Flooding of state schools by ex indie students fails to materialise

[zaxxon]

An interesting story, given all the doomsaying we saw on here last year following the VAT policy change. It's great news that more families received their first choice of school this year.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/mar/10/no-exodus-to-state-sector-after-vat-added-to-private-school-fees-say-english-councils?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Well said. My DC are currently in grammar, and some of the vitriol I’ve received on other threads is shocking. Full disclosure: I vote LibDem, but you’d think from what other posters have said to me, I’m akin to Jacob Rees Mogg, and I hold identical political beliefs to his.

Talking about buying privilege and preferential treatment... 🙄

Talking about buying privilege and preferential treatment...

Should parents not donate to state schools?

Alleyns are not opening new schools. They are renting their name to existing schools, in this case owned by a private equity company whose investment has not been as lucrative as hoped. No additional private school places are being created in this transaction.

Don't be silly.

I wonder what could have happened here?.. 🙄

www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5293299-secondary-school-admission

Probably the same thing that happens each year. There are always school black spots & siblings/feeders where relevant can make a difference. There are always people who get offered a school that wasn't on their list.

@strappyshoe given you are pro this policy when do you expect to see the positive results?

Rn Labour are cutting welfare and civil service. They're doing this because their policies have wiped out all funding headroom.

Now you can easily see the concern about welfare on this site with scared personal stories.

Why is that good exactly?

I am not a fan of Gove, but within the state system, academy trusts and free schools have managed to increase achievement at scale over the past several years - particularly in areas with poor education outcomes.

The decisions by Bridget Phillipson to get rid of the Academy Conversion Grant and the Trust Capacity Fund (grants which help the establishment of Academies) and to pause the last wave of free schools seems to have received relatively little attention. Another example of this government working to undermine parental choice and higher levels of academic achievement?

The article says that there'll be a new junior section at the Hampstead site, which must surely mean new places.

It also says that there'll be a lot of investment in shiny new stuff [doubtless shared in full with local communities etc etc].

I'm fairly sure that these are both the sorts of things that we were told couldn't possibly happen following the imposition of VAT.

given you are pro this policy when do you expect to see the positive results?

Why do you think I am pro this policy? It may end up affecting me 😆

I just don't think it's a huge issue for the electorate & that there has been a lot of hysteria.

Probably because you're posting that it won't have an impact.

Labour's approach clearly is, if you look at other threads you'll see those scared about welfare cuts.

It's all linked. Wiping out headroom hits the poorest, as we're seeing now.

That includes this poor VAT policy.

Probably because you're posting that it won't have an impact.

I think there will be some impact, I already said I feel for dc with SEN so I'm not sure who you have inferred that to mean I am pro?

I just don't think the impact will be very big as some posters have claimed eg I don't think many will be giving up their jobs, buying all the houses in catchment, spending 16k on tutors &/or taking the majority of the grammar places. I also think it's hard to separate other issues eg lower birth rates, increased COL, fee increases pre VAT etc when looking at numbers.

I also don't think the majority of the electorate care about this policy but you can disagree.

I believe the junior section will be only Years 3-6, allowing them to become an all-through again. It's not clear whether they'll end up moving some students from those years at the Regent's Park school. And I suspect that, if they are creating net new places, the viability was helped by the closure of two of their direct competitors this summer.

If there is a reduction in demand for private school places, it's unlikely that all schools will suffer equally. It's more likely that the weaker schools or schools lower on the hierarchy suffer disproportionately while the stronger schools are much less affected or even see their demand increase if weaker schools shut down completely rather than merely shrink. I also suspect that Cognita are doing what they think is necessary to move their schools closer to the top of the hierarchy.

Oh but lots of MN posters absolutely hate academies too? So it's yet another popular policy for the electorate.

“I also don't think the majority of the electorate care about this policy but you can disagree.”

I think most of us who oppose this policy would agree that the majority of the electorate either don’t care/don’t think this affects them or think the policy is a good thing.

Our point is they should care, because in one way or another it will affect many of them (not the doomsday scenarios predicted by some, but at the very least as part of the bigger picture of Labour royally screwing things up.)

And that on no objective analysis is the policy a good thing; there are unlikely to be any tangible benefits and certainly not those that have been used by Labour to justify it.

Not necessarily new places, they're just trying to lure those who'd otherwise go to Highgate, SHHS, USC etc. We applied both to Alleyns and Hampstead schools so they know their customer base. Some families are not very keen on single sex schools, and only Highgate is co-ed in that area (NBH is not in the same league).

I'd say it's more a sign of increasing competition between schools rather than expanding the number of places.

Our former school used to attract 10+ applications per place, they very rarely had occasional places, only when families moved abroad, and those places were filled in quickly. Now they have a few places in most year groups. They are still academically selective and I don't know what they are going to do. They can't accept whoever comes as that would damage academic league tables and will in turn lead to falling number of applications.

The electorate don't care about many things including some of Labour's anti growth policies. But that doesn't mean they still won't care when it hits something like welfare cuts.

Labour have got it wrong and those at the welfare end will feel it.

We were offered our 4th choice school and they are refusing to accommodate my child’s medical needs. On continuing interest for 3 schools and 22nd place on waiting list for semi-selective. Not great situation to be honest.
There are many private schools near us, but I don’t think they have even announced the 25/26 fees yet.

So sorry to hear that CharlieMagenta. If your child has medical needs that can't be met by the allocated school, that might be grounds for an appeal? Wishing you the best of luck with it!

because it is a story / gov spin not fact !

that is moving houses to get into grammar schools or top state schools

grammars are more selective and unfair than private schools

It is based on fact. The evidence is that applications to state schools have not gone up significantly this year. However, as per my first post on this thread, that doesn't really tell us anything. Many parents intending to send their children to independent schools also applied for state schools to give themselves a backup, so I wouldn't have expected a huge increase in applications even if people are abandoning independent schools. The number how actually start in September will be a better indicator.

Yes, they should be more selective—entrance is based on the child’s ability, rather than on how deep the parents’ pockets are.