[Politics] Sir Keir Starmer’s route to Number 10

[WATFORD zero]

Steering to the centre ground... preparing for government...

Labour drops plan to strip public schools of charitable status

Party drops promise to remove some charity tax perks but says it will implement VAT on fees.

www.bbc.co.uk

Certainly looks like it, but sticking with VAT, so a step in the right direction

And what are you hoping to see in the manifesto from your party next election, more of the same ?

Serious question, how do members get any input ?

 

[Titanic]

And what are you hoping to see in the manifesto from your party next election, more of the same ? Serious question, do members get any input ?

I don't think it matters what they put in the manifesto, so it will probably be the usual three word slogans and dog-whistles.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I don't think it matters what they put in the manifesto, so it will probably be the usual three word slogans and dog-whistles.

Are you no longer a member ?

 

[Titanic]

Are you no longer a member ?

I use THEY because party members have little or no influence over policy and certainly government policy / behaviour - it is more relevant for local discussion / campaigning etc...

 

[rippleman]

Steering to the centre ground... preparing for government...

Labour drops plan to strip public schools of charitable status

Party drops promise to remove some charity tax perks but says it will implement VAT on fees.

www.bbc.co.uk

No surprise there then.

I think he has just about abandoned all of his pledges he made when he got the leadership gig.

He is a man devoid of personality or policies. If you think that a Starmer led government will bring about the radical policy changes the country needs on health, housing, taxation, infrastructure et al you will be sorely disappointed.

Starmer is a Tory wearing a red tie.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I use THEY because party members have little or no influence over policy and certainly government policy / behaviour - it is more relevant for local discussion / campaigning etc...

Thanks, that answers the second part of the question I asked re input from members. I'm guessing from your earlier response of 'three word slogans and dog-whistles' that you don't agree with what they are currently doing. If it was me and I didn't like what they were doing and had little or no influence over it, I don't think I would remain a member of a political party.

Everyone is different though

I do hope you weren't campaigning locally for my councillor

 

[sparkie]

Steering to the centre ground... preparing for government...

Labour drops plan to strip public schools of charitable status

Party drops promise to remove some charity tax perks but says it will implement VAT on fees.

www.bbc.co.uk

This will cost me £200 a month+ for the next 5-9 years if they win. I can't see myself voting for the ChargeSparkie200AMonth Party tbh. Think it'll be Tories(urgh) or spoil. Lol.

 

[ROSM]

No surprise there then.

I think he has just about abandoned all of his pledges he made when he got the leadership gig.

He is a man devoid of personality or policies. If you think that a Starmer led government will bring about the radical policy changes the country needs on health, housing, taxation, infrastructure et al you will be sorely disappointed.

Starmer is a Tory wearing a red tie.

It's really quite simple. Changing charitable status rules will take primary legislation (which will take time) and also an implementation period meaning the financial benefits will be 3 to 5 yrs. Vat change can be delivered within a finance bill so immediate. Does mean schools now have double hit of admin required to be charities and also paying vat. They could move to a more donation model but thats hugely complex.

 

[Chicken Run]

It's really quite simple. Changing charitable status rules will take primary legislation (which will take time) and also an implementation period meaning the financial benefits will be 3 to 5 yrs. Vat change can be delivered within a finance bill so immediate. Does mean schools now have double hit of admin required to be charities and also paying vat. They could move to a more donation model but thats hugely complex.

All of which he knew when he made his original pledges

 

[London Irish]

Starmer just copies everything the Tories do - democracy has effectively been abolished in this country as regardless of whoever you vote for, you are going to get the same policies. And there isn't a damn thing you can do about it, it's all been stitched up.

And if you think those policies will be done with more competence, wait to see what that looks like when the billionare press really starts going at them every day as the Tories repair their team.

 

[Bozza]

It's really quite simple. Changing charitable status rules will take primary legislation (which will take time) and also an implementation period meaning the financial benefits will be 3 to 5 yrs. Vat change can be delivered within a finance bill so immediate. Does mean schools now have double hit of admin required to be charities and also paying vat. They could move to a more donation model but thats hugely complex.

If it's simple, you think they'd have known that before they stated, repeatedly, year after year, that they were going to remove charitable status from private schools. From what you're saying, it would be obvious to anyone who'd done some very basic research. Doesn't inspire confidence, tbh.

What is the new VAT proposal? That private schools would begin having to pay VAT on their purchases, or that schools fees chargeable to parents will be newly VATable?

 

[ROSM]

If it's simple, you think they'd have known that before they stated, repeatedly, year after year, that they were going to remove charitable status from private schools. From what you're saying, it would be obvious to anyone who'd done some very basic research. Doesn't inspire confidence, tbh.

What is the new VAT proposal? That private schools would begin having to pay VAT on their purchases, or that schools fees chargeable to parents will be newly VATable?

Its the latter as I read it. It doesnt mean tgat the original point wont still be done but more importantly that extra income can be generated more quickly.

 

[ROSM]

All of which he knew when he made his original pledges

The original pledge can still be done (and add some of the tufton street think tanks in the mix too) but get the income in early is a good thing surely?

 

[Bozza]

Its the latter as I read it. It doesnt mean tgat the original point wont still be done but more importantly that extra income can be generated more quickly.

There was a brief snippet of an interview with Stamer on 5Live this morning when I was walking the dog and the policy did seem to be "private schools will have to pay VAT, but it's up to them if they pass that onto parents", which didn't make much sense.

The BBC article on this says: "Labour says it would charge private schools 20% VAT, as well as ending business rates relief, to raise an estimated £1.7bn." - but charge them on what? That doesn't sound like imposing VAT on fees.

None of this affects me at all, but I have no idea what they are actually proposing!

 

[beorhthelm]

It's really quite simple. Changing charitable status rules will take primary legislation (which will take time) and also an implementation period meaning the financial benefits will be 3 to 5 yrs. Vat change can be delivered within a finance bill so immediate. Does mean schools now have double hit of admin required to be charities and also paying vat. They could move to a more donation model but thats hugely complex.

that make sense. couldn't understand why dropping the charitable status, where the private schools also get a real tax subsidy.

 

[ROSM]

There was a brief snippet of an interview with Stamer on 5Live this morning when I was walking the dog and the policy did seem to be "private schools will have to pay VAT, but it's up to them if they pass that onto parents", which didn't make much sense.

The BBC article on this says: "Labour says it would charge private schools 20% VAT, as well as ending business rates relief, to raise an estimated £1.7bn." - but charge them on what? That doesn't sound like imposing VAT on fees.

None of this affects me at all, but I have no idea what they are actually proposing!

Its two fold, charging vat on school fees and also removing business rate exemption. The IFS had previously estimated that school fees alone would equate to £1.5bn per annum and this was the policy costing against the initial policy statement which indicates it hasnt fundamentally changed.

The question is that schools can choose to pass this shortfall on to people in terms of raising fees or absorb the costs. In effect the extra cost isnt being levied by the govt against parents

That makes sense to me.

 

[Bozza]

Its two fold, charging vat on school fees and also removing business rate exemption. The IFS had previously estimated that school fees alone would equate to £1.5bn per annum and this was the policy costing against the initial policy statement which indicates it hasnt fundamentally changed.

The question is that schools can choose to pass this shortfall on to people in terms of raising fees or absorb the costs. In effect the extra cost isnt being levied by the govt against parents

That makes sense to me.

The reporting of this policy is just bizarre, then. In the Sky News report they say...

"However, it has now emerged that, while Labour still plans to force independent schools to pay VAT, it will no longer remove their charitable status."

I'm not sure why they aren't simply saying that Lahour will impose VAT on school fees. Like any other business in the land, the schools will then be collecting VAT from their customers and forward it on to HMRC periodically.

Whether they choose to reduce their prices, in order that the new gross fee is the same as the pre-VAT fee, is irrelevant.

 

[Recidivist]

Most social and affordable housing in Ireland is now built by charities - and I have a major problem with this as it let's the government and the local councils off the hook.

Local councils in Ireland are sitting on large banks of land zoned for housing but won't build social and affordable housing - instead they flog them at knockdown prices to private developers.

Housing needs should be provided by local councils through a state operated construction company - it would save significantly on building costs, it would ensure proper employment for building workers (not bogus so-called self-employment contracts), and it would ensure that the land is properly developed with appropriate infrastructure, utilities and services in place.

 

[ROSM]

The reporting of this policy is just bizarre, then. In the Sky News report they say...

"However, it has now emerged that, while Labour still plans to force independent schools to pay VAT, it will no longer remove their charitable status."

I'm not sure why they aren't simply saying that Lahour will impose VAT on school fees. Like any other business in the land, the schools will then be collecting VAT from their customers and forward it on to HMRC periodically.

Whether they choose to reduce their prices, in order that the new gross fee is the same as the pre-VAT fee, is irrelevant.

I agree. It seems weird. Maybe obvious and simple doesnt drive drama

 

[Chicken Run]

The original pledge can still be done (and add some of the tufton street think tanks in the mix too) but get the income in early is a good thing surely?

Mmmm , we were only ever going to see dramatic change for the apparent better when JC was in the mix!