Charitable status and private schools

Thanks for your explanation, Wheniwasyourage. I'm sorry if I took your original words the wrong way.

It does seem unfair, though, that, when the PM is doing, saying and approving all sorts of dreadful things, with very little media disapproval, the media will attempt to vilify the LOTO for very little at all.

I'm resigned to that, but it's annoying, all the same

MaizieD

Elegran

MaizieD A technical point, and it could probably be labelled pedantic, but I am with Josie in thinking that "it is an 'unfortunate u-turn' " is not an exact quoting of her "backtracking on his pledge doesn't look good." If you are quoting part of someone else's post, then quote it, don't paraphrase it to change the meaning.

I stand corrected, Elegran. I confused Joseann's wording with that of the next poster, who did use the terms 'unfortunate ' and 'u turn'. To me they both expressed some adverse criticism of the move.

However, I will now don my sackcloth and ashes and go and sit on the naughty step for a few hours in the hope that it will sufficiently atone for my crime against posting accuracy.

I used the terms "unfortunate" and "u-turn". Obviously I have not made my meaning clear, but what I wanted to convey was that these days, anything that looks like a change of policy for any reason, is jumped on as a failure. In this case, I think that removing charitable status may not be very effective, but VAT on fees might be better and is perhaps being considered. Changing policies in the light of further information can be very positive, but it is still seen as weakness by our dreadful press. I hope that makes what I meant a bit clearer.

Having said that, I am not at all in favour of Rishi Sunak's recent backtracking, as I think his information is wrong!

You must have missed the last conversation on here about this. LizzieDrip

There are still private schools in Finland. They do serve a smaller percentage than here but they exist. Always worth checking your facts

By the way, that one very statist post may have lost Labour my vote. It's only one but that sort of thinking will affect your chances.

I neither want an all powerful, new aristocracy or an all powerful state. I am a centrist democrat - difficult though that can be in today's UK.

Absolutely DaisyAnne and my vote will definitely go to Labour at the next election. Centre or Left, IMO Labour is (and will continue to be) the only party of social justice.

Rich ppl aren’t posh they just have a bit more money than most of us. You should never judge a person by their personal choices. My granddaughter goes to a private school the local school is absolutely shocking and she is so advanced for age. military families get 90 percent paid for from the military. My granddaughter is no longer part of the military family her parents now pay for her. Yes she got some posh friends with very big houses but they don’t treat my son and his wife any differently.

Channel 4 News
"Keir Starmer is spineless, but so is Rishi Sunak"
Economist Yanis Varoufakis tells @krishgm what he says is "the greatest defeat in democracy" in Britain that there is no difference between a Labour and Conservative Prime Minister

You can find full video on YouTube
Yanas Varoufakis on the death of capitalism, Starmer and the tyranny of big tech.

LizzieDrip

*But I would also hate what Neo-Communism (a creep towards totalitarianism) could do to us should they take over Labour*

I doubt that would happen DaisyAnne, particularly under Starmer and his Cabinet, although I do respect your point. For many, the current Labour Party is far too centrist. Of course, for me they’re not left enough - but that’s just me!

LizzieDrip

I'd like to believe it wouldn't happen under Starmer but once Parties get into power and become complacent about winning votes from the centre, they do tend to move to extremes.

As you point out, we want different thing but currently neither of us can get near what we want without some sort of tacit agreement.

Finland abolished its fee-paying schools and instituted a nationwide comprehensive system from the early 1970s onwards … and, since then, Finland has consistently rated highly on all PISA categories. Result!

DaisyAnneReturns

Whitewavemark2

DaisyAnneReturns

Aveline

How are they subsidising private schools? Parents are paying taxes and their children not taking up places in public schools.

I dont think truth comes into it fir some Aveline.

I have still not decided whether to support Labour into power in the next election or not. I hate what the Neo-Liberals have done to the country after taking over the the Conservative Party. But I would also hate what Neo-Communism (a creep towards totalitarianism) could do to us should they take over Labour.

dar what happened between you post timed 9.23 and this one? I read them as being in direct contradiction, but perhaps I’m wrong?

I'm not sure what you see as a contradiction Whitewave? Let me know and I will try and explain my thinking.

Sorry it was me - I read it completely wrongly. Apology

I’m not sure I would have liked to go to a private posh school with all the so called elites. If no private schools can you imagine them turning up in their chauffeur driven cars to lord it over the other kids at state school? No I expect they will educate them privately at home. At least that would be better than the poor little blighters sent off to boarding school at 8. No wonder they end up mal adjusted.

I liked the grammar school system whereby you got a decent education and were the equal of anyone. Instead of bringing private schools down we need to raise state schools up. Sending their kids to ordinary school wouldn’t do much for the have and have not divide.

Elegran

MaizieD A technical point, and it could probably be labelled pedantic, but I am with Josie in thinking that "it is an 'unfortunate u-turn' " is not an exact quoting of her "backtracking on his pledge doesn't look good." If you are quoting part of someone else's post, then quote it, don't paraphrase it to change the meaning.

I stand corrected, Elegran. I confused Joseann's wording with that of the next poster, who did use the terms 'unfortunate ' and 'u turn'. To me they both expressed some adverse criticism of the move.

However, I will now don my sackcloth and ashes and go and sit on the naughty step for a few hours in the hope that it will sufficiently atone for my crime against posting accuracy.

There used to be a system called the Assisted Places Scheme. My husband taught in an independent school and his school had a number of assisted places available to children who came from low income backgrounds. My nephew benefited from such a place as my sister and her husband had a low income. My nephew is now a doctor. I’m not suggesting that all children who benefited from the scheme went on to become doctors, but a number of them went on to Oxbridge from my husband’s school.

Visgir1

We put our children into the Private sector at Junior level as the local schools were not the best. We struggle to pay the fees but I feel it was worth it. Only did it until they were 11 as we wanted the good foundation to see them into the senior sector.
So No not every parent is Rich and we by no means the only ones to do this, it was quite common in our era about 20 years ago.

So Vat on Private Schools, so will they do that to University fees as well? Same diffence? Although didn't they bring in Uni fees?

In 1995, Gillian Shepherd (Tory Ed Sec) asked Ron Dearing to look into Higher Ed funding. He reported in 1997. Obviously unis had made long-term funding plans for worst case scenario. Whether the plans were too far advanced to go back, whether there was no funding for Blair's Education Education Education plans and uni funding, I've no idea, but uni fees were initially a Tory idea.

The point about a voucher system is that in theory only half of the fees for a typical private day school is covered by the state. So the other half is covered by grandparents, parents, insurance policies etc and that means the impoverished working and middle classes might consider private education. Many parents switch between private and state schools as it is.

MaizieD A technical point, and it could probably be labelled pedantic, but I am with Josie in thinking that "it is an 'unfortunate u-turn' " is not an exact quoting of her "backtracking on his pledge doesn't look good." If you are quoting part of someone else's post, then quote it, don't paraphrase it to change the meaning.

I’m not sure what state schools many of you attended or your children etc, but what you are describing of lack of discipline, chaos etc certainly does not reflect any state school that I am familiar with.

What the state schools have had to contend with has been the cruel slashing of their budgets, and the lack of support, which means that they can’t possibly compete with fee paying schools, and their impressive facilities.

The fact that state educated children succeed in spite of the apparent chaos, ill-discipline etc, says much for the resilience if these children and teachers.

Oreo

MaizieD

I seen to remember a voucher scheme being offered undervtha Thatcher government. What happened to that?

I've worked in a state school in a deprived area. Actually, we liked our children, but some certainly had 'attitudes' that the private sector would find problematic... especially if they had a large number to deal with. State sector is obliged to take these children, I wonder how the private sector would cope if they had the same obligation.

They and their parents would be warned about their behaviour.If discipline still failed they would be suspended and maybe expelled.They wouldn’t have the obligation of continuing to educate them that state schools have.I’m not surprised that teachers enjoy their jobs at private schools.

I was musing on a hypothetical situation which could arise as a result of ronib's voucher suggestion. If private schools were subject to the same obligations as the state sector their whole outlook, and their popularity with some parents, might well change quite radically.

State schools can 'expel' pupils, but if they use that method too frequently questions would be asked, inspections made and a verdict of unsatisfactory would be the most likely result.

I would be interested to see how the private sector, which is supposedly so much better than the state sector, would fare if subject to the same constraints.

Of course, their much higher per pupil funding might help them to deal with these pupils better; these children often need far more individual attention than a state setting is able to give them because of cost constraints.

Whitewavemark2

DaisyAnneReturns

Aveline

How are they subsidising private schools? Parents are paying taxes and their children not taking up places in public schools.

I dont think truth comes into it fir some Aveline.

I have still not decided whether to support Labour into power in the next election or not. I hate what the Neo-Liberals have done to the country after taking over the the Conservative Party. But I would also hate what Neo-Communism (a creep towards totalitarianism) could do to us should they take over Labour.

dar what happened between you post timed 9.23 and this one? I read them as being in direct contradiction, but perhaps I’m wrong?

I'm not sure what you see as a contradiction Whitewave? Let me know and I will try and explain my thinking.

It was mentioned on TRIP’s a while back that the best countries for education are the ones where private schools are not allowed. From memory I think the mentioned Finland and Canada.

Aveline

How are they subsidising private schools? Parents are paying taxes and their children not taking up places in public schools.

Yes Aveline. If every independent school closed tomorrow, the state sector would have a lot of trouble accommodating all the children. Luckily that won’t happen.

It’s not that state schools are bad its that parents don’t care , if they did discipline would be vastly improved, teachers have no control over the children, are not respected by either so many are chaos and nobody cares.

If VAT was charged on Private schools it would make no difference, only 6 % of children go private, the amount is over £1bn but that is less than 1% of the education budget that is not going to make the slightest difference it’s just a sop to the left wing.

It would deter parents at the lowest level of private education the majority would just shrug their shoulders and carry on

GrannyGravy13

Sir Starmer has seen the light and has decided to leave fee paying schools alone, well done 👏👏👏

I agree with you GrannyGravy.

I doubt very much that Starmer and his cabinet will be in control of the Labour Party for long, should they form the next government.
Private education is unfair; in my opinion it promotes the mediocre, children who would not cope within the state sector but not entirely their fault.
The state sector is burdened with inadequate funding, large classes, open enrolment, closure of special schools and lack of sanctions to deal with out of control pupils . Teachers are expected to do more and more social work to compensate for poor parenting.
Private schools may choose who they educate, and if they accept special needs children, as some do, the parents pay accordingly.

Vouchers would probably send more into "alternative" education ronib - that's what I see happening.

Homeschoolers campaigned for this in the 1980s. I think nowadays it would encourage division.
I think that boat has sailed tbh.

Just what does Labour have against independent schools? If parents can afford (whether easily or by scrimping and saving and going without) to send their child to an independent school what is wrong with that? Why make it even harder, probably impossible, for ordinary families to have choice in the matter of their children’s education?

And no, I didn’t attend an independent school, nor did my son.