[Politics] Keir Starmer

[Simster]

Absolute hogwash.

I know of many working class parents making massive personal financial sacrifices to send their child/children to an independent school. Prices going up 20% will force many normal folk out of the market.

I DO hope Sir Kneel enjoyed his spell at Reigate Grammar School.

Reigate FEES

Wasn't a fee-paying school back then.

Apart from that, you're wrong as usual. The only people squealing are died-in-the-wool Tories who wouldn't vote Labour anyway.

 

[Bodian]

From bitter personal experience, I have no axe to grind for private schools.... but if 600,000 children are being educated in over 2000 schools in the independent sector, won't the really wealthy just carry on paying the increased fees, and those for whom the financial case is marginal will look to go back to state provision.

Aren't most schools under pressure already, where will these children go?

I get the 'fairness' argument... but am not clear how this is any sort of solution.

But isn't that a bit like the NHS / Private issue? - If we didn't have private hospitals (stealing NHS staff trained at public expense) then there would be more load on the NHS hospitals - therefore private hospitals must be good.

 

[Titanic]

But isn't that a bit like the NHS / Private issue? - If we didn't have private hospitals (stealing NHS staff trained at public expense) then there would be more load on the NHS hospitals - therefore private hospitals must be good.

So it needs something a lot more radical than minor financial tinkering?

 

[dsr-burnley]

Obviously it's up to individuals how and where they spend their money, but I'm still unclear why you think British taxpayers should have to subsidise them if they can't afford the actual cost of what they want, particularly in the current economic climate where people are struggling to stay warm and eat

There's surely little element of subsidy involved? By definition, if they're charities they're non-profit making and so the absence of Corporation tax makes no difference.

 

[Simster]

So it needs something a lot more radical than minor financial tinkering?

It does indeed. If we had the stones to deal with the issue properly and ban public schools full stop, you'd find the education budget would miraculously double overnight. This isn't politics of envy, it's just what happened when Finland did exactly that.

 

[Titanic]

It does indeed. If we had the stones to deal with the issue properly and ban public schools full stop, you'd find the education budget would miraculously double overnight. This isn't politics of envy, it's just what happened when Finland did exactly that.

Starmer is going to have a mega-majority.... why hasn't he got the confidence to do something like this and make a real difference?

 

[erkan]

From bitter personal experience, I have no axe to grind for private schools.... but if 600,000 children are being educated in over 2000 schools in the independent sector, won't the really wealthy just carry on paying the increased fees, and those for whom the financial case is marginal will look to go back to state provision.

Aren't most schools under pressure already, where will these children go?

I get the 'fairness' argument... but am not clear how this is any sort of solution.

I would abolish all private schools. 600,000 x £40,000 = £24,000,000,000. That would help with the solution.

Removing the tax break should just mean that these ludicrously overproviding perpetuators of privilege scale back their luxurious offer by 20%.

 

[Simster]

There's surely little element of subsidy involved? By definition, if they're charities they're non-profit making and so the absence of Corporation tax makes no difference.

Removal of charity status would mean schools would have to charge VAT on their fees. Not sure what corporation tax has to do with this.

 

[Titanic]

I would abolish all private schools. 600,000 x £40,000 = £24,000,000,000. That would help with the solution.

Removing the tax break should just mean that these ludicrously overproviding perpetuators of privilege scale back their luxurious offer by 20%.

So again... Starmer is going to have a mega-majority.... why hasn't he got the confidence to do something like this and make a real difference?

 

[WATFORD zero]

There's surely little element of subsidy involved? By definition, if they're charities they're non-profit making and so the absence of Corporation tax makes no difference.

The subsidies are £1.7Billion in VAT and business rates

 

[Simster]

Starmer is going to have a mega-majority.... why hasn't he got the confidence to do something like this and make a real difference?

Because he is at the mercy of big business and media interests who have sufficient influence to get enough turkeys voting for Christmas to swing elections. That's why we really need to change the voting system, so that parties with a minority don't get seat majorities. IMO, that is more urgent than any other issue, beyond homelessness and child poverty.

 

[A mex eyecan]

There's surely little element of subsidy involved? By definition, if they're charities they're non-profit making and so the absence of Corporation tax makes no difference.

deleted

 

[dsr-burnley]

The subsidies are £1.7Billion in VAT and business rates

That depends on how you define a subsidy. I didn't pay VAT on my dinner today, but I wouldn't say it was subsidised. And I bet if VAT rose to 25%, there wouldn't be great approval for the government for increasing food subsidies by 5% across the board.

When it was the "tampon tax", the argument was that the government shouldn't be taxing women's sanitary products. They weren't suggesting that the products were on sale at normal prices and the women wanted subsidies. They wanted the abolition of the tax.

Absence of business rates sounds like a subsidy, though. How much is that?

 

[dsr-burnley]

It does indeed. If we had the stones to deal with the issue properly and ban public schools full stop, you'd find the education budget would miraculously double overnight. This isn't politics of envy, it's just what happened when Finland did exactly that.

They can't ban public schools full stop, because the richer ones (boarding schools) would move abroad. They would be able to close the cheaper end of the market, and the day schools.

 

[nicko31]

The subsidies are £1.7Billion in VAT and business rates

Beggars belief my local comp pays businesses rates, yet the independent school down the road has multiple rugby pitches, a leisure centre, a running track and a friggin golf course. They pay nothing.

I don't advocate banning them but if they choose to exist they need to pay their way.

Next the Non-doms, yes you media owners....

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Absolute hogwash.

I know of many working class parents making massive personal financial sacrifices to send their child/children to an independent school. Prices going up 20% will force many normal folk out of the market.

I DO hope Sir Kneel enjoyed his spell at Reigate Grammar School.

Reigate FEES

I bet most of the working class wish they were as “working class” as your mates.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

So again... Starmer is going to have a mega-majority.... why hasn't he got the confidence to do something like this and make a real difference?

Maybe he will when he's in power. Maybe he'll do a lot of the things which got him into the labour party in the first place.

At the moment, his job is to not give the tories a sniff. It's the football equivalent of ignoring a 4 against 1 and running the ball into the corner in stoppage time when you've got a lead.

Dull? yes
Pragmatic? yes.

But it gives him the best chance at maximising that majority. The tory press with come at him ferociously and he's wise not to underestimate their power.

 

[Dibdab]

Maybe he will when he's in power. Maybe he'll do a lot of the things which got him into the labour party in the first place.

At the moment, his job is to not give the tories a sniff. It's the football equivalent of ignoring a 4 against 1 and running the ball into the corner in stoppage time when you've got a lead.

Dull? yes
Pragmatic? yes.

But it gives him the best chance at maximising that majority. The tory press with come at him ferociously and he's wise not to underestimate their power.

And relies on him not just being another Tory light in sheeps clothing. I dont trust him at all.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Absolute hogwash.

I know of many working class parents making massive personal financial sacrifices to send their child/children to an independent school. Prices going up 20% will force many normal folk out of the market.

I DO hope Sir Kneel enjoyed his spell at Reigate Grammar School.

Reigate FEES

What other topics do you chat about in your working class circles? How attractive your nannies are? the color of your new Porsche?

 

[beorhthelm]

From bitter personal experience, I have no axe to grind for private schools.... but if 600,000 children are being educated in over 2000 schools in the independent sector, won't the really wealthy just carry on paying the increased fees, and those for whom the financial case is marginal will look to go back to state provision.

Aren't most schools under pressure already, where will these children go?

I get the 'fairness' argument... but am not clear how this is any sort of solution.

because you haven't thought on what the problem is. first, its a popular political football of the left, that most centre ground dont care about, triggering the right (even those never considered going private). second, Sunak went to private school so its a direct dig at him. with that lens its a fine solution.