Labour to abolish private schools

As John says Eaton, Harrow and the other truly elite “public schools” are very much the exception - most independent schools function at roughly the level of the equivalent state schools but charge per pupil - at secondary level this is probably about 2-2.5x the state secondary per-pupil funding (very roughly £12k pa vs £5k pa) so, clearly, facilities are better.

I’m (just) a baby boomer so benefited from a good state education - well, I probably would have had a private education but made things a little awkward for my parents by getting expelled from prep school (very long story). I send my son to an independent though.

When choosing I had an excellent academy school, of which we are officially in the catchment and a so-so, large, but generally acceptable comprehensive. Given that the academy was pretty clear that it was too small to serve the whole of the official catchment and, while within the official boundary we were well outside the de facto one the choice became a state school with large classes where I felt my son would “disappear” or one with smaller classes and the budget to attract better teachers - I could afford the latter and feel it is in the best interest of my son - but it is not a ticket to the gravy train, he still has to work hard and get good grades to progress just like everyone else.

I agree that to take buildings and resources which are in the hands of independant schools is morally wrong.

I also take exception to the accusation that the fact that independent schools have charitable status somehow means they are “getting a free ride at taxpayers’ expense” - in choosing to send my son to an independent school I do not benefit from a tax rebate equivalent to the funding that would be attached to a place in a state school so, effectively, I am paying twice over.

This is definitely a case that you do not strengthen the weak by pulling down the strong - if we had a state system that was funded at £12k pa per pupil and if we acknowledged that bright pupils thrive in an institution with other bright pupils we probably would not need a private education sector; but we don’t and we do.

4 Likes

And thanks for posting it, @JohnBoy. Of course it commands my respect, and it’s good that you did your best for your children, and could afford to.

Many parents who can’t afford fees feel the same as you. If there are failures in the school system it is IMO primarily down to the interference of privately educated politicians, expensive doctrinaire reorganisations, and a failure of adequate funding.

We are probably on the same page there.

I’m sorry your school experience was rotten as you are obviously an intelligent and able man. Our children suffered in the same way.

My wife and I were nurses, and couldn’t possibly have afforded private schooling for ours. We couldn’t afford to get a mortgage until I was into my mid-forties and my wife could work full-time. So much for getting off our arses!

Schools are also embedded in the British class system where a classical education is privileged over a technical, industrial or commercial one. This disadvantages at least 65% of all children, and has led to the scramble for half-baked, over-priced and worthless ‘degrees’ (a degree in promoting fashion shows?).

Another victory for the NEWish ‘private’ ‘higher’ education, pay-now, lose-out for ever…

1 Like

If Labour get into power (and it’s a big if) then surely the NHS, social care, education and adequate policing etc should be bigger priorities than shutting private schools and re-nationalising the railways?

3 Likes

Could this be part of the reason dreadful policies are now being proposed?

1 Like

As to whether it’s a vote winner - who knows? - the capacity of many British people to vote against their own interests and for the right-wing extremists that brought us brexit never ceases to surprise.
What we have at the moment (at least as far as the reporting I’ve seen so far goes) is only a broad-brush conference composite - it’s no good trying to pronounce on the policy to come until the detail is published - but a couple of the issues around charity law do cross into my area of professional expertise, so I can correct at least a couple of misconceptions.
Education used to be a charitable objective in and of itself, but this has changed since the 2011 Charities Act, so that now to retain charitable status, organisations not only have to demonstrate that they are carrying out exclusively charitable activity, but that they are providing a substantial public benefit. Most experts have believed for years that most private schools cannot demonstrate either exclusively charitable activity or substantial enough public benefit to retain charitable status - it has been a destructive anomaly in charity administration for a long time, and it’s actually really good that Labour intends to rectify this. Now when any organisation loses charitable status it cannot keep its charitable assets - of course not - they have been built up from donations etc by people that thought they would be used for charitable purposes, and under enormously favourable tax etc conditions, they are not privately owned, but held under trust, so it would actually be illegal - and clearly wrong - for them to simply pass into non-charitable private hands. It is in fact perfectly normal in such situations for the state to step in.
So withdrawing the charitable status of private schools and using the resulting assets for educational purposes elsewhere is in fact absolutely in line with normal practice, despite the tabloid/murdoch hysteria you might come across trying to present it as ‘theft’ etc.
(I also think, incidentally, that the ‘abolish’ line is a media distortion - I think the composite talks only of integrating the schools into the state system - but as I said it’s probably a mistake to get into too much discussion until the actual policy is published.)

2 Likes

Regardless of it being only a composite at present it is clearly going to be a Labour manifesto pledge at a time when there are more pressing matters at hand.

Thanks to Geoff for his clear explanation.

As I understand it the “problem” is really that we do not have a formal not-for-profit framework in the UK outwith charitable status.

It is certainly clear to me that a school should not be run to generate profit for shareholders - if so I (as a parent paying school fees) am just giving someone money for no purpose at all except to make me poorer and them richer.

Our daughter won a full sixth form scholarship to Downe House when things were financially difficult for us.
They gave her wonderful opportunities, from which she has benefitted and is now in a very senior position in technical investments in Munich.
Also, I really think that this would be the thin end of the wedge. What else are politicians going to tell us that we cannot spend our money on? If people work to pay school fees, that is their choice and should remain so.

They do. Jo Swinson is dynamic and shows up both BoJ o and Jeremy Corbyn for the posers that they are.

“As to whether it’s a vote winner - who knows? - the capacity of many British people to vote against their own interests and for the right-wing extremists that brought us brexit never ceases to surprise.”

Nothing would surprise me Geoff but such leftyist policies were firmly rejected three times when the Lab candidates stood against Maggie and I think the elctorate has moved further towards the right since. Are we misreading the thoughts of the UK electorate, are we moving back left a bit ?

We like @JohnBoy sent our children to a local private school, for us in Bedford.

Neither my wife nor I went to private school.

Our daughter had issues at state school with certain GCSEs, the school admitted on results day that they had let her down by not submitting coursework for review and hence her results were low. Within a couple of days she started for the sixth form at the nearby private girls school. She was only there for 2 years but her transformation was staggering part of this was due to the single sex school as all of a sudden the focus on appearance diminished and instead a determination to achieve good A level results thereby getting a good university place. The school did an excellent job and the attitude of staff was an impressive change.

We struggled for money through these couple of years but I am very pleased we did it for her.

For our son who is quite a bit younger than our daughter he also went to a boys private school, this time from an earlier age as we had seen the benefit that our daughter had. Again the school was excellent academically and superb for sports which he really enjoyed playing to a very high level.

The school identified our sons dyslexia which had previously been missed.

Again money was very tight for this period.

Both schools offered their facilities for use by local schools and groups, there were quite a few events for these groups - I imagine that the purpose of these offers was with a view to maintaining their charitable status.

Having seen both sides of this issue - to me it is simply a choice of parents if they can afford it and wish to do this - by doing so they are saving the local state schools money allowing that money to be spent on other pupils (probably doesn’t happen).

Ideally all schools would have the level of investment so that they could all have the same facilities and excellent teaching - I very much doubt however that a tripling of funding will happen. In the same way many people would want more money spent on NHS.

This then forms part of a much bigger discussion of what levels of public service are we prepared to be taxed for. Unfortunately it does all need to be paid for.

5 Likes

That was how I interpreted it too Tim. Much the same idea as giving renters the ability to buy the home they are renting at a knock down price if they so wish, irrespective of what the landlord may think.

Hi again everyone. I hope you are all well!

This is obviously a delicate and contentious subject. However it is a debate which needs to be had. As with social care it would benefit from cross party collaboration. To say we are some way off that is of course an understatement.

My contribution is this: we are currently all reaping the results of the UK’s woeful education system. To say that there are more pressing matters to deal with is missing the point. The Brexit vote is the result of a poor education system and one that has failed the electorate. We do not live in a meritocracy. Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings at the department of Education deliberately operated a slash and burn policy with their introduction of free schools and the new curriculum. All creativity and critical thinking are quashed under this new regime. In addition to this large sums of money are siphoned out of this system and this in no way benefits pupils. When everything is dumbed down it is easier to manipulate an electorate. But this is not just down to the current Tory party of course. The results and inspection focused system actively hinders education and learning and is driving teachers away from the profession. The subsuming of universities by Peter Mandelson into the department of Business and Industry is another travesty.

The good news is that there are lots and lots of wonderful young people and teachers in both state and private schools. All is not lost but we do need to level the playing field.

What is lost from these debates is that inequality affects everyone. I can’t answer Peter Bird’s original question but as a teacher I know we need to offer more to young people. There are undoubted benefits to private education and these should be made more widely available to the greater cohort.

I don’t have all the facts and figures at my disposal to argue this in more depth but the bigger question is what kind of society do we want to create.

4 Likes

And what are we prepared to pay in taxes for it.

To me it’s a ‘sledgehammer to crack a nut’ policy. There is, always was and always will be inequality in life based on where you were born and who you were born to and abolishing or integrating private schools into the state sector will never change that, the wealthy will simply pay for private tutors or send their kids abroad to be educated. Surely it would better simply to improve state schools so that parents didn’t feel it necessary to pay for their children to be educated privately?

This idea along with giving private tenants the right to buy is ideological and will not solve anything long term.

1 Like

But it is not just a matter of taxes. It is a matter of ethos and that is not just about funding. I brought up a results/rote learning focused system. For example if your son’s state school teacher had not been so swamped with unnecessary paperwork, and believe me an enormous amount of it is unnecessary, they may have spotted his dyslexia.

Not all parents are able to afford private school fees. It is not about not being willing to get off their arse - it is simply a fact. So a similar child to yours with dyslexia may not get the support they need. This can go on and have consequences for a wider social network further down the line.

The whole idea is to give the 93% of children that attend state schools a better chance of becoming MP’s, barristers, CEO’s, bankers and stockbrokers and very little about improving the standard of education generally.

I spent a brief time working in a State Secondary School in the 80’s.

They had cancelled Sports Days so that no-one felt let down by NOT winning.

They selectively corrected the workbooks, so that children would not be disheartened by having their mistakes pointed out too often.

Spelling corrections went out the window. Not really necessary, “so long as the idea is understandable” was that reasoning.

Those kids are now… out in the world armed with the skills and mindset acquired during their school days… :crazy_face: - maybe even Members of Parliament

1 Like

I should mention that there are some excellent State Schools… :hugs: my grandson is very happy, thriving and learning a lot. Excellent teachers.

Hopefully, at his next school he will find a similar standard of education.

But it is so much more than “just” education in what many regard as the mainstay of education (the so called 3 r’s).
Our son went to a private prep school. On his birthday we took him and a few of his school mates out to a local swimming pool (to be followed by a McDo or similar) before being returned to the school.
What was significant to me watching the boys interaction in the pool was the camaraderie. Because they talked “posh” a group of local lads decided to “have a go” and push them a bit. The others on seeing this surrounded the local lads lending support to the one who was being targeted. The local lads folded very quickly and dispersed whilst the prep boys just continued about their enjoyment of the pool.
You see, what the prep school taught them was to look out for each other. Something they wouldn’t get in a normal state school.
They also did very well in the 3r’s :wink:

1 Like