You are reading a single comment by @ReekBlefs and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
used by people that aren't especially wealthy
I love you man but if a family can afford an average £17k per year toward private education for their kids, they ARE especially wealthy. They may be making other sacrifices, and I'm not downplaying that. But if you've got £17k a year to blow, you're doing alright.
ReekBlefs-
Sure thing, but there's quite a big difference in income/status between someone that can do local private school fees of £17k and fees for places like Eton which are £50+k per year.
I think what I'd do as Starmer is to take an approach something like universities. Regulate the term fees to make them more accessible and perhaps mandating wider entry conditions/ free places in return for the continuing tax breaks.
Jameo
Lots of problems with removing charitable status/VAT etc in education. Most universities are technically private education institutions, many of which offer A levels, some private schools do mini degrees, its complicated. To be consistent, are Labour going to remove benefits to universities as well?
As someone that was lucky enough to go to private school, I feel it's important to reiterate that only a handful of them are the nightmare Eton image that people usually think about private schools, most are small, relatively progressive places that don't have a tonne of money and are used by people that aren't especially wealthy or have kids that have special needs that their local state can't cover.
In terms of getting the Tories out, this is a very risky proposal by Labour.