Labour U Turns Part 164

[tyke1962]

Dropped taking away Charitable status from Private Schools yesterday .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66942985

[roversdude]

There will be a few more broken promises from all sides as we run up to an election
Worst ever must have been the clown who ran the election campaign based on scrapping tuition fees then became Deputy Prime Minister in a coalition and in doing so managed an about turn. Nick Clegg

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

The thing with this policy for me, is a lot of people (regardless of what you think about it) spend all they have on school fees, many won't be able to afford 20% more.  I'd be surprised if it raises what they think it will.  Surely if you're going to do it phase it in?

[SydneyRover]

Labour have said what the VAT does raise will go to state schools, maybe they can reduce the ₤11bn backlog of repairs required.

[Herbert Anchovy]

We are in the build up to a GE announcement for sure. The governments policy announcements over recent days are designed to appeal to right wingers contemplating moving to Reform. The home secretary’s recent speech about refugee status was a case in point. The UN will absolutely not change the definition of a refugee based on the speeches of a hypocritical UK home sec but it gets headlines in the Daily Mail etc.

The Labour Party will now begin going through all of the policy promises they’ve made since 2019 to see which ones can be scrapped.

The Lib Dems….who knows?

As we get closer to an election the parties will be making more and more bolder and rash promises. Remember Corbyns increasingly over the top policies as we got closer to the election in 2019?

As for me, whoever is in power not a great deal will change for me, though ironically I’m probably better off financially under the Tories. However I want to ensure that the next generation have more security regarding housing, jobs, education, health etc and based on the past 12 years I don’t believe for a minute that the Tories will do that. They don’t even try to hide their contempt for anyone outside of the wealthy, London based bubble anymore.

[SydneyRover]

Gove, in the past has said that he hoped there would be no need for private schools, presumably he and his governments were to raise the standards in state/independent schools ............ maybe he had a change of heart.

[River Don]

I think we are on the countdown to the election but I don't think that necessarily means an early election... Just a very long campaign.

It will all depend on how the polls are looking, so I expect Sunak to put it off as long as he can.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Labour have said what the VAT does raise will go to state schools, maybe they can reduce the ₤11bn backlog of repairs required.

Seems really fair for the kids whose education may be disrupted by having to change school and lifestyle, they should phase it in or do it differently.

[albie]

Private schools are not charities, they are businesses.

As such, they should not enjoy any financial benefits from false charitable status, and face the same tax regime as other private businesses.

[SydneyRover]

Michael Gove 2017

''Removing charitable status is rightly no longer seen as radical. In 2017, that well-known lefty Michael Gove declared that private schools were “welfare junkies”, calling the VAT exemption “egregious state support to the already wealthy so that they might buy advantage for their own children”. The classic argument that private schools deserve tax breaks because they provide bursaries to poorer children is as thin as paper: in 2017, only 1% of private school pupils were schooled for free, while figures show “financial assistance” is considerably more likely to go to affluent middle-class families than children in need''

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/19/private-schools-britain-labour-unjust

Gove talked about it, did nothing.

[Bristol Red Rover]

This change of policy is simply another attempt to win over, or not lose, votes from that section of people - around 550,000 kids are privately educated.

Removing the charitable status would obviously mean private schools become more exclusive, and it would be the poorer of that section who would lose out, so in a sense, idealogically included, it makes sense for a centre right Labour Party to scrap this policy.

The education system is kak, but unless you are a fully signed up elitist, there is no place for private schools, and meanwhile the less there are the better - just someone please start by removing the ones at the top first which removing the charitable status won't do.

[drfchound]

I can’t see any Party doing away with private schools.
Plenty of top brass in all Party’s attended them.

[tyke1962]

This change of policy is simply another attempt to win over, or not lose, votes from that section of people - around 550,000 kids are privately educated.

Removing the charitable status would obviously mean private schools become more exclusive, and it would be the poorer of that section who would lose out, so in a sense, idealogically included, it makes sense for a centre right Labour Party to scrap this policy.

The education system is kak, but unless you are a fully signed up elitist, there is no place for private schools, and meanwhile the less there are the better - just someone please start by removing the ones at the top first which removing the charitable status won't do.

But Keith had the opposite view in 2021 which is entirely my point .

[danumdon]

This change of policy is simply another attempt to win over, or not lose, votes from that section of people - around 550,000 kids are privately educated.

Removing the charitable status would obviously mean private schools become more exclusive, and it would be the poorer of that section who would lose out, so in a sense, idealogically included, it makes sense for a centre right Labour Party to scrap this policy.

The education system is kak, but unless you are a fully signed up elitist, there is no place for private schools, and meanwhile the less there are the better - just someone please start by removing the ones at the top first which removing the charitable status won't do.

The politics of envy, this will do bugger all for working class kids and in effect will hinder the smartest of them from being able to attend a school that wants to educate them to a standard that will benefit them and the country overall.

But no, lets force them into sink schools similar to the likes of the one that the poor young girl from Croydon attended.

Will do wonders for pupil attainment and future progression, as if we need more kids from under performing schools.

The country is truly going to the dogs, with u turning politicians leading it.

[Bristol Red Rover]

This change of policy is simply another attempt to win over, or not lose, votes from that section of people - around 550,000 kids are privately educated.

Removing the charitable status would obviously mean private schools become more exclusive, and it would be the poorer of that section who would lose out, so in a sense, idealogically included, it makes sense for a centre right Labour Party to scrap this policy.

The education system is kak, but unless you are a fully signed up elitist, there is no place for private schools, and meanwhile the less there are the better - just someone please start by removing the ones at the top first which removing the charitable status won't do.

The politics of envy, this will do bugger all for working class kids and in effect will hinder the smartest of them from being able to attend a school that wants to educate them to a standard that will benefit them and the country overall.

But no, lets force them into sink schools similar to the likes of the one that the poor young girl from Croydon attended.

Will do wonders for pupil attainment and future progression, as if we need more kids from under performing schools.

The country is truly going to the dogs, with u turning politicians leading it.

Envy, no. Any society that has elitist institutions, especially for children is the opposite of being wholesome. Note that it produces catastrophies like Johnson, but also so many other powerful and influencial people that destroy what is good.

What is it that you think is good about them?

[danumdon]

This change of policy is simply another attempt to win over, or not lose, votes from that section of people - around 550,000 kids are privately educated.

Removing the charitable status would obviously mean private schools become more exclusive, and it would be the poorer of that section who would lose out, so in a sense, idealogically included, it makes sense for a centre right Labour Party to scrap this policy.

The education system is kak, but unless you are a fully signed up elitist, there is no place for private schools, and meanwhile the less there are the better - just someone please start by removing the ones at the top first which removing the charitable status won't do.

The politics of envy, this will do bugger all for working class kids and in effect will hinder the smartest of them from being able to attend a school that wants to educate them to a standard that will benefit them and the country overall.

But no, lets force them into sink schools similar to the likes of the one that the poor young girl from Croydon attended.

Will do wonders for pupil attainment and future progression, as if we need more kids from under performing schools.

The country is truly going to the dogs, with u turning politicians leading it.

Envy, no. Any society that has elitist institutions, especially for children is the opposite of being wholesome. Note that it produces catastrophies like Johnson, but also so many other powerful and influencial people that destroy what is good.

What is it that you think is good about them?

So because they produced a cretin like Johnson they need to be scrapped and removed? You do realise that if you scrapped every private school tomorrow the overall standard of attainment in Uk schools would plummet to a level on a par with 3rd world countries, to say nothing of the massive disruption in state schools to accommodate all these extra pupils.

They also produce leaders and innovators, people who will benefit society as a whole, i mean does this country truly need more underachieving kids?

Is it the right thing to do to lose a very bright working class kid into our sub standard comprehensive system when with they could flourish in an environment that will assist them.

You stick with your right on class war mate and watch this country sink to levels no one could ever contemplate.

[Bristol Red Rover]

So because they produced a cretin like Johnson they need to be scrapped and removed? You do realise that if you scrapped every private school tomorrow the overall standard of attainment in Uk schools would plummet to a level on a par with 3rd world countries, to say nothing of the massive disruption in state schools to accommodate all these extra pupils.

They also produce leaders and innovators, people who will benefit society as a whole, i mean does this country truly need more underachieving kids?

Is it the right thing to do to lose a very bright working class kid into our sub standard comprehensive system when with they could flourish in an environment that will assist them.

You stick with your right on class war mate and watch this country sink to levels no one could ever contemplate.

There are very well balanced, humanistic, egalitarian people that come out of private schools. Not all private schools are the same, some don't poison their pupils with elitist values and means. But no, it isn't "just because of Johnson" - he's the example I used as the bottom of the slime pit.

You appear to celebrate elitism. You confuse an under resourced, poorly formulated education system with children underachieving because they aren't in a private school. Don't increase taxes, especially inheritance tax. Just what the elites want you to think. Well done you!

And then you come in with the fear of the country sinking, jeez, they really have your cojones in a vice. Or maybe you are Jacob Rees Mogg?

[i_ateallthepies]

"watch this country sink to levels no one could ever contemplate"?  It's already happened in barely the blink of an eye.  Just look at two of today's headlines... Fifteen year old girl stabbed in the neck an killed, Sycamore Gap tree felled for no conceivable reason.

[TommyC]

It isn't quite the u turn it sounds though. They're still going to stick VAT on the fees so the effect is much the same. The charitable status thing is a bit of a red herring.

As someone who this directly affects, it is pure dog-whistle politics of envy. For every Eton and Harrow, there are tenfold middle ranking provincial private schools. My daughter attends one such school. I'd say 75% of the parents at the school gates are sending their children there on trust funds, grandparents paying, inheritances etc. Stay at home mums who dont work picking them up in the Range Rover every day etc. There are however a minority of parents like myself and my wife who both work our b*llocks off to be able to send her there. Drop her off earliest and last to pick her up because we're both working to send her there. Its people like us (which cumulatively adds up to quite a lot of people across the country) who will suffer. It won't affect your Boris Jonson types and your Eton, Harrow and Charterhouse kids. It will affect the kids of hard working middle income parents.

And that's before we get onto the fact that it won't produce any more additional income if the predictions as to how many will drop out of the private sector and join the state system.l are factored in.

As for charitable status, most if not all of these schools open up their usually very impressive facilities to the general public in an attempt to give something back to the local community.

As for promoting inequality, unfortunately it has been proven (and I will find it if I have to) that the perceived inequality a private education conveys is a falicy. If you're from a family wealthy enough to send your kids to private school, the ship has already sailed by the time they reach school age (3 and over). The social demographic of those kind of families means that those kids are at a massive advantage with or without a private education.

A parent friend of ours commented only last weekend when we were watching the little ones at a swimming competition...."this is what all schools should be like". Amen to that. The answer is not to tear them down or make them the preserve of only the ultra rich.  Aspiration can achieve a great deal of good.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Tommy

I don't understand. If the advantage is hard wired in by the age of 3, why pay for a private education?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Tommy

I don't understand. If the advantage is hard wired in by the age of 3, why pay for a private education?

Surely that only gets you so far?  My school had pretty poor facilities, poor options and not the best teaching at all, I've created an ok life and career despite that not because of it. I've no doubt if I had better schooling I'd have been more successful.

[TommyC]

Tommy

I don't understand. If the advantage is hard wired in by the age of 3, why pay for a private education?

Surely that only gets you so far?  My school had pretty poor facilities, poor options and not the best teaching at all, I've created an ok life and career despite that not because of it. I've no doubt if I had better schooling I'd have been more successful.

Yes pretty much that. My parents did it for me and they also made sacrifices  to pay for it. On a point of principle I said I'd do the same for my daughter and whilst ever she is happy there, making the most of the opportunity and enjoying it, I'd sell a kidney to keep her there. Which I might have to once the fees go up 20% under labour.

 I always said about my own education that it didn't turn me from an idiot into a genius (far from it) nor would it do that for anyone else. But what it does do is push you a little harder and nurtures whatever little talent I may have had. My wife does exactly the same job as me yet she was state educated. So she has ended up in exactly the same place albeit without the expensive education. She herself nevrtheless still says that she would have killed to have had that level of opportunity, support and nurture that I had at school and she was/is therefore fully supportive of us doing the same for our daughter. Ultimately though, if you're clever enough and encouraged enough and work hard, you'll be successful irrespective of whether you're privately educated or not.

Interestingly it's also true that anyone aspiring to Oxbridge has far better prospects of being accepted if they apply from the state sector than they do from the private sector. The latter is actually a millstone in the Oxbridge applications process.

I'm not saying a private school is pointless BST. Far from it. 93% at A* to C at A Level isn't an accident is it.  What i am saying is that the degree to which it promotes social inequality, is overstated as a large part of that perceived inequality comes simply from the fact that rich families raise children in a certain way and that starts from the day they're born.

[River Don]

Anecdotal evidence is useless.

That said, I'll give you my anecdote. My sister won a scholarship to a fee paying school in Herts. She won a scholarship for tennis, still it cost my dad a pretty penny.

I did better than her at uni but she went to the USA because of her tennis. She won a few things.

My experience of private education is that it is a million miles ahead of state school. But the biggest difference, is the attitude of the teachers. It's a different world.

So much more supportive. So much more focussed.

[SydneyRover]

Anecdotal evidence is useless.

That said, I'll give you my anecdote. My sister won a scholarship to a fee paying school in Herts. She won a scholarship for tennis, still it cost my dad a pretty penny.

I did better than her at uni but she went to the USA because of her tennis. She won a few things.

My experience of private education is that it is a million miles ahead of state school. But the biggest difference, is the attitude of the teachers. It's a different world.

So much more supportive. So much more focussed.

RD, why do you think that is?

[River Don]

Anecdotal evidence is useless.

That said, I'll give you my anecdote. My sister won a scholarship to a fee paying school in Herts. She won a scholarship for tennis, still it cost my dad a pretty penny.

I did better than her at uni but she went to the USA because of her tennis. She won a few things.

My experience of private education is that it is a million miles ahead of state school. But the biggest difference, is the attitude of the teachers. It's a different world.

So much more supportive. So much more focussed.

RD, why do you think that is?

Because it is very clear. For those teachers to achieve their pupils must achieve.

In practice what it means is a much more equal relationship between tutor and pupil. And a combined effort

[River Don]

I notice the teachers in private schools are much more compassionate and supportive.

In general it's a much nicer environment to learn in.

[SydneyRover]

I notice the teachers in private schools are much more compassionate and supportive.

In general it's a much nicer environment to learn in.

This 'nicer environment' can you expand on this, RD?

Added

Are you talking about more modern buildings, smaller class size, something else?

[River Don]

I notice the teachers in private schools are much more compassionate and supportive.

In general it's a much nicer environment to learn in.

This 'nicer environment' can you expand on this, RD?

How can I expand on this? The teachers don't bully you. They don't write you off. They look to bring out the best in you.

[SydneyRover]

I notice the teachers in private schools are much more compassionate and supportive.

In general it's a much nicer environment to learn in.

This 'nicer environment' can you expand on this, RD?

How can I expand on this? The teachers don't bully you. They don't write you off. They look to bring out the best in you.

Better teachers lead to more respect from the kids, a more harmonious learning environment, better results, is that a fair comment?

[River Don]

I notice the teachers in private schools are much more compassionate and supportive.

In general it's a much nicer environment to learn in.

This 'nicer environment' can you expand on this, RD?

How can I expand on this? The teachers don't bully you. They don't write you off. They look to bring out the best in you.

Better teachers lead to more respect from the kids, a more harmonious learning environment, better results, is that a fair comment?

Yes