Starmer's stubbornness

Joseann you are a breath of fresh air……

*nearly not early

Sadly, it is the small, often privately owned, independent schools, like I presume GNs often talk about, that will fare worse with the 20% VAT increase. You wouldn't have been envious of the buildings my school was housed in, Glorianny. It had no hall, no canteen, no games facilities at all, just a small garden. We bought into expensive outside facilities for such things. But the 90 children on roll flourished, and many are still family friends. Wellbeing came first, and as mentioned, financial assistance was readily available. I could have been early £20k a year better off myself by not giving away free places, but that was not part of my strong Christian ethos.

I wonder what choice you would have made if you’d adopted a child and was facing the situation my son faced with his child? Would your politics have been so inflexible that you’d have left your young adopted child in a situation that was leading to a failure to thrive? There were no other state schools in the area that were in the position to offer a school place, and in any case the state CofE school was renowned for it’s quality and it’s nurturing, but some things are beyond control. My son leans to the left in his politics, but thought his child’s stability more important than principle.

GG you’re right, school is an extension of family life, especially for adopted children.

Not all independent schools are charities or claim reductions in business rates. The small schools GN members GCs attend may well not be affected by this change. Only 70% of independent schools are registered as charities. Amongst those are of course the hugely expensive ones. There is absolutely no justification for granting them benefits.

I always find the expression "the politics of envy" amusing as a statement. It comes when someone can find no other reason for supporting the insupportable.

Do I envy rich people? Sometimes I think it would be nice to have more money. But really I know that I have a comfortable and reasonably secure life, during which I have been (and still am) able to contribute to society, whilst maintaining a creative and positive personal life. I hope I've passed on to my children and grandchildren the belief that money isn't everything and life is more than just acquisition.

So I really don't envy private education personally. I do however envy the level of funding, the level of staffing, the support and the buildings and games facilities they have. I'd want the same for every child in the country, so if that is envy yes I have it.

maddyone I totally endorse that previously looked after children should have priority in their foster/adoptive parents first choice of school.

We have adopted children in our immediate family, depending on the age of the children at adoption they need nurturing, reassurance and encouragement along with the knowledge that they are now secure and surrounded by a loving family. Their school life journey is an extension of this.

It does go to show yet again, how many families straddle the two systems.
Not all independent schools are like Eton or Winchester.
They are very much in the minority.
I doubt very much that anyone on here will have heard of the independent primary school my grandson is currently attending.

Iam64

maddyone,your family experience is of course just that. I recognise both of you taught for many years, very valuable contribution.
I don’t see my post as saying never the Twain shall meet. More that this area is one that divides posters into largely for or against Labour’s proposal. As is clear, I support it

Thank you for your recognition Iam.
You’re certainly correct in that this topic does divide posters hugely.
It will no longer affect me or my family, but that would be a selfish attitude, because it would have affected me some years ago, and so I do feel for families using independent schools who are not rich, but just about managing to pay their school fees.
Independent schools are used for a variety of reasons. My grandson, who was adopted at two years old, went initially to a state CofE primary school, but he was removed after two years due to constant changes of staff (three teachers and four different TAs in one year alone) and my son chose a lovely private school for him. The constant disruptions were affecting his young child who had had more than enough disruptions in his young life, and his confidence was affected badly. In his new independent school, with stable staffing and smaller classes, he thrived. It was the best choice for him and he was lucky that his parents could make that choice. He will be going to senior school in September and he is going to an excellent state senior school, much sought after, but previously looked after children have the advantage of rising to the top of the admissions list in state schools.
I hope no poster will think that this advantage, not available to other children, is unfair.

Oh, and to the poster who sees nothing philanthropic in choosing to offer 5 free places in a school of 90 pupils, at least I knew that those children were able to benefit from opportunities they wouldn't have otherwise had. And I don't just mean educationally.
Thank you Wyllow3 for recognising this, and yes, I agree, that the poorest performing state schools in the country should be given help to bring them up to the standards of the best.

I do understand why is called "politics of envy", though on the particular issue of removing charitable status, I see it more as politics of pettiness.
To be honest, most private schools wouldn't really care if charitable status were to be removed. It nets them little in the bigger picture, and it is a pain to administer. Eton is always cited, but it is not a good example to choose. Anyway, it won't happen because the law is so entrenched and complicated on this aspect, dating back to medieval times. They tried to consider it before during a Labour government's terms, but just reached an impasse.
The 20% VAT increase will, however, happen. I don't believe the silly figures that half the spaces will become unfilled.

Correction: Doug Bandow - sorry predict/text removal

The "politics of envy": it's not a "fact" of course, it's simply a right wing trope.

In modern times by Doug Band in the US in his book of that title in the 1990's, it's been used since then by the right in the USA and the UK.

Here's an interesting snippet showing its use in 2012
www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2012/aug/29/nick-clegg-politics-of-envy

The politics of envy:

“ Use of the term tends to surge when the right feels threatened by mass outrage at extreme wealth while the majority are struggling economically”.

Feeling ‘threatened’ GSM?

I don’t envy people who are better off than me. But I do empathise with people that are worse off because I know how easy it is to get into a downward spiral if there is no help available.

I have no problem with the status quo - but then I don’t subscribe to the politics of envy. It’s easy to see who does on here.

Indeed Glorianny. In fact the very few and carefully selected pupils who receive bursaries at Eton for example are mere window dressing.

Are those on Gransnet, or their adult children, truly happy to subsidise every student at Eton? Because that in a nutshell is a fact.

Have your private schools but stop pretending they are charitable organisations and make them pay their way like any other commercial business. One or two children given bursaries does not constitute a charity

Hear, hear Glorianny!

Germanshepherdsmum

I have already said that independent schools do much good in the state sector and in taking in children whose parents cannot afford fees - but it seems to fall on deaf ears. Comments are being made by posters who have no knowledge of what independent schools do yet hate their very existence. How very typical of old Labour views - what has really changed?

This is purely propaganda. The amount of good done has absolutely no proportion to the amount claimed as a charity. It isn't charity to use profits from a business to fund a few things. Many businesses make charitable donations and they can be tax deductable. They do not give the business charitable status or exempt it from taxes on other things.

I have no objection to anyone paying for the education of their children. I simply don't see why the tax payer should fund it.

From the article I linked to earlier
on 2,707 properties classified as private schools there would be a business rates bill of around £1.16bn over the next five years. Extrapolating from the data received from councils, it forecast that £634m would be paid, with £522m saved through the schools’ charitable status.’ Among the beneficiaries are Eton, whose bill for business rates would have been in excess of £4m, but is, in fact, only £821,000
This is money which would go directly to local councils who could use it to properly fund state education.

Have your private schools but stop pretending they are charitable organisations and make them pay their way like any other commercial business.
One or two children given bursaries does not constitute a charity.

Thanks flappergirl. Truly shocking!

Just to put this into perspective: Eton College receives 80% business rate relief, doesn't pay any Corporation Tax, receives Gift Aid on all "donations" (which adds up to a pretty penny) and can claw back any VAT it pays on certain goods and services.

The tax payer is effectively subsidising each pupil at the school to the tune of around £10,000 a year. We subsidised Boris Johnson's education amongst other worthy boys.

Is that not charity?

How magnanimous to give out free places to the deserving poor…

You are so right.

Germanshepherdemum & Joseann
however much we explain I am afraid it will continue to be ignored 🤦‍♀️