Bye Bye Boris!

[DeskJockey]

But why should you force them to? That's their choice. You can't coerce people only to work in the state sector.

In historical terms, all this stuff is extremely hard left politics - the kind of which is not common barely anywhere in the developed world.

Who said anything about forcing them? I stated my personal preference. If they want to do something else, that's their choice.

This isn't hard left at all. It is common sense thinking to help the country as a whole, rather than widening the gap between elite and rest.

I’m sure all those poor inner city kids with academic bursaries are happy to know they’re the elite.

Any system that helps a narrow segment of the population widens a gap. Great that some of the poor inner city kids get to go to private schools, but imagine how many more their funding could help. Do you know how they're selected? I assume it isn't a lottery.

[GG.]

@Rev It would but you won't get there by VAT on school fees.

A kid from a sink estate in South London on an academic scholarship is not the elite in any other sense than intellectually gifted.

ISC schools spend £400million on academic bursaries annually. That's a lot of kids.

[GG.]

Who said anything about forcing them? I stated my personal preference. If they want to do something else, that's their choice.

This isn't hard left at all. It is common sense thinking to help the country as a whole, rather than widening the gap between elite and rest.

I’m sure all those poor inner city kids with academic bursaries are happy to know they’re the elite.

Any system that helps a narrow segment of the population widens a gap. Great that some of the poor inner city kids get to go to private schools, but imagine how many more their funding could help. Do you know how they're selected? I assume it isn't a lottery.

You go and sit an exam. Its based on merit. Funny concept I know.

[DeskJockey]

Quite a few would rather quit teaching altogether than work in the state sector - why would you when governance is so poor, with no support from your EA, and with so many parents who see the teachers as a problem. The state sector is riddled with major issues and it largely comes down to piss poor governance, not necessarily a shortfall of funding.

As per pretty much ALL public sectors.

And the private sector is the panacea to all ills. Rubbish, utter rubbish.

Nobody is forcing them to work anywhere. And, if you want to improve things you need to fund them properly. Is the system perfect? No, never will be. But a near-decade of cuts and then being told you're shit doesn't exactly help, does it?

Where did I say that?

And see above regarding money. Money IS NOT the problem.

Well, you argue that state sector has nothing but issues, yet offer no criticism of the private sector. That suggests a rather blinkered view.

And, funding absolutely is the issue. When teachers have to pay for teaching supplies, when the school has to spend budget feeding children that don't get enough food at home, when they drop SEN provisions as too costly, when they can't recruit anyone to fill vacant posts (and this isn't just in education), then funding it a significant part of the issue.

[NotoriousREV]

@Rev It would but you won't get there by VAT on school fees.

Oh, I didn't realise the Labour's only tax rise was VAT on school fees. How silly of me.

[DeskJockey]

I’m sure all those poor inner city kids with academic bursaries are happy to know they’re the elite.

Any system that helps a narrow segment of the population widens a gap. Great that some of the poor inner city kids get to go to private schools, but imagine how many more their funding could help. Do you know how they're selected? I assume it isn't a lottery.

You go and sit an exam. Its based on merit. Funny concept I know.

So anybody that can afford it can send their kids to a private school, but if you're poor you have to prove your worth. If that isn't the gap in a nutshell...

[GG.]

My god the ignorance is astounding. These schools are academically selective too. You just get in for free if you can't pay and are awarded a bursary.

Sadly this level of understanding of the whole system informs the (low) level of debate.

[NotoriousREV]

My god the ignorance is astounding. These schools are academically selective too. You just get in for free if you can't pay and are awarded a bursary.

Sadly this level of understanding of the whole system informs the (low) level of debate.

So does everyone who can pass the exam get in? Can everyone apply to take the exam?

[ShockDiamonds]

My god the ignorance is astounding. These schools are academically selective too. You just get in for free if you can't pay and are awarded a bursary.

Sadly this level of understanding of the whole system informs the (low) level of debate.

That comes with some conditions though, doesn't it?

[DeskJockey]

My god the ignorance is astounding. These schools are academically selective too. You just get in for free if you can't pay and are awarded a bursary.

Sadly this level of understanding of the whole system informs the (low) level of debate.

Do they need to achieve the same results to get in?

[Swervin_Mervin]

And the private sector is the panacea to all ills. Rubbish, utter rubbish.

Nobody is forcing them to work anywhere. And, if you want to improve things you need to fund them properly. Is the system perfect? No, never will be. But a near-decade of cuts and then being told you're shit doesn't exactly help, does it?

Where did I say that?

And see above regarding money. Money IS NOT the problem.

Well, you argue that state sector has nothing but issues, yet offer no criticism of the private sector. That suggests a rather blinkered view.

And, funding absolutely is the issue. When teachers have to pay for teaching supplies, when the school has to spend budget feeding children that don't get enough food at home, when they drop SEN provisions as too costly, when they can't recruit anyone to fill vacant posts (and this isn't just in education), then funding it a significant part of the issue.

For one - I didn't state that the state sector has nothing but issues - I said it was riddled with them There are many state schools which manage to operate successfully in spite of them being state sector. That's down to good governance. I'm not sure I see the relevance to this debate as to what the private sector achieve - it doesn't cost the taxpayer.

We spend more than most developed countries on education, so funding is not the issue. Inefficient use of funds may well be - see most public sector problems, wastage is very high. Otherwise how do you explain how it is possible that many state sector schools are able to deliver excellent results?

[GG.]

@SD What, like cleaning the floors after school? Of course it fucking doesn't.

If you flunk your exams you won't progress, exactly in the same way as for the other kids.

[DeskJockey]

My god the ignorance is astounding. These schools are academically selective too. You just get in for free if you can't pay and are awarded a bursary.

Sadly this level of understanding of the whole system informs the (low) level of debate.

So does everyone who can pass the exam get in? Can everyone apply to take the exam?

Deleted what I wrote because it was stupid. Not worthy of the debate.

[NotoriousREV]

We're going off down a rabbit hole here. I'm absolutely not against private schools. If you want to pay for private education, knock yourself out. But I still see no convincing argument for a fee earning institution to not charge VAT on an optional expense.

[GG.]

What about private health then?

Where do you stop with ramping up taxes on things that have an overall benefit and reduce tax expenditure?

It's not going to help further the improvement of public services, its as simple as that.

[ShockDiamonds]

@SD What, like cleaning the floors after school? Of course it fucking doesn't.

If you flunk your exams you won't progress, exactly in the same way as for the other kids.

No, I meant in terms of being tied to the insitution thereafter. I've been led to believe (previously) that's it not completely free, end-to-end. But perhaps it is. You're saying there's no conditions at all?

[GG.]

What do you mean by 'tied to the institution'?

Every school will decide the terms of its own bursaries - I've never heard of special conditions being attached.

[ShockDiamonds]

I still see no convincing argument for a fee earning institution to not charge VAT on an optional expense.

Given what sales taxes are designed to cover (anything which isn't deemed basic requirements) this seems reasonable.

[Swervin_Mervin]

My god the ignorance is astounding. These schools are academically selective too. You just get in for free if you can't pay and are awarded a bursary.

Sadly this level of understanding of the whole system informs the (low) level of debate.

Do they need to achieve the same results to get in?

Okay I'll answer the obvious

Each school will have a fund they set aside for academic scholarship. That fund is available as a result of skimming some off from the tuition fees paid by those which don't get in on a scholarship. If you reach the pass threshold, you're eligible, and then places will be usually be dished out on the basis of the pass mark achieved.

And SD: No - in what way could you be? Bizarre question.

[NotoriousREV]

What about private health then?

Where do you stop with ramping up taxes on things that have an overall benefit and reduce tax expenditure?

Same. Any company charging a customer money directly for access to its services should be charging and paying VAT.

Open a privately run college or hospital that is a non-profit organisation and only charges the government for its services, and it's fine to not charge or pay VAT.