Read this an tell me you still agree with VAT on school fees

[Sally20099]

DS is 3 years from finishing private school which includes 2 years in the sixth form. DD was due to start same senior school in Sept. Both went to private prep but due to talk of VAT on fees, and certainty of Labour govt for some time, we actually investigated sending DD to state secondary school. Only one in the entire city is rated outstanding but DD has got a place so we have decided to send her there. It’s very good academically but obviously hasn’t got the facilities of the private option. Currently school fees are £19,300 per year (before VAT) for DS so we have saved a reasonable sum by going to state school with DD. DS will finish at his school and we could afford DD fees (even with VAT) so we will instead put £12k a year extra in savings for DD and then spend the rest of the savings on an extra winter holiday. We would have never looked at state schools without the VAT policy and instead we have taken the place of someone at an outstanding rated school. Im not posting to annoy anyone, I wanted those who unequivocally support this to see some of the consequences. We also know a reasonable number of children in DS year who can’t afford fees with VAT and are taking their children out of private and going into state - and taking more places at the limited good schools. Its probably no surprise that most families in private schools happen to also live in good areas, meaning catchment areas tend to work out quite well when they go state.

You are assuming that just because a school is ‘Excellent’ it is oversubscribed. It all likelihood there are places for everyone who wants to go who falls within catchment.

The IFS estimates the impact on private school use (and subsequent demand
for state school places) will be minimal:

“Our best judgement is that it would be reasonable to assume that an effective VAT rate of 15% would lead to a 3–7% reduction in private school attendance”.

So, looks like most parents using private school will pay the VAT (even if it means foregoing that extra winter holiday) rather than have their kids slum it in state school and thereby it won’t put much extra pressure on state schools.

https://ifs.org.uk/publications/tax-private-school-fees-and-state-school-spending

OP's so committed to 2 tier education that she's incorporating it into her "parenting"

Catchment areas will need to change so that all schools are diverse and to equal out the advantage / disadvantage of leafy and struggling. The best teachers should be paid more to go to the tougher schools and raise aspirations. Universities will continue to contextualise but they need to refine this even more so those kids who have put the effort in and have raised their sights get rewards in terms of access to the best universities and courses or apprenticeships. No school should be allowed to sink. Private schools are a red herring but even if they remain the advantage they give in terms of advancement needs to be ruthlessly removed. This country can't afford educational apartheid it needs to make the best use of all its citizens.

So your argument boils down to...."We had a choice between paying VAT, which we can afford and benefits everyone, or an annual trip to Verbier, and chose the latter. Well done Labour voters who's kids are in shit schools. They could have gone to a better school but as we live in the posh area we nicked your place for the sake of an extra holiday. You should have voted against the monied paying VAT."

And YOU are the one who has sacrificed your daughters education and future opportunities, in favour of skiing.

Thank you for telegraphing your morals.

If the school fees had gone up by whatever the VAT takes it to, but it wasn't VAT... you'd presumably have still sent her to the private school, given you can afford it.

So the reality is you don't want to, you object to the price increase because its VAT, not because its a price increase and not because you can't afford it.

So no, this simply makes me think you're a bit of a twat, and possibly that you don't value your daughters education as much as your sons (why not put those savings towards extra curricular stuff to make up for the lack of facilities/opportunities a state school means).

Yes, rolls are falling. Broadly. But if more kids within the catchment of outstanding schools want a place, the catchment will shrink. That's great until it's your child that can't get in. The best schools in the best areas will thrive. No doubt at all. How will it make a difference to the school that has a large council estate as it's main catchment with known issues such as drug abuse, poverty, children who have experienced multiple aces?

Because the place is full of grammar schools!

Sorry if this has been said already, but this thread TLDR (in it's entirety).

How about your son doing his final 2 years at this excellent state school so that your daughter can benefit from a private education?

Roofers, builders, nurses and teachers were all parents at the school where I sent my child. Hardly the super rich or elite.

This doesn't make sense - if you think the outstanding state school is just as good as the private school your son went to, why didn't you send your son there too? Then you could be giving him £100k to him when he's 18 too. Are you seriously suggesting you sent your son to private school to benefit the country?

I went to a private school and I am all for VAT on private schools. I haven't seen a compelling argument for them being exempt and your post certainly hasn't persuaded me.

Not sure you understand how the allocation system works. In some areas, yes. But in many others, no. Not even nearly.

Sorry, you blew that with your reference to huge classes in your current school. If you have plenty of room to take in more pupils, you don't have huge classes. You have smaller than average size classes. Apart from anything else, there are limits posed by health and safety and environmental regulations, and class sizes in practical subjects are not allowed by law to go over 20.

You know schools receive different levels of funding based on their needs so children on free school meals have more funding allocated to them by the government and children in more deprived areas receive more funding per head than those in better off areas. For instance children in Wolverhampton have higher funding per head than children in Shropshire and then other adjustments on top.

The system you are advocating for sounds similar to what currently exists just there is zero parental choice, it's one size fits all and no private schools.

Sounds shit to me. I quite like the idea of picking a school based on my child's needs rather than someone who doesn't know my child making that choice for me. But then I'm not a communist.

What a load of self indulgent garbage. Nobody cares about your boastful sob story. Do what you want but no one's changing their mind based on that

You are assuming that just because a school is ‘Excellent’ it is oversubscribed. It all likelihood there are places for everyone who wants to go who falls within catchment.

Plus schools change all the time (personally I think head leadership is one of the most important factors). The local very selective boys grammar school not far from me that has kids travelling from 30 miles away has dropped down to 'Good' from 'Outstanding' in the last couple of years whereas another school in the town where my daughter went has gone from 'Inadequate' to 'Good'. It used to be the one that everyone avoided but now it's getting great reviews.

A lot of former private school parents are going to be moving house a lot if they're basing where they live on OFSTED ratings!

Well… I read it

and I still think VAT is a good idea

I live in a medium sized, average town in the South West. Recently I had cause to look at the data for entry into Foundation Stage, as I was helping a friend with an appeal.

Unfortunately for her, her nearest school was one of only four schools (out of about maybe thirty) that was full. The vast majority of people got their first choice.

i know that’s just anecdotal and may not be borne out in other areas.

Catchments won't necessarily shrink, in fact in the South it's highly unlikely, because of those falling rolls. If a few years ago the school could fill every place from siblings etc plus people within, say, a mile of the school, nowadays in some areas schools never fill up even when taking every single child that applies, both from within and outside catchment.

I understand that the government funds school places per the number of children therefore more children = more funding?

Apparently there is an issue with primary schools not having enough pupils due to declining birth rates and this is impacting their funding and forcing some to close.

Assume it'll hit secondary schools next?

Point is I'm not sure how much it ultimately impacts the average person a small number of private school pupils moving as it is a drop in the ocean overall but may help some stay open?

I don't understand why you say you took someone's place at the school. The school had a place and your DD filled that place. I'm sure that the school will be happy to have the place filled as they receive funding per capita and an unfilled place means they are losing money.The falling birthrate is having a big impact on state school numbers. My DS is in class of 24 this year which is difficult for the school because they still have to have to have a teacher but will be missing out on the funding for 6 children. It seems that you had the money to send her to private school but chose not to do so - just up to you.

Wah wah wah

Initially I was against the idea, thinking it would push more kids into the state system and put a further squeeze on resources. But given falling birth rates, and the investment back into education from the tax raised, I agree it’s a good move. These schools are not proper charities; it’s an insult to actual charities that have purpose and make a profound and genuine difference rather than being tokenistic. Also, my biggest bugbear is this term aspiration. ALL (decent) parents have aspirations for their kids and I am sick to death of this word being used to justify private education being excluded from VAT as parents strive to pay for it. Some simply cannot afford it whilst working meaningful jobs. We need this money to be pumped back into the state where it belongs. Simple as that.

State schools are for all children. She's not "taking somebody else's place" FFS. Do you consider yourself a different breed to the scummy state school kids then?

Unfortunately they are. Which is why l left teaching 4 years ago.

Classes of 30 in practicals in rooms designed for 15.

20 is a recommendation from the Design and Technology Association. But it’s not law.