Grammar schools to be means tested for free places

[dera35]

Are admissions to Grammar schools going to be means tested for free places ? I.e Children from affluent families will pay fees ?

I can understand if it goes that way because there is lots of independent research that points to Grammar schools being dominated by affluent families and especially using expensive private tuition for entrance tests.

There’s lots of relatively inexpensive housing in catchment for grammars in mid and north Bucks. Catchment areas are large too. You don’t need to live near the school. Also, define well off. Who is well off in your world?

@Oakskn It’s better if all dc are helped to pass. I dislike the fact parents pay and others have less chance. I’ve always felt the test structure should be taught. Certainly VR and NVR. It’s difficult to teach a child to read more and get a better vocabulary. It’s often speed of answering that leads to not getting a place. Not finishing and spending too long deliberating. This could and should be addressed.

It's just a statement of fact that a Labour govt ordered LEAs to start phasing out grammars in 1965.

You're now harking back to a government policy of 1965 which was not about charging for state education to try to pretend that a Labour government of 2024 will start charging for state education.

In education policy? You mean a civil servant that has been working under instruction of the Conservative for the last 14 years government?

I'm not pretending anything.

I'm simply saying that Labour have a long history of trying to remove inequality in education.

Lots of people with kids at grammars like to pretend their kids are "just" at state school and that people with kids in private are evil turds who've bought advantage. But so many of those grammar kids' parents have procured advantage for their kids - just in a different way. Why not target them financially, if it's OK to target private parents? Why should people in million pound houses get free education for their kids? Money is needed - let's see them cough up as well.

Yes! There is such a big focus on private school parents getting an advantage but no one is actually looking within the state system at the huge disparities there! There are many, many parents with the means to contribute more to the overall system that educates their children and others less fortunate yet instead of paying in, use this money for tutoring and giving their children a significant advantage over their less wealthy class mates! That is were the greatest disparity is and if Labour didn’t have such a laser focused hatred of private schools, they would have realised that there would have been a lot more income to be generated off the wealthy currently taking advantage of the best state and church schools through the funds they have to be able to buy and reside in the right catchment areas in primary and tutor the socks off their kids to get into the best state secondaries!!

How, exactly would Labour tax these people? How would they know where dc go to school? Fees are an easy target, and Vat is collected by the business, but how do you tax parents not paying fees? We have pretty average housing where we have three grammar schools. Very few expensive houses when compared with housing costs 10 miles further south.

Parents have paid for tutoring but some go without to do that. I don’t like it at all. I would prefer the schools to help more but how do you stop tutoring? It’s impossible.

^Why not target them financially, if it's OK to target private parents?

Because state education is free and the Labour Party are not going to start charging for state education. FFS.

They would means test (in the same way that is already done to allocate free nursery hours) and those earning over a certain threshold would pay a termly or yearly contribution that would be invoiced to them. It is done this way in other countries and works well to ensure that those who have the means are contributing towards the education system that they benefit from that educates all children from all backgrounds.

But clearly ‘free for all’ does not work anymore!!!! Otherwise you would would not have schools in some areas of the country literally falling apart. This rhetoric of everything for free needs to stop - those who can pay in should rather than spending this money solely on providing further advantages to their own children while still using the ‘free’ system that is falling apart for the rest!

@Seasaltlady Schools are falling apart because LAs made poor decisions re what construction method to use. It wasn’t forced on them. These buildings were built on a capital budget. Nothing to do with annual budgets. It wasn’t teachers or buildings. It’s poor decision making on how to construct a building to last!

My dd goes to a grammar. It says they're a voluntary grammar school and therefore permitted to levy fees and charge in respect of pupils. There's a capital compulsory charge of £140 per year and a supplementary parental contribution of £300 per year. It's a large grammar with 1.5k students and they bring in a lot of additional money.
There is also a fsm element in admissions so in result of a tie a fsm child would gain a place over one that isn't eligible.

I think grammar schools should just become private. The type parents who send their kids there are often the same who send to private after all. The funding spent by the state on keeping grammars open can then be used to improve state non-selective schools in grammar areas.

You didn't really frame it as a clear question though. Or at least not a clear one.

The Labour Party who disagree with private schools and are planning to tax parents who use them to pay for state schools are not planning to turn state schools into private schools. It makes zero sense.

@circular2478 Do you mean Voluntary Aided or Voluntary Controlled or merely that the school ask for voluntary contributions? Loads of schools do this, not just grammars. They can ask for contributions for projects and to cover costs, eg art, ingredients etc. In my area, the non grammars to do. It’s hardly a tax though.

With the nursery comparison, you acquire a free place via your tax code. You pay fees if you are above this and it stops people working. Most parents in the average semi around here don’t get free nursery but they aren’t remotely well off either. Both work to pay the mortgage! We already have the 40% tax boundary getting lower and lower and mortgage rates are higher now. Anyone contemplating taxing these people more, some of whom are teachers, would immediately cause uproar.

A couple of hundred pounds contribution from higher earners to their state school (or borough) to improve the conditions for all children using the state system, will not make the state school private!! Private schools costs thousands a term so no comparison.

@TizerorFizz I can't see where it says aided or controlled. It doesn't cover ingredients or school trips- we pay them separately. We can gift aid our contributions and off set on self assessment.

So it’s a contribution to a charity then. It’s not fees which you cannot put on your self assessment. Lots of schools run a charity like this. Eg it will pay for school trips for those who cannot afford them. Even primary schools do.

I think @noblegiraffe was referring to the PP that stated all Grammars should be made private not that financial contributions would automatically make all schools private.

Is that correct noble?

I suspect that back in 1966 you would have said that the NHS is free and the Labour Party are not going to start charging for it, but in 1968 Labour re-introduced prescription charges.

We could also talk about tuition fees - introduced by Labour in 1997.

I am not saying they will start charging for state education. Indeed, I would be very surprised if they do. But I wouldn't rule it out just because they are Labour.

They could take against the grammars again though! As we can see, elite rich people use them and they are ripe for taxing. Not much different to private school parents in some eyes. I guess you could make them charge fees! At least it wouldn’t be abolition as before. This thread does make it clear why iou cannot trust Labour.

The ones round us have a lower pass mark for fsm

If you are talking about state schools, then no. Some schools call themselves grammars but left the state system, for example after the 1975 regulations, and I know of at least one current state school which has grammar in its title but is actually non-selective, which is probably confusing for people new to the area.

I heard all grammar schools will be getting a free unicorn this year 🦄🦄🦄