Private schools lose case at High Court

I'm sorry to say, private schools and parents need to get over it, and get on with it as it is.

Laughable decision. Going to appeal.

escaped

I'm sorry to say, private schools and parents need to get over it, and get on with it as it is.

That view may apply to many. However, those who have SEND children at private specialist schools and can no longer afford the fees, will have to send those children back into mainstream education that was unable to deliver an education to them in the first place. What future for them?
The Government should have made SEND private schools exempt. Students are in those schools from necessity rather than image and many of those parents are far from wealthy but trying to do their best for a child with needs.
A very cruel decision by Labour.

ronib

Laughable decision. Going to appeal.

Why?

You certainly have a point Sarnia. It's not the decision itself to put 20% on school fees, but the process of going about it.

If a child's EHCP identifies that they require a specific type of educational provision that can only be found in a private school, the local authority can fund that placement

Sarnia

What we should be outraged about s he lack of adequate SEND provision for all children wh need it, irrespective of their parents/grandparents incomes and wealth.

No private schools should ever have been granted charitable status on the back of offering a couple of “deprived” children scholarships each year.

Many independent schools, especially at secondary level, make profits, some vast.

Sorry about typos Edit button please

Cossy

Sarnia

What we should be outraged about s he lack of adequate SEND provision for all children wh need it, irrespective of their parents/grandparents incomes and wealth.

No private schools should ever have been granted charitable status on the back of offering a couple of “deprived” children scholarships each year.

Many independent schools, especially at secondary level, make profits, some vast.

Totally agree Cossy

A ridiculously rushed and poorly thought through decision by the Labour Party.

escaped

I'm sorry to say, private schools and parents need to get over it, and get on with it as it is.

Totally, as I speak as the grand-mother of several GCs at private school.

Cossy

Sarnia

What we should be outraged about s he lack of adequate SEND provision for all children wh need it, irrespective of their parents/grandparents incomes and wealth.

No private schools should ever have been granted charitable status on the back of offering a couple of “deprived” children scholarships each year.

Many independent schools, especially at secondary level, make profits, some vast.

Spot on!
Every mainstream school should have teachers and resources in all specialities so every child crossing their threshold, whether gifted, average or with learning issues can receive an education to suit them. How much better for those SEND children to go to their local school, mixing and making friends with those who live locally. Instead many are sent miles and miles away to get their schooling. Latest figures show a cost to the taxpayer of £11b a year on schools and transport and rising year on year.
A crazy way to run a country's education service.

A lot of private schools had historical charitable status.

Precisely, kittylester. The law regarding charitable status goes back centuries.
Labour said a while back, that it would not be removing charitable status. That's a completely separate issue.

Yes Sarnia!

Put money into good SEND provision for all children across all schools.

The two privately owned and run SEND schools of which I have knowledge have children exclusively funded by the local authority.
The fees ( with or without VAT) would be prohibitive for parents .
Placements, supported by an EHCP, are requested by parents as the need is perceived to be impossible to achieve in a mainstream setting- classes of eight and under, for example.

On fees potentially increasing if schools decided to pass on the cost of VAT to the parents, the judges said the European Convention on Human Rights did not protect the ‘right’ to pay school fees at a particular level.

‘Private school fees are set independently of government and are inherently subject to market forces. Parents always have the option of not paying any school fees at all - and therefore no VAT - by sending their children to a state school or educating them at home,’ the judgment says.

(The Law Gazette)

During the past 10 years or so, it was not unusual for the "finance man" at the local authority to phone the independent school I was at to discuss the possibility of reducing the amount he was due to hand over for child X, Y or Z. He would say his budget just couldn't stretch to it. The school would then invariably come to an arrangement with him to send across a third less than was owed to it.
Ours was a well off school, it would not be possible in a school with only 8 - 10 per class.

kittylester

A lot of private schools had historical charitable status.

Many were started by merchants and others who had become wealthy and spent their wealth helping their local communities by establishing schools for children who may not have received education beyond the age of about 10 or 12. .

The Worshipful Company of Haberdashers was one such.

escaped

Precisely, kittylester. The law regarding charitable status goes back centuries.
Labour said a while back, that it would not be removing charitable status. That's a completely separate issue.

Charities are not exempt from paying VAT although they can claim some back on purchases.

Many were started by merchants and others who had become wealthy and spent their wealth helping their local communities by establishing schools for children who may not have received education beyond the age of about 10 or 12. The Worshipful Company of Haberdashers was one such

I’m sure that’s the case Allira but it doesn’t mean those schools should remain charities for eternity!

Children went up chimneys. Women weren’t allowed to vote. Education wasn’t freely available to all. But that’s no longer the case … because life has moved on.

Just because something was doesn’t mean it should always be.

Education is freely available to every child in this country. If parents choose not to avail themselves of it, that’s up to them, but they should not expect special economic treatment for doing so.

Private schools are not charities; they are businesses. They provide a service; parents / pupils are their clients who pay for the service provided. It’s a transactional relationship that should not be ‘dressed up’ as a charity.

Children with special needs are invariably funded by their lea to attend specialist private schools. Those parents who just want their children to be privately educated will just have to pay. ALL children would benefit from smaller class sizes not just the tiny tiny minority attending such private schools. No sympathy from me!

I think we need to be a bit careful here that smaller class sizes are the magic wand to give all children the best education. They are certainly not when you only have 8 or 10, as mentioned, pupils in a class.

kittylester

A lot of private schools had historical charitable status.

What is the relevance to today?

My grandchildren's excellent private school has mainly children from wealthy to very wealthy parents from all over the world. And they have a charitable side, with bursaries for fees, activities, uniforms, and so much more.