Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Blimey.
I always thought of a minority as 1%.
Still, there you go.
You say tomato, I say tomato.
[Politics] The Labour Government
- Thread starter Super Steve Earle
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
I always thought of a minority as 1%.
Still, there you go.
You say tomato, I say tomato.
I do not know the exact details. I was under the impression that what we would call 'regular' schools cannot be for profit.
Jeez.
Like private schools, I'm feeling charitable today. Would you like a lesson in critical thinking? I am relatively free today, so am happy to help.
A Poll here would be interesting ?
HalfaSeatOn
Well-known member
Indeed. Most universities are considered part of the private sector.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
I wouldn't want to interrupt your lunch.
pb21
Well-known member
- Apr 23, 2010
- 6,699
Reserves are essentially cash and/or liquid assets such as equities and other investments that can be relatively quickly realised. What I would call 'proper' charities are expected (by the Charity commission rules) to have a minimum of 3 months of costs as reserves. This is becoming increasingly difficult for many charities (albeit my knowledge is confined to the social care sector) who are being forced to use reserves to balance funding cuts. This is clearly not sustainable but not a problem Eton or the C of E are likely to encounter.
Leaving aside the question as to whether religious organisations should have charitable status at all, your point about the C of E might stand if it wasn't for the fact that they do not use their tax free billions for more than a select few. Parishioners are expected to fund their own church or the Church commissioners (the business department of the C of E) threaten to close them and sell the the churches for housing. Our parish (4 C of E churches) has just been told it will no longer have a resident full time vicar because the Church Commissioners need to sell the vicarage to raise money! Vicars are payed appallingly. Furthermore, whilst the communities of almost all churches (whatever their faith) get very involved in supporting those in need in their local community, not a penny comes from the Church Commissioners themselves.
'Charity' (or Christianity for that matter) are not concepts that the Church Commissioners recognise.
I'm involved with a couple of private schools, smallish about 400 pupils each. They are both going to charge parents 12% VAT as they have worked out they can claim back the other 8% using the VAT system. They use companies for catering & cleaning which charge them VAT which they can now claim back, plus normal VAT expenditure. Eton on the other hand, despite all their reserves, are going to charge the full 20%.!
If we assume Eton are an exception, if most schools are charging only 12% then the revenue the Govt are hoping to collect is a fair bit lower than they suggested.
Thank you. Interesting post. The funding for churches here is by an 'opt out' tax of 7%; surprisingly Germany is a very religous nation. I remember when we moved here, my wife registered here a few months before I did, in January. We started letters, an Easter card, and even a visit from the local church. We're not religerous and was a bit puzzled until someone told us the tax was opt-out. It was a right palava to opt out as well. Thankfully, when I tegistered I checked the opt-out box.
At 7% there are few whip rounds for leaky roofs.
Good point, if you charge VAT you can claim back. So Eton could/will be making money on this if they charge an extra 20%
How did you land upon 1% as the definition of a minority?
So 94.1% aren’t attending private schools?
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,975
I would assume the government understood how VAT worked
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,035
i'd assume the Treasury understands VAT; i wouldn't make such assumptions of the politicans. they'll just make promises, ignore unintended consequences.
Seagull58
In the Algarve
Tony Blair discusses immigration.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Great news, well done chaps.
Parents have been asked to provide evidence they can no longer afford private school fees to secure a place at a state school.
An email sent out by Buckinghamshire council, seen by The Telegraph, showed a mother being told her daughter had been rejected by two local secondary schools because “they are full”.
She was then asked to prove her financial situation in order for her daughter to be considered for another school in the area.
The Government has leant on estimates drawn up by the Institute for Fiscal Studies predicting that up to 40,000 private school children could be forced out under the plans.
However, education figures have warned that there will likely be stark regional variations, and that councils with a range of top grammar schools will likely see the sharpest rise in inquiries for places.
Parents have been asked to provide evidence they can no longer afford private school fees to secure a place at a state school.
An email sent out by Buckinghamshire council, seen by The Telegraph, showed a mother being told her daughter had been rejected by two local secondary schools because “they are full”.
She was then asked to prove her financial situation in order for her daughter to be considered for another school in the area.
The Government has leant on estimates drawn up by the Institute for Fiscal Studies predicting that up to 40,000 private school children could be forced out under the plans.
However, education figures have warned that there will likely be stark regional variations, and that councils with a range of top grammar schools will likely see the sharpest rise in inquiries for places.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,807
I wonder why you just quoted a few statements and didn't provide a link
If you actually read beyond the Telegraph's normal tirade for the terminally naive, you'll find the actual story
The mother, who asked not to be named, had applied for a place at two schools via the council’s online portal amid fears she could be priced out of her daughter’s private school by the Government’s VAT raid. The email from Buckinghamshire council said: “Unfortunately we cannot offer any places at your preferred school/s as they are full”.
The email continued: “In this circumstance, we would normally advocate that [the child] should remain at their current school. However, if you can provide evidence that you can no longer finance the independent school fees, please advise and we can make a local authority non-preference allocation.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/06/parents-asked-prove-afford-private-fees-buckinghamshire/
Pretty standard stuff for anyone wanting to move schools mid year
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,640
Actually it's not standard stuff to ask for proof of parental income for children to be given a place at a state school. Free education is an absolute right. They should never be asked to prove income.I wonder why you just quoted a few statements and didn't provide a link
If you actually read beyond the Telegraph's normal tirade for the terminally naive, you'll find the actual story
The mother, who asked not to be named, had applied for a place at two schools via the council’s online portal amid fears she could be priced out of her daughter’s private school by the Government’s VAT raid. The email from Buckinghamshire council said: “Unfortunately we cannot offer any places at your preferred school/s as they are full”.
The email continued: “In this circumstance, we would normally advocate that [the child] should remain at their current school. However, if you can provide evidence that you can no longer finance the independent school fees, please advise and we can make a local authority non-preference allocation.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/06/parents-asked-prove-afford-private-fees-buckinghamshire/
Pretty standard stuff for anyone wanting to move schools mid year
If you'd read the story yet further you would have seen that the council apologised for cocking up and said they won't make that mistake again.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,807
Education is free, and indeed it was a cock up with the wording as explained here
A spokesman for Buckinghamshire council said they wanted to “apologise for the choice of language” and insisted it did not reflect any formal policy. Anita Cranmer, the council’s cabinet member for education and children’s services, said: “We believe this wording was taken from an individual correspondence rather than being a formal policy and we apologise for the choice of language; we are happy to confirm this direct with the family and will not be seeking personal financial information from them or any other Buckinghamshire family.
“The intention was to seek confirmation in this case as to whether the family was relinquishing the child’s current school place and would definitely be seeking an ‘in year’ school place even though their preferred school is full, or whether they would be staying at their current school which is often the case when families aren’t able to get a place at a preferred school.”
But never let facts get in the way of a good headline
And my favourite bit of it all, who would post all this on a thread titled 'The Labour Government' to complain about something done by a Conservative council
Last edited: