FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Is Phillipson thick?
Is Phillipson thick?
Jump to: Newest in thread
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew "
I liked the "there is an expectation........" comment.
Expect all you like love.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
“Posh private schools must keep community outreach schemes going after they start paying VAT on fees, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson warned.
It follows reports some private schools are looking to cut back on bursaries for poor children, and may raise the cost of using facilities such as swimming pools in response to the Government's VAT increase. But the Education Secretary hit back at the concerns raised by headteachers.”
WARNED! Or else WHAT?
You tell them they are not charities. Tell them they are a business. Remove the tax breaks they get as a charity and lo-and behold they stop being charitable and start acting like businesses!
I mean who’d ‘av thunk it?
Shall I…hmmmm shall I…????? Yes…
I TOLD YOU SO |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"“Posh private schools must keep community outreach schemes going after they start paying VAT on fees, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson warned.
It follows reports some private schools are looking to cut back on bursaries for poor children, and may raise the cost of using facilities such as swimming pools in response to the Government's VAT increase. But the Education Secretary hit back at the concerns raised by headteachers.”
WARNED! Or else WHAT?
You tell them they are not charities. Tell them they are a business. Remove the tax breaks they get as a charity and lo-and behold they stop being charitable and start acting like businesses!
I mean who’d ‘av thunk it?
Shall I…hmmmm shall I…????? Yes…
I TOLD YOU SO"
it does make you wonder how these people get these positions,like you said anyone with half a brain knew they would stop the freebies for poorer kids if they were no longer classed as a charity and now classed as a business |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 13 weeks ago
|
They're 'stopping the freebies for the poor kids'?
You mean the handful of scholarships (for which you still need to find the cash to pay for the uniform). Or the odd open day where they permit the local plebs to enjoy the freshly cut grass on the back lawn?
They were never charities. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
I have maintained from the beginning that instead of a punitive approach which WILL backfire, Labour should have introduced a minimum threshold of charitable activity for the schools to maintain charity status (ie do more than now, offer more bursaries and community access). The pvt schools would be pressured by fee paying parents to do more to keep their fees down. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew "
All they had to do was read the fab forums and its all there written down for them |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew
All they had to do was read the fab forums and its all there written down for them"
LOL we are the fount of all knowledge  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew
All they had to do was read the fab forums and its all there written down for them
LOL we are the fount of all knowledge "
Not going to mention carpark puddles again...   |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew
All they had to do was read the fab forums and its all there written down for them
LOL we are the fount of all knowledge Not going to mention carpark puddles again... "
Who’s out of their depth in this instance though? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew
All they had to do was read the fab forums and its all there written down for them
LOL we are the fount of all knowledge Not going to mention carpark puddles again...
Who’s out of their depth in this instance though?"
I can wear platforms or heels, Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew
All they had to do was read the fab forums and its all there written down for them
LOL we are the fount of all knowledge Not going to mention carpark puddles again...
Who’s out of their depth in this instance though?I can wear platforms or heels, Mrs x"
There’s some on here who’d need a snorkel in a puddle  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-posh-private-schools-warned-33725123
Is she really now just telling us that she had no idea that private schools would cut outreach programmes, they rest of us knew
All they had to do was read the fab forums and its all there written down for them
LOL we are the fount of all knowledge Not going to mention carpark puddles again...
Who’s out of their depth in this instance though?I can wear platforms or heels, Mrs x
There’s some on here who’d need a snorkel in a puddle "
An aqualung haha Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There are loads of parents of private schools kids that really struggle to put their kids through. Making them pay VAT is likely to mean that those kids will be pulled from private schools and therefore be placed in an already full state system. Private school parents are doing the state system a favour by freeing up spaces in the state system!
This is purely the politics of envy and will create even more problems when an exodus of kids leave the private system to join the state system making the class sizes even bigger and the money that the Governement will make (apparently) will fund about 1/2 a new teacher per school….
It really is one of the more stupid ideas Labour have come up with there is some pretty stiff competition for that prize…. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"If they are saying that losing “charitable status “ will cost them more than the scholarships they are giving out… I think I would call BS on that "
They’re not saying that. They are saying if you say we are not charities and are businesses then we will stop being charitable and act like businesses. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 13 weeks ago
|
Doubtful there will be an exodus. What do you think happens if a private school suddenly finds it loses loads of 'customers'?
I don't see it as politics of envy. More a long overdue challenge to class based opportunities. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Doubtful there will be an exodus. What do you think happens if a private school suddenly finds it loses loads of 'customers'?
I don't see it as politics of envy. More a long overdue challenge to class based opportunities."
really?
While the Government predicts the increase will see between 18,000 and 40,000 children shift from private education into state schools – between 3 and 7 per cent – a report released this week will warn that 13 per cent – more than 80,000 pupils – could leave by January.4 days ago
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Doubtful there will be an exodus. What do you think happens if a private school suddenly finds it loses loads of 'customers'?
I don't see it as politics of envy. More a long overdue challenge to class based opportunities."
Of course there should be equality of opportunity for all. But that comes from levelling-up, and improving state-funded education, not through petty punishment of a thriving and successful private sector. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 13 weeks ago
|
Levelling up
How do you level up schools left with the least resources and the most challenging kids (& parents!)? Oh and a shit curriculum gifted upon them by Gove.
Money should never be a limiting factor for a child's educational opportunities. A better educated, more skilled population benefits us all.
As for faith based schools, hopefully somebody will have the balls to get rid of those too. It won't be this lot though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!"
Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x"
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. "
Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x"
You hit the nail on the head, hotspots. There are areas of the UK with a high number of pvt schools. Brighton is an example. Edinburgh is another. The state schools will struggle if pvt numbers start to transfer. The good state schools have finite capacity so their catchment areas will see increased demand for houses pushing up prices. It will start to happen over the next couple of years, not in January. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x"
The numbers won't be spread evenly, I'm sure you don't actually believe that anyway.
There is zero point in talking about an average of 6. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x
You hit the nail on the head, hotspots. There are areas of the UK with a high number of pvt schools. Brighton is an example. Edinburgh is another. The state schools will struggle if pvt numbers start to transfer. The good state schools have finite capacity so their catchment areas will see increased demand for houses pushing up prices. It will start to happen over the next couple of years, not in January."
There is genuine capacity in the state system but it's not an ideal world and there may be issues in certain areas. But the numbers in this case do not mean that there will be a massive increase in house prices, not enough to make them unaffordable for the locals who already live there.
It's not like those greedy 2nd home owners
Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x
The numbers won't be spread evenly, I'm sure you don't actually believe that anyway.
There is zero point in talking about an average of 6. "
But that's the scale of the issue, ignore it if you want. Good state schools influence local house prices now. A small increase in demand won't push up house prices to levels of unaffordability for the locals.
Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x
The numbers won't be spread evenly, I'm sure you don't actually believe that anyway.
There is zero point in talking about an average of 6. But that's the scale of the issue, ignore it if you want. Good state schools influence local house prices now. A small increase in demand won't push up house prices to levels of unaffordability for the locals.
Mrs x"
That's the scale of the issue if you work on an absolute average. We both know ow that isn't how reality works. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x
The numbers won't be spread evenly, I'm sure you don't actually believe that anyway.
There is zero point in talking about an average of 6. But that's the scale of the issue, ignore it if you want. Good state schools influence local house prices now. A small increase in demand won't push up house prices to levels of unaffordability for the locals.
Mrs x
That's the scale of the issue if you work on an absolute average. We both know ow that isn't how reality works. "
I said I'm aware of hotspots and other issues, however that is the scale of the issue.
And not everyone who takes their kid out of school will migrate to an area with a good state school. If they cannot afford to pay an increase in fees due to VAT they may not be able to afford to move home. Most of these parents will not have children boarding but will be paying for their kids to attend on a day basis.
It's not going to be a massive issue for the housing market.
Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x
The numbers won't be spread evenly, I'm sure you don't actually believe that anyway.
There is zero point in talking about an average of 6. But that's the scale of the issue, ignore it if you want. Good state schools influence local house prices now. A small increase in demand won't push up house prices to levels of unaffordability for the locals.
Mrs x
That's the scale of the issue if you work on an absolute average. We both know ow that isn't how reality works. I said I'm aware of hotspots and other issues, however that is the scale of the issue.
And not everyone who takes their kid out of school will migrate to an area with a good state school. If they cannot afford to pay an increase in fees due to VAT they may not be able to afford to move home. Most of these parents will not have children boarding but will be paying for their kids to attend on a day basis.
It's not going to be a massive issue for the housing market.
Mrs x"
Nobody said a massive issue. But it will be an issue, in hotspots. And it won’t be 6 per school because of hotspots. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x
The numbers won't be spread evenly, I'm sure you don't actually believe that anyway.
There is zero point in talking about an average of 6. But that's the scale of the issue, ignore it if you want. Good state schools influence local house prices now. A small increase in demand won't push up house prices to levels of unaffordability for the locals.
Mrs x
That's the scale of the issue if you work on an absolute average. We both know ow that isn't how reality works. I said I'm aware of hotspots and other issues, however that is the scale of the issue.
And not everyone who takes their kid out of school will migrate to an area with a good state school. If they cannot afford to pay an increase in fees due to VAT they may not be able to afford to move home. Most of these parents will not have children boarding but will be paying for their kids to attend on a day basis.
It's not going to be a massive issue for the housing market.
Mrs x
Nobody said a massive issue. But it will be an issue, in hotspots. And it won’t be 6 per school because of hotspots."
So if it's not a, I'll say, big issue then why mention it? Scaremongering, if they can't afford the fees they probably won't afford a move.
Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x
The numbers won't be spread evenly, I'm sure you don't actually believe that anyway.
There is zero point in talking about an average of 6. But that's the scale of the issue, ignore it if you want. Good state schools influence local house prices now. A small increase in demand won't push up house prices to levels of unaffordability for the locals.
Mrs x
That's the scale of the issue if you work on an absolute average. We both know ow that isn't how reality works. I said I'm aware of hotspots and other issues, however that is the scale of the issue.
And not everyone who takes their kid out of school will migrate to an area with a good state school. If they cannot afford to pay an increase in fees due to VAT they may not be able to afford to move home. Most of these parents will not have children boarding but will be paying for their kids to attend on a day basis.
It's not going to be a massive issue for the housing market.
Mrs x
Nobody said a massive issue. But it will be an issue, in hotspots. And it won’t be 6 per school because of hotspots.So if it's not a, I'll say, big issue then why mention it? Scaremongering, if they can't afford the fees they probably won't afford a move.
Mrs x"
It's a strange argument to say that someone no longer paying 1000/per month on school fees can't afford to add 50k to there mortgage. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"This Labour policy is punitive and cynical. Introducing it in January in the middle of an academic year was a deliberate ploy to minimise the number of children who will change schools. Admissions for Sept were already down. Expect admissions for next Sept to fall further and for increased numbers to move back into state schools for the school year starting Sept 2025.
While nationally there will be capacity in the state system to absorb, there are going to be local hotspots where it will not be able to cope.
The amount of money collected via VAT will therefore be less than Labour claim.
Smaller independent schools will close. Faith schools will have challenges too.
The good state schools will see house prices in their catchment areas rocket as wealthier parents price out poorer people.
Bursaries will reduce and in some schools disappear. As will free access to facilities for local state schools.
The bill for govt depts will increase as military kids and foreign office kids see their boarding fees increase.
Meanwhile the rich won’t care because they can absorb the 20% increase and the schools will become even more elite.
What a great idea this isn’t!Can you explain how 'house prices' are going to be driven up in areas which have good state schools to accommodate the exodus of private school families?
Mrs x
That's quite simply supply and demand.
People will want to move into catchment areas of the better performing stare schools. And being that these people will previously have afforded private schools fees, they'll be able to outbid others. Good state schools already affect local house pricing. But in this case the numbers shouldn't come into any great effect on housing prices. This is due to the fact that the state system will only have to increase attendance by 6 pupils per school to accommodate the estimated numbers of pupils predicted to leave. I'm aware of the 'hotspot' issue but say the numbers are spread fairly evenly, an increase in pupil numbers such as these should not impact the housing market as much as some are suggesting.
Mrs x
The numbers won't be spread evenly, I'm sure you don't actually believe that anyway.
There is zero point in talking about an average of 6. But that's the scale of the issue, ignore it if you want. Good state schools influence local house prices now. A small increase in demand won't push up house prices to levels of unaffordability for the locals.
Mrs x
That's the scale of the issue if you work on an absolute average. We both know ow that isn't how reality works. I said I'm aware of hotspots and other issues, however that is the scale of the issue.
And not everyone who takes their kid out of school will migrate to an area with a good state school. If they cannot afford to pay an increase in fees due to VAT they may not be able to afford to move home. Most of these parents will not have children boarding but will be paying for their kids to attend on a day basis.
It's not going to be a massive issue for the housing market.
Mrs x
Nobody said a massive issue. But it will be an issue, in hotspots. And it won’t be 6 per school because of hotspots.So if it's not a, I'll say, big issue then why mention it? Scaremongering, if they can't afford the fees they probably won't afford a move.
Mrs x
It's a strange argument to say that someone no longer paying 1000/per month on school fees can't afford to add 50k to there mortgage. "
Precisely.
It isn’t scaremongering. It is part of a list of unintended consequences that collectively add up to a lot of issues and undermines the supposed benefits of the Labour policy. This policy is flawed and punitive. It will not achieve what they claim and will instead have a range of negative impacts on more than just the kids and parents in pvt schools. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"“Posh private schools must keep community outreach schemes going after they start paying VAT on fees, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson warned.
It follows reports some private schools are looking to cut back on bursaries for poor children, and may raise the cost of using facilities such as swimming pools in response to the Government's VAT increase. But the Education Secretary hit back at the concerns raised by headteachers.”
WARNED! Or else WHAT?
You tell them they are not charities. Tell them they are a business. Remove the tax breaks they get as a charity and lo-and behold they stop being charitable and start acting like businesses!
I mean who’d ‘av thunk it?
Shall I…hmmmm shall I…????? Yes…
I TOLD YOU SO"
It’s almost as though the decision was thought out in a “fleece the rich” echo chamber, with no consideration of impacts or consequences.
The worrying thing is that this was one of their headline policies … just how bad will some of their less thought-out policies be … |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I know a person in Buckinghamshire who can no longer afford to send her kid to a fee paying school. She has contacted local state schools to transfer her kid and is being asked to “prove” that she can’t afford the fee-paying school.
I thought schilling was an entitlement, rather than being means-tested? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"“Posh private schools must keep community outreach schemes going after they start paying VAT on fees, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson warned.
It follows reports some private schools are looking to cut back on bursaries for poor children, and may raise the cost of using facilities such as swimming pools in response to the Government's VAT increase. But the Education Secretary hit back at the concerns raised by headteachers.”
WARNED! Or else WHAT?
You tell them they are not charities. Tell them they are a business. Remove the tax breaks they get as a charity and lo-and behold they stop being charitable and start acting like businesses!
I mean who’d ‘av thunk it?
Shall I…hmmmm shall I…????? Yes…
I TOLD YOU SO
It’s almost as though the decision was thought out in a “fleece the rich” echo chamber, with no consideration of impacts or consequences.
The worrying thing is that this was one of their headline policies … just how bad will some of their less thought-out policies be … "
This was purely punitive populist politics. They figured it only affects c.6-7% of kids/parents and amongst the remaining 93-94% there will be enough who think “hell yeah fuck the rich” because they never scratch below the surface to understand the reality.
Note that whenever a Labour Minister is asked about this they focus on the top level elite schools like Eton (playing on the hatred of Johnson and Cameron and the ultra rich). They also focus on the poor state of the state school sector implying it is the fault of private sector when it is nothing of the sort. They never talk about bursaries. Never talk about community outreach or the provision of free access to facilities for local state schools or partnership programmes.
When anyone raises the point on how it will not affect the super rich and how those barely affording it and those on bursaries will be impacted, they hand wave it away moving the narrative to how everyone has aspirations for their kids as if that was the point being made! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"I know a person in Buckinghamshire who can no longer afford to send her kid to a fee paying school. She has contacted local state schools to transfer her kid and is being asked to “prove” that she can’t afford the fee-paying school.
I thought schilling was an entitlement, rather than being means-tested? "
Surely that is one for the media? She has already paid for her child’s state school place. By having them in pvt she has been saving taxpayers b/w £7k-£8k per year. Now the state will have to cover it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"“Posh private schools must keep community outreach schemes going after they start paying VAT on fees, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson warned.
It follows reports some private schools are looking to cut back on bursaries for poor children, and may raise the cost of using facilities such as swimming pools in response to the Government's VAT increase. But the Education Secretary hit back at the concerns raised by headteachers.”
WARNED! Or else WHAT?
You tell them they are not charities. Tell them they are a business. Remove the tax breaks they get as a charity and lo-and behold they stop being charitable and start acting like businesses!
I mean who’d ‘av thunk it?
Shall I…hmmmm shall I…????? Yes…
I TOLD YOU SO
It’s almost as though the decision was thought out in a “fleece the rich” echo chamber, with no consideration of impacts or consequences.
The worrying thing is that this was one of their headline policies … just how bad will some of their less thought-out policies be …
This was purely punitive populist politics. They figured it only affects c.6-7% of kids/parents and amongst the remaining 93-94% there will be enough who think “hell yeah fuck the rich” because they never scratch below the surface to understand the reality.
Note that whenever a Labour Minister is asked about this they focus on the top level elite schools like Eton (playing on the hatred of Johnson and Cameron and the ultra rich). They also focus on the poor state of the state school sector implying it is the fault of private sector when it is nothing of the sort. They never talk about bursaries. Never talk about community outreach or the provision of free access to facilities for local state schools or partnership programmes.
When anyone raises the point on how it will not affect the super rich and how those barely affording it and those on bursaries will be impacted, they hand wave it away moving the narrative to how everyone has aspirations for their kids as if that was the point being made!"
Agreed. Not every school is eton or Harrow, those places will do just fine, it’s other schools further down the food chain that will feel the impact.
And not every family who sends their kids to fee paying schools are loaded. A friend of mine had one kid and sent him to a school in London. The numbers were so tight that he sold his car, cancelled his golf club membership and had no holidays for 10 years. He basically had zero disposable income for 10 years. There is no way he could have found money to absorb a further 20 per cent increase |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"“Posh private schools must keep community outreach schemes going after they start paying VAT on fees, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson warned.
It follows reports some private schools are looking to cut back on bursaries for poor children, and may raise the cost of using facilities such as swimming pools in response to the Government's VAT increase. But the Education Secretary hit back at the concerns raised by headteachers.”
WARNED! Or else WHAT?
You tell them they are not charities. Tell them they are a business. Remove the tax breaks they get as a charity and lo-and behold they stop being charitable and start acting like businesses!
I mean who’d ‘av thunk it?
Shall I…hmmmm shall I…????? Yes…
I TOLD YOU SO
It’s almost as though the decision was thought out in a “fleece the rich” echo chamber, with no consideration of impacts or consequences.
The worrying thing is that this was one of their headline policies … just how bad will some of their less thought-out policies be …
This was purely punitive populist politics. They figured it only affects c.6-7% of kids/parents and amongst the remaining 93-94% there will be enough who think “hell yeah fuck the rich” because they never scratch below the surface to understand the reality.
Note that whenever a Labour Minister is asked about this they focus on the top level elite schools like Eton (playing on the hatred of Johnson and Cameron and the ultra rich). They also focus on the poor state of the state school sector implying it is the fault of private sector when it is nothing of the sort. They never talk about bursaries. Never talk about community outreach or the provision of free access to facilities for local state schools or partnership programmes.
When anyone raises the point on how it will not affect the super rich and how those barely affording it and those on bursaries will be impacted, they hand wave it away moving the narrative to how everyone has aspirations for their kids as if that was the point being made!
Agreed. Not every school is eton or Harrow, those places will do just fine, it’s other schools further down the food chain that will feel the impact.
And not every family who sends their kids to fee paying schools are loaded. A friend of mine had one kid and sent him to a school in London. The numbers were so tight that he sold his car, cancelled his golf club membership and had no holidays for 10 years. He basically had zero disposable income for 10 years. There is no way he could have found money to absorb a further 20 per cent increase "
I have friends (the parents of my kids’ friends) who have an 80% bursary and another on a 30% bursary. I know of people on 100% bursaries. And to tie this directly back into the OP, the reason these schools can fund bursaries is due to other wealthier parents paying full fees (the amount takes account of funding bursary needs).
The parents are happy to do so because they also have been getting the benefit of charity status. Take that away and you will start to see parents pressuring the school to reduce fees so the allocation towards charitable activity like bursaries will be the first victim. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 13 weeks ago
|
Catchment areas are more of a big deal for good primary schools than they are secondary. Parents go to crazy lengths to give their kids an edge at primary; tutoring before they even begin school, coaching for SATS, prep for entrance exams & 11+, sponsoring the local kids sports teams to ensure little Bella and Milo get nominated for trials with the local academy. And buying a house in the catchment of choice.
By the time they've had to settle for their second choice secondary school (because coaching and prep can't entirely compensate for the kids lack of talent) it's easier to pay for the kids transport to school than to move house to somewhere the parents never wanted to live.
There's also a question as to what people consider to be a good school. Many of the genuinely good state schools are located in some less than desirable areas. Doubtful there will be a sudden rush to buy houses around them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"Catchment areas are more of a big deal for good primary schools than they are secondary. Parents go to crazy lengths to give their kids an edge at primary; tutoring before they even begin school, coaching for SATS, prep for entrance exams & 11+, sponsoring the local kids sports teams to ensure little Bella and Milo get nominated for trials with the local academy. And buying a house in the catchment of choice.
By the time they've had to settle for their second choice secondary school (because coaching and prep can't entirely compensate for the kids lack of talent) it's easier to pay for the kids transport to school than to move house to somewhere the parents never wanted to live.
There's also a question as to what people consider to be a good school. Many of the genuinely good state schools are located in some less than desirable areas. Doubtful there will be a sudden rush to buy houses around them."
Nobody is saying sudden rush. The full effect of this VAT on school fees policy will be felt over a few years as changing trends will start to emerge. The first evidence of that will be a steady fall in admissions at pvt schools. I believe that is already started happening.
Back to the point on hotspots. There won’t be an even impact felt across the country. In some areas where there are currently disproportionally high numbers of pvt schools vs state schools, you will see catchment area issues start to arise. Houses in the catchment of good state schools already attract a premium. Supply is limited so when people move the demand will be higher pushing up prices. Over time you will see middle class enclaves around these good state schools pushing the poorer kids into the poorer performing state schools which they are in the catchment for. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 13 weeks ago
|
Many of the kids at the surrounding private schools travel relatively big distances. Way further than they'd need to travel to get to the nearest outstanding state school. And they're far spread ie. if they do drop out of the private system they'd be widely distributed among authorities and schools. It's unlikely that would have much of an impact on the property market surrounding any of those schools.
Maybe the impact will be greater in places where there's only one or two private schools and not many more state schools but I doubt their intake is too much different than others.
I'll wait and see if we see the enclaves you talk of. Presumably those responsible will hop around from school to school depending on which is rated outstanding (or whatever Ofsted now decides to call it...) If however it does happen then maybe when they find themselves forced to move to one of the council estates to get into the catchment for their next school of choice they'll upgrade the local housing stock too  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
Using Brighton & Hove as an example, there are 10 state senior schools, two of which have entry criteria based on religion. There are 8 senior private schools. This isn’t about council estates. It is about areas with normal/average housing stock that will increase in value as parents try to get into the catchment of the best of those 10 (or in reality 8 if you are not Catholic or a regular Anglican church goer). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 13 weeks ago
|
Round here it isn't unusual for parents to move house to get into the catchment for their primary of choice. Don't tend to hear of the same for secondary but that may be partly due to the large number of private schools along with a number of grammar schools. They're more concerned with passing the entry exams than living locally.
No doubt there will be local variations but as I suggested earlier it isn't in a private school's interests to lose customers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Round here it isn't unusual for parents to move house to get into the catchment for their primary of choice. Don't tend to hear of the same for secondary but that may be partly due to the large number of private schools along with a number of grammar schools. They're more concerned with passing the entry exams than living locally.
No doubt there will be local variations but as I suggested earlier it isn't in a private school's interests to lose customers. "
It’s not in private school’s interests to lose money either. That’s why there is the prospect of bursaries being the victim, as schools try to avoid passing the full vat increase on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"Round here it isn't unusual for parents to move house to get into the catchment for their primary of choice. Don't tend to hear of the same for secondary but that may be partly due to the large number of private schools along with a number of grammar schools. They're more concerned with passing the entry exams than living locally.
No doubt there will be local variations but as I suggested earlier it isn't in a private school's interests to lose customers.
It’s not in private school’s interests to lose money either. That’s why there is the prospect of bursaries being the victim, as schools try to avoid passing the full vat increase on. "
It beggars belief that Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson is criticising this probability.
Most Private Schools: “We are charities, all our profits/surplus is ploughed back into the organisation to continue to provide education which are the objects of our charity as agreed with the Charities Commission. We have no shareholders and pay no dividends. Our charitable activity includes providing bursaries to pupils whose families cannot afford the fees and access to our facilities for free or little costs”
Labour: “You are not charities, you are tax dodgers who shall no longer enjoy being free of VAT (even though the provision of education services is and always has been exempt from VAT). It will have negligible effect because our research says so (let’s not discuss the flawed methodology) and BTW all parents gave aspirations (but let’s not even discuss bursaries because it is a but uncomfortable)!”
Most Private Schools: “Well we recognise not all our parents can absorb 20% increases to fees so we have explored ways to not pass the full amount on. One way we can achieve that is to stop funding bursaries”
Labour: “You greedy bastards that’s not acting charitably!”
Most Private Schools: “Huh? You said we were not charities!” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Whatever problem you have with private schools, the same applies for private healthcare too.
Is it a good thing or a bad thing that private healthcare/schools thrive well along side public healthcare/schools? Should governments encourage the private sector?
Pros:
- People who have money would be able to handle their expenses on healthcare and schools by themselves and reduce the burden on public sector
- A thriving private sector with competition will give better quality service at lower costs and will innovate.
- Salaries for workers in these sectors will receive pay based on market pricing instead of arbitrary salaries decided by politicians
Cons:
- If you are hell bent on equality even at the cost of everyone receiving poorer service, then a private sector alongside won't be something you will like
- If private sector pays more, good quality employees will move there, leaving the public sector in a poorer state. But public sector will just have to catch up on the pay given by private sector.
If you like a thriving private sector for healthcare but not for schools or vice-versa, you have some explaining to do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 13 weeks ago
Brighton |
"Whatever problem you have with private schools, the same applies for private healthcare too.
Is it a good thing or a bad thing that private healthcare/schools thrive well along side public healthcare/schools? Should governments encourage the private sector?
Pros:
- People who have money would be able to handle their expenses on healthcare and schools by themselves and reduce the burden on public sector
- A thriving private sector with competition will give better quality service at lower costs and will innovate.
- Salaries for workers in these sectors will receive pay based on market pricing instead of arbitrary salaries decided by politicians
Cons:
- If you are hell bent on equality even at the cost of everyone receiving poorer service, then a private sector alongside won't be something you will like
- If private sector pays more, good quality employees will move there, leaving the public sector in a poorer state. But public sector will just have to catch up on the pay given by private sector.
If you like a thriving private sector for healthcare but not for schools or vice-versa, you have some explaining to do."
Agree with all of this except:
"give better quality service at lower costs"
Lower cost to who? Are you saying insurance payouts to cover treatment are less expensive/lower than the same treatment on the NHS?
Few people I have seen are anti private healthcare. They are anti privatisation of the NHS which is totally different. Having both running in parallel is fine for reasons you have said including reducing burden on govt/tax payers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Round here it isn't unusual for parents to move house to get into the catchment for their primary of choice. Don't tend to hear of the same for secondary but that may be partly due to the large number of private schools along with a number of grammar schools. They're more concerned with passing the entry exams than living locally.
No doubt there will be local variations but as I suggested earlier it isn't in a private school's interests to lose customers.
It’s not in private school’s interests to lose money either. That’s why there is the prospect of bursaries being the victim, as schools try to avoid passing the full vat increase on.
It beggars belief that Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson is criticising this probability.
Most Private Schools: “We are charities, all our profits/surplus is ploughed back into the organisation to continue to provide education which are the objects of our charity as agreed with the Charities Commission. We have no shareholders and pay no dividends. Our charitable activity includes providing bursaries to pupils whose families cannot afford the fees and access to our facilities for free or little costs”
Labour: “You are not charities, you are tax dodgers who shall no longer enjoy being free of VAT (even though the provision of education services is and always has been exempt from VAT). It will have negligible effect because our research says so (let’s not discuss the flawed methodology) and BTW all parents gave aspirations (but let’s not even discuss bursaries because it is a but uncomfortable)!”
Most Private Schools: “Well we recognise not all our parents can absorb 20% increases to fees so we have explored ways to not pass the full amount on. One way we can achieve that is to stop funding bursaries”
Labour: “You greedy bastards that’s not acting charitably!”
Most Private Schools: “Huh? You said we were not charities!”"
I'm going to suggest the title and position of "Education Secretary" isn't best suited to Bridget Phillipson. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whatever problem you have with private schools, the same applies for private healthcare too.
Is it a good thing or a bad thing that private healthcare/schools thrive well along side public healthcare/schools? Should governments encourage the private sector?
Pros:
- People who have money would be able to handle their expenses on healthcare and schools by themselves and reduce the burden on public sector
- A thriving private sector with competition will give better quality service at lower costs and will innovate.
- Salaries for workers in these sectors will receive pay based on market pricing instead of arbitrary salaries decided by politicians
Cons:
- If you are hell bent on equality even at the cost of everyone receiving poorer service, then a private sector alongside won't be something you will like
- If private sector pays more, good quality employees will move there, leaving the public sector in a poorer state. But public sector will just have to catch up on the pay given by private sector.
If you like a thriving private sector for healthcare but not for schools or vice-versa, you have some explaining to do.
Agree with all of this except:
give better quality service at lower costs
Lower cost to who? Are you saying insurance payouts to cover treatment are less expensive/lower than the same treatment on the NHS?
Few people I have seen are anti private healthcare. They are anti privatisation of the NHS which is totally different. Having both running in parallel is fine for reasons you have said including reducing burden on govt/tax payers."
I meant private healthcare, not privatisation of NHS. With private healthcare, if there is competition, it will end up being lower cost for people. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"- If private sector pays more, good quality employees will move there, leaving the public sector in a poorer state.
They already work there!"
If the private sector starts thriving, more would move. But the onus is on the government to match the pay. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whatever problem you have with private schools, the same applies for private healthcare too.
Is it a good thing or a bad thing that private healthcare/schools thrive well along side public healthcare/schools? Should governments encourage the private sector?
Pros:
- People who have money would be able to handle their expenses on healthcare and schools by themselves and reduce the burden on public sector
- A thriving private sector with competition will give better quality service at lower costs and will innovate.
- Salaries for workers in these sectors will receive pay based on market pricing instead of arbitrary salaries decided by politicians
Cons:
- If you are hell bent on equality even at the cost of everyone receiving poorer service, then a private sector alongside won't be something you will like
- If private sector pays more, good quality employees will move there, leaving the public sector in a poorer state. But public sector will just have to catch up on the pay given by private sector.
If you like a thriving private sector for healthcare but not for schools or vice-versa, you have some explaining to do.
Agree with all of this except:
give better quality service at lower costs
Lower cost to who? Are you saying insurance payouts to cover treatment are less expensive/lower than the same treatment on the NHS?
Few people I have seen are anti private healthcare. They are anti privatisation of the NHS which is totally different. Having both running in parallel is fine for reasons you have said including reducing burden on govt/tax payers.
I meant private healthcare, not privatisation of NHS. With private healthcare, if there is competition, it will end up being lower cost for people. "
As an aside, there was some work done about 15/20 years ago by the National Audit Office, when the NHS bought a private hospital to improve capacity. They looked at comparative salaries. Although the private sector had headline better salaries, they had poorer holidays and pensions, so actually the salaries like for like were almost identical. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
