1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Labour propose to abolish fee paying schools

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by jsmoke, Nov 23, 2019.

  1. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 22,740

    Location: Cornwall

    I do think that Labour's current manifesto position makes sense. Let's end all kinds of state aid, including tax breaks, to private schools, as a first step, no? There can really be no justification whatsoever for the govt to provide any kind of assistance to private schools.

    Because if we're being honest, the parents who send their kids to private schools aren't really going to care how bad the state-funded education system is. They might not even care if many kids leave school with no education at all.

    Why? Because life is about the cream rising to the top. If their kids have less competition that's a good thing. So if the masses have no education to speak of, that's just grand. Their kids will have an easier time rising to the top. Win/win. So let state education crumble and collapse. It's a good thing.

    In that vein, the state should not give any assistance to private schools whatsoever. No tax breaks, no funding, no help with anything. Let the market sort itself out, right? We don't need any govt interference. So let private schools work like any other free market business. And pay their damn taxes.

    Meanwhile funding to state schools has got to increase. Posters have commented that state schools are filled with "left-wing types who've never had a real job and couldn't get a job in private industry".

    Well the teachers whom they admire in private schools would never be attracted to the state schools, because the wages, conditions, investment, facilities, outcomes, prestige, etc, are so inferior, it's like comparing the 1st world with the 51st world. The free market model everyone loves says that if you want the best you have to pay for it. So we simply have to spend more money on state education.

    Or we give up and go back to the Victorian era and admit that is the natural, at-rest state this country by default aspires to. The master and the servant. The lord and the commoner. The haves and the have-nots. Everybody wants to be the former, and in that position nobody would give two craps about the latter. It seems to be in our DNA.

    Those who send their kids to private schools don't care about state education, and what's more favour lower taxes so they don't have to support other people's kids (that's for communists and socialists). So it's not hard to see how a proliferation of private education basically erodes and destroys state education, eventually. The more you go down the private route, the less money their is for the state-run sector, and the more everybody wants to send their own kids to private schools. In so doing having less money and wanting to pay lower taxes, thus voting Tory...

    Catch-22, no? Leading to state-run schools basically being run into the ground. We're not that far off that now, are we?
     
  2. cheesyboy

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 7, 2012

    Posts: 12,236

    Location: Gloucestershire

    Please read my posts in the thread, and consider that these are the key arguments against private schools. All to do with improving state schooling, nothing to do with "jealousy" (you mean "envy")
     
  3. Thecaferacer

    Hitman

    Joined: Feb 3, 2019

    Posts: 747

    I think you are being unfair to those who send their kids to a private school and their motives. Some had private schooling themselves so it's just a continuation of their normal, others are investing in their children's futures to give them the best possible head start, others look at the alternative comps and it scares them witless (Diane Abbott?)

    Another factor is private schools are not obliged to follow the national carriculum so parents may prefer what a certain schools teaches over the state ones

    The lord's and ladies of this world who genuinely look at it as one school for the rulers and another to the serfs are miniscule.

    Teachers pay also plays a smaller part than you'd imagine. Private school teachers won't be offered a public sector pension and earn marginally more than state. The big draw is that they can be employed with no formal teaching qualifications for state education and a lot have done the international circuit teaching abroad. In fact most will be earning far less than teachers in inner city London. A vast majority are on sub £40k.

    My kids will be going to my local comp as I'm happy with the school and confident with my discipline and guidance they will attain the qualifications needed to progress in life. I also want them to have a solid grounding in the community I grew up in before they disappear into their choices in life.
     
  4. Thecaferacer

    Hitman

    Joined: Feb 3, 2019

    Posts: 747

    So how does closing private schools bring up standards? The fee money won't magically be given to the local authority, the children will then have to be funded by the state and there will be no additional competition for teachers unless schools are given budgets to pay extra, which then again creates a 2 tier system as teachers will flock to the best paying schools and parents start gentrifying that area.
     
  5. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 22,740

    Location: Cornwall

    Trouble is I know many people who sending their kids to private schools, and they aren't "rich" and they aren't the "elites".

    But they know that the state run schools in this area are poor, and class sizes are huge, and outcomes from going to private schools are just 100x better.

    The more people who take this route, the less people are going to want to pay more taxes to increase the quality of state run schools. At best they'll be ambivalent, at worst they'll be opposed to the idea.

    We're in danger of state schools being a slum for those with no other options. In some cities this is basically true anyhow. State schools are just a hotbed of criminality and churn out young offenders. Naturally, everybody who can afford to will be sending their kids to private schools.

    And it's entirely natural that if you send your kids to private schools you stop caring how good the state education is.

    You yourself said it - you send your kids to private school if you want them to have an advantage. So naturally you either don't care about improving state education or you are happy that state education is bad. You just don't send your kids to private school and at the same time care deeply about the quality of state education.

    And Abbott is a disgrace and a hypocrite.
     
  6. Thecaferacer

    Hitman

    Joined: Feb 3, 2019

    Posts: 747

    I'd be surprised if there was anybody who was callous enough not to care about school standards in comps as that directly effects the overall surrounding communities that we all have to live in. I'd love for local children to be training as doctor's rather than our reliance on immigration.

    The problem we have is lack of direct taxation. Everyone knows a 5% increase in tax is swallowed up in the ether and your bang for buck at a local level will be difficult to see. My council tax went up again this year to pay for policing in order to tackle foreign drugs gangs in rural towns. If say a school tax was introduced whereby your council tax by postcode directly funded your local schools then few would argue with that.
     
  7. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 66,976

    Put it down to whatever but good luck getting the people of this country to collectively grow a social consciousness and conscientiousness at the level needed to make some of these systems work that do in Scandinavian countries.

    I think some degree of discrimination needs to go into the "can't tax the rich because they will leave" it isn't as simple as that some approaches to tax will have more of an impact towards that end than others, etc. but you can't just target the rich with changes to tax and expect them to just take it on the chin.

    Some areas will benefit from economies of scale others when you increase the numbers you increase complexity which increases costs non-linearly - also bigger countries also tend to spend more of their GDP on some areas that smaller countries don't have to (typically things like defence spending - but several countries around Scandinavia have bumped their military spending significantly in the wake of events in Ukraine distorting that one).

    A lot of schools seem to be suffering post the whole academy thing - where I think the ideal was once they'd been "upgraded" under the new system they'd be able to attract higher levels of funding from other sources such as the local community which in reality haven't panned out (and wasn't really very likely to) while their funding has been reduced compared to where they were before while they are expected to now run with a higher level of facilities, etc. to fund... my old secondary school for instance got tons spend on an all singing, all dancing set of sports facilities (which to be fair would set some public schools to shame) under the changes brought in by Gove but they've had to close half of it and sell off a load of land to fund the rest due to the lack of money to run it.
     
  8. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 22,740

    Location: Cornwall

    I wouldn't. In this country it's all about me, me, me these days. If you aren't using state-run facilities you probably don't care about funding them properly.

    And frankly if you're middle class you aren't living in the communities you mention that suffer from high crime, low prospects, etc. The council-house estates where nobody has any hope for the future at all. Plenty of them down here. Fortunately I don't live there either.

    e: Funnily enough, the Telegraph argues that there should be more use of private schools, and "aspirational middle classes" should be sending their kids to private schools. And that private schools should be opening their doors to the middle classes not just the upper echelons.

    So you see how various people believe that private schools should be the defacto choice for those who can afford them.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
  9. cheesyboy

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 7, 2012

    Posts: 12,236

    Location: Gloucestershire

    Because:
     
  10. Usher

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 30, 2004

    Posts: 3,203

    A much better idea is to nationalise private healthcare and take it all into public ownership, then cost cutting governments would reap what they sow
     
  11. Thecaferacer

    Hitman

    Joined: Feb 3, 2019

    Posts: 747

    So when the private school institutions have all been dismantled what's stopping a person of affluence making a "donation" to a state school their child attends or moving to an area with a top performing comp.

    This isn't a problem of the rich getting the resources. Labour poured endless money into social programmes and it didn't change a single thing.
     
  12. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 22,740

    Location: Cornwall

    Wouldn't that benefit the other pupils at that school? Isn't that the point? Unless the school used his "donation" to fund a class that only other "donors" could benefit from...

    No that's not what people were saying. They were saying if the well-off had to use the same schools as the poor, they'd ensure those schools were delivering results. Because they have power and influence.

    But I'm not sure that argument works in any case. They are just as likely in this country to choose home schooling or move their kids abroad to be privately educated. Although that wouldn't be an option for the (fairly large) number of middle-class professionals currently using private schools.

    I think Labour's policy as proposed is a good first step. Remove any and all tax breaks for private schools and ensure they are receiving *no* state funding whatsoever.
     
  13. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,689

    Location: Plymouth

    You haven't provided any actual evidence or mechanism by which this would occur though.

    There is absolutely zero evidence that abolishing private schools would do anything to improve state schools, especially if we stay with the current discredited system of entry by houseprice rather than merit to better performing state schools.
     
  14. Thecaferacer

    Hitman

    Joined: Feb 3, 2019

    Posts: 747

    We have already seen what happens with areas with top performing comps. House prices go through the roof, rich move in, poor move out and it becomes gentrified. In my town we have areas of high social housing, high unemployment and high migration and guess what, the comp is pretty bad. The other areas of high private house ownership and low crimes have very good comps.

    Unless you are going to suggest communist level housing measures I'm not sure how you will overcome that.
     
  15. Caracus2k

    Soldato

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 5,178


    Fellow forum members please don't let
    D. P try to lecture you on social tax responsibility, in the UK, unchallenged because in doing so they are showing the height of hypocrisy.


    D.P was educated, at great expense, in the UK before insulting the county where they had been born and the country that paid for their expensive younger year on these very forums before moving away from the UK to a low tax haven (Switzerland) which we all know only has low taxes as it practices massive amounts of 'Beggar thy neighbour' economic policies whereby it collect money from multinational companies who, whilst doing very little actual economic activity in Switzerland, structure themselves so they pay as much of their tax burden in Switzerland as possible.

    D. P has gloated about the low taxes they pay in Switzerland on these forms aswell.


    For your information Switzerland has a very low tax to gdp ratio.....

    Before Switzerland D. P was taking advantage of the favorable tax regime in the US when they lived there ....

    Don't accept these sorts of lectures unchallenged from this poster!
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
  16. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 22,740

    Location: Cornwall

    Maybe you can't. Because as @Rroff pointed out, we just don't have a social conscience in this country.

    Everybody for themselves. It's the British way, since forever, really.
     
  17. Caracus2k

    Soldato

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 5,178

    On the subject of fee paying schools its the classic case of the socialist poltics of envy.

    You can't (easily) stop some people seeking the best for their children and it isn't desirable for a society to seek to do so. Ban or increase taxation on private schools and see the burden on the state schools increase as more and more people parents (who have often chosen to sacrifice lots to send their kids to private schools) can no longer afford to do so and instead start playing the post code game to get into the better state schools.

    The 'rich' will just pay for private tuition or send their children abroad.

    You don't improve overall standards by dragging the top down. Rather you have to improve from the bottom up if you are sincere in your intention to have a net improvement in conditions or standards.
     
  18. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 22,740

    Location: Cornwall

    When you say "increase taxation", do you mean you think private schools should continue to receive tax breaks (and charitable status), or other state contributions?

    Personally if they benefit only those who are already ahead of the curve, I don't think they should receive a penny of state aid/funding. In any form.

    Or do you think it's desirable to help the middle-classes send their kids to private school? It's a genuine question. After all, it's money the govt would spend either way.

    Either to improve state schools, which may be a bottomless funding pit, or to private funding to help the middle-classes enjoy a better standard of schooling than the state can provide...

    So in that context, would you approve of the govt giving tax breaks and/or other aid to private schools?

    I guess the latter is like paying housing benefit to private landlords. They provide a "service", because the Tories won't let councils increase the amount of state-owned housing.

    So it's money the govt would spend either way... to build housing or to finance private landlords to increase their portfolios...

    I just happen to think one is morally bankrupt, but it's money that would be spent either way.
     
  19. Caracus2k

    Soldato

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 5,178

    I didn't goto a private school and haven't had a child that's attended one either.

    Parents of children attending private schools receive no reduction in their taxation for relieving the burden on the state system.

    I am not wedded on an ideological basis to the idea of these schools having 'charitable' status but unlike Labour I do forsee some issues if you suddenly try and slap vat on school fees.

    And labour are clearly ideologically opposed, in their current form, to the existence of such schools at all in the longer term.

    So i am 100% against their opening salvos in efforts to achieve this aim.


    I don't see anything great about ensuring that hardworking, but not massively rich parents, parents have to remove their children from private schools and likely increase overall costs for the state to educate their children.
     
  20. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 22,740

    Location: Cornwall

    Even if the opening salvos are themselves quite reasonable?

    Why should private schools have tax breaks?

    Isn't that state interference when the market alone should decide?