs up to an additional six figure sum to live in the catchment of the best state schools in the area (this is the estimate where I live), is this not an issue for making sure educational access is fair.
3) I am intrigued by people implying that state schools are paying tax that private schools don't. Apologies if I'm being naive - are these indirect taxes (VAT) etc or direct taxes?

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 13:43

The detail can get complicated, but generally a state school wouldn't pay taxes as it wouldn't make a profit. (Although a private company that provides education services would pay taxes on the profit in the same way that other private sector companies that provide services to the public sector wouldn't pay a profit)

Charities don't pay tax on investment income, but I don't think many state schools would have investments - not long term anyway.

Alwaysinahurrynow · 01/12/2014 13:48

That's what I thought on tax for a state school as if they were making a profit on any services offered, you would hope that it was invested in the school. I was just wondering if I had missed something fundamental about the way state school finances worked.

TheBogQueen · 01/12/2014 14:21

Isn't the point that if state schools decided to start hiring out their facilities - perhaps a swimming pool or playing field, drama studio - to local private school then wouldn't it have to pay income tax on this?

merrymouse · 01/12/2014 15:13

I don't know the ins and outs because state schools are run in different ways. However, Local Authorities don't pay tax. Also a lot of school fundraising is done through the PTA which is usually a charity.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page