You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So, I started a thread some time ago (long enough that it's now closed:
[url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/charity-bashers-assemble-for-the-real-scandal-private-schools ]http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/charity-bashers-assemble-for-the-real-scandal-private-schools[/url] ) but to save you the read, the pertinent points I'm picking up on here are:
Most private schools are registered as charities.
One of the significant tax advantages is that they get a mandatory relief of 80% on their business rates.
One of the egregious features of this is that state schools aren't charities and have to find 100% of their business rates out of their budgets.
So, this is now set to change in Scotland. The mandatory business rates relief is going to be removed from them. It's fair to say that the private schools sector in Scotland is not best pleased with this.
I, on the other hand, am very pleased about this.
You don't have to be politically opposed to the existence of private, fee paying schools to think that, if state schools have to pay their rates, their private equivalents should also have to contribute on an equal basis.
Well, I thought it was interesting, anyway. More comment from different sides of the debate can be found here:
[url= https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/12139/scottish-private-schools-finally-pay-appropriate-taxation ]sauce[/url]
[i]if state schools have to pay their rates[/i]
Interestingly, Special Schools don;t have to pay rates around here (not sure if that is national) but, as a consequence, they're not allowed to hire their facilities out.
It's a great move - the whining from certain commentators about poor hardworking upper-middle-class families who now won't be able to afford both a private school and a pony have been hilarious.
Next target: all the tax reliefs for hunting estates.
State schools paying their rates is surely a bit of a circular thing though, as they are mostly funded by the local council. So they basically pay the rates to the authority who then give it back to them as part of their budget.
Beware the law of unintended consequences.
They should get the results they deserve from such a myopic policy. Good job it's not a party that emphasise education.
Next target: all the tax reliefs for hunting estates.
THM, doesn't like it; that probably makes it a good thing.
That will be a truly joyous day!
Who'd have thought equality of treatment would be a myopic policy.
THM, doesn't like it; that probably makes it a good thing.That will be a truly joyous day!
+1
Do you also have an issue with Universities?
(because AFAIK they are also registered as charities in the same way that private schools are).
While we are on it, please can it be applied to Universities?
As an example: Edinburgh University had £909million income last year, leaving £87m after financial investments, capital investments etc, and are sat on financial investments of £171m.
They do not pay business rates.
In Scotland, the top 20 charities by income and resources are dominated by Universities:
University Of Edinburgh
University Of Glasgow Court
University Of Strathclyde
University Of Dundee
University Of Aberdeen
University Of St Andrews
Heriot-Watt University
The Glasgow Housing Association Limited
Culture & Sport Glasgow
Edinburgh Napier University
Glasgow Caledonian University
The Church Of Scotland
University Of Stirling
Court of the University of the West of Scotland
The Robert Gordon University
Historic Environment Scotland
University of the Highlands and Islands
Mercy Corps Europe
SRUC
Glasgow School Of Art
I just lost a piece of work as a University (in England) didn't want to pay the rates we as a small charity charge for our training services, at significantly less than that University charges itself out at, for work their staff do not have the expertise to deliver, and while sat on £700m of financial investments....
Do you also have an issue with Universities?
University education is free in Scotland, so everyone benefits - unlike with private schools.
Do you also have an issue with Universities?
The issue is with (lack of) equality not eduction....
Beware the law of unintended consequences.They should get the results they deserve from such a myopic policy. Good job it's not a party that emphasise education.
Hasn't it pretty much always been the case that once you correct for selective nature of private schools that the state system offers a better education that private?
sharkbait - MemberDo you also have an issue with Universities?
No, because they are free.
Hasn't it pretty much always been the case that once you correct for selective nature of private schools that the state system offers a better education that private?
Yup. Many years ago, when I was going to secondary school, my parents looked at a private school in Glasgow. It was a dump - the library was tiny and badly equipped, the sports facilities were not great, but they emphasised the 'quality' of people who went there and the connections they had to get kids good careers or into Oxbridge.
I'm very glad I went to the good local secondary instead.
if state schools have to pay their rates, their private equivalents should also have to contribute on an equal basis.
It wouldn't be a level playing field though would it. Schools are given a budget, and part of that budget is to pay for rates.
I pay my council tax so I pay for state schools I also then decide to send my son to private school. Isnt that a win win?
At my sons private school and do not see any of the teachers driving around in posh cars / living in posh houses, in fact I understand that wages are less than state schools. Private schools are not run for profit!
So really where is this detrimental to anyone?
THM, doesn't like it; that probably makes it a good thing.
+1.
THM is now on my list of convenient litmus tests when I can't be bothered to look into the minutiae of an issue.
If THM, ninfan, chewkw, enfht and Nigel Farage are up in arms about something then that must mean it is something good that should be encouraged.
Have they stopped the £9k/year tuition fees then? Yay 🙂No, because they are free.
[i]Private schools are not run for profit![/i]
they are run for 'a surplus' which sounds far less capitalistic but there's still targets set for Bursars etc to meet over and above their running costs.
Hasn't it pretty much always been the case that once you correct for selective nature of private schools that the state system offers a better education that private?
Oh, the ironing!
Private schools are not run for profit!
Then you have to ask yourself what they [i]are [/i]run for.
And the answer is much more worrying than if they were just run for profit.
At my sons private school and do not see any of the teachers driving around in posh cars / living in posh houses, in fact I understand that wages are less than state schools.
My Mrs works as an unqualified teacher in a local private school. If she was full time she'd be on £20k more than me as a state school teacher at the top of the pay scale
If THM, ninfan, chewkw, enfht and Nigel Farage are up in arms about something then that must mean it is something good that should be encouraged.
You forgot to add Trump to the list 😉
State schools 'business' rates are paid to the Local Authority by the Local Authority.
Perhaps the Local Authorities should reimburse the Private schools the £17k+ per pupil per year subsidy that a state education would otherwise cost the taxpayer?
There's a few others that you could add to the list but I think Danny nailed it.
My Mrs works as an unqualified teacher in a local private school. If she was full time she'd be on £20k more than me as a state school teacher at the top of the pay scale
I thought the lowest pay scale in teaching was £22,467 rising to £33,160 after 6 years ?!?
And the answer is much more worrying than if they were just run for profit.
Go on please expand, maybe I am being naïve? The modest 'profit' made by my sons school get used to reinvest in facilities etc.
Have they stopped the £9k/year tuition fees then? Yay
Obvious troll etc...was mine the only post you read?
Love the idea that Uni education is free. Politicians must love the idea that people fall for that
If your devolved government wants to harm your education system - which already has poor equality records - then you shouldn’t like it too ducks. But perhaps the rush to post was too much 😉 ?
teamhurtmore - Member
Good job it's not a party that emphasise education.
On the contrary- this is intended to correct Scotland's long-standing educational problems, ignored by a succession of administrations. By doing this, the SNP are [i]emphasising[/i] education, something your anti-Scots blinkers won't let you see.
Its a good move, and should be adopted UK-wide. We all benefit from a well-educated populace, and absenting yourself from your responsibility to others should be outlawed.
duckman - Member
sharkbait - Member
Do you also have an issue with Universities?No, because they are free.
The number of Free places available at Scottish Uni's is capped by ScotGov.
'Good job it's not a party that emphasise[b]s[/b] education' FTFY
No, because they [s]are free[/s] cost the taxpayer millions and millions.
FTFY
Private schools are not run for profit!
Tell that to some I have worked with this year, here and abroad.
My Mrs works as an unqualified teacher in a local private school. If she was full time she'd be on £20k more than me as a state school teacher at the top of the pay scale
If she were [b]qualified[/b], then she could work in a state school in Scotland, and would be on that pay scale.
£17k+ per pupil per year that a state education would otherwise cost the taxpayer
Sauce?
We all benefit from a well-educated populace, and absenting yourself from your responsibility to others should be outlawed.
Sorry what do you mean? Are you suggesting that a kid going to private school is harmful to the rest of society?
No it’s political dogma. Makes zero economic sense and does not do what is says on the tin. Classic SNP divergence tactic though - the Nationalist party that is addicted to self national harm
But your schools and your devolved government - their record on education speaks for itself. Little details tha Danny can avoid but big ones for those who actually care about education.
One unintended consequence could be the effect on language schools. My partner works for one which has charitable status and I assume many of them are the same. Here in Brighton and where she lives in Eastbourne they are an important part of the local economy and in monetary terms are effectively exporters. If a similar change were to happen here then the result could well be a significant blow to the local economy. It's not just the fees students pay but all the accomodation costs usually going to local families and all the other ancillary spending by students when they are here.
Even by your "standards" that was some spin, THM. Maybe you should have a sit down,you must be dizzy?
Yup, apologies, £4k - £8.5k.
[url= http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get ]http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get[/url]
No it’s political dogma. Makes zero economic sense and does not do what is says on the tin. Classic SNP divergence tactic though - the Nationalist party that is addicted to self national harm
Yeah we should all be doing our best to maintain what is in effect a partial subsidy of private education...
their record on education speaks for itself
Sauce?
Are you suggesting that a kid going to private school is harmful to the rest of society?
well the eton mafia seem to be having a good go. 😉
If you think education costs a lot then you should consider the cost of ignorance.
Do the maths on the opposite - then revert. The answer will have poor ducks spinning for ever. But if you guys want Scottish kids to suffer, it’s your choice.
Seems the wrong way round to me.
The real question should have been - why the hell are we charging state school business rates?
Genuine question - are business rates chargable on law courts, local government buildings etc?
Anyway business rates are small beer to the whole equation. Eton saves £500,000 in business rate being a charity - thats £384 per student and they have some of the most impressive and extensive buildings and grounds of any school and that's in a part of the country of particularly high business rates. It's the VAT that makes a difference - to the tune of about £6K a year per pupil on the school fee.
Do the maths on the opposite
I suspect that this is not possible otherwise you would have shown your working to make your argument.
[quote=bodgy ]Perhaps the Local Authorities should reimburse the Private schools the £17k+ per pupil per year subsidy that a state education would otherwise cost the taxpayer?
Even ignoring your inaccurate figures, what is the logic behind your suggestion that private schools should receive the same level of government funding as state schools?
Little details tha Danny can avoid but big ones for those who actually care about education.
Excellent - you're getting sweaty about this one - must mean I'm right.
Oh, and you said "education" when you actually meant "elitism".
Teamhavermuch is talking about political dogma while previously telling us the SNP aren't a left wing party...And then sends his poor child to fail in the education system he is so critical of. 😀
I think the common theme is "SNP" But maybe I should be so grateful that a privately educated home counties banker (sp) takes SUCH and interest in our wee corner of Northern Britain.
well the eton mafia seem to be having a good go.
Joking aside though is this all a bit of politics of envy. Elite will always exist, those who appear to have more than others.
Stick everyone in state schools and an ‘elite’ will continue to prevail and envy will still exist. In fact the ‘elite’ kids will be richer as their parents were not shelling out £1,000’s per year in school fees.
Which brings me on to if you take kids out of private education, where do you magically get money to pay for them in state education? Plus the benefit private education brings to the economy ie Premium car brands/posh clothing
I'd be quite happy for a reduction in my tax to cater for the fact I don't use a state place. I also pay more tax now as well. of course, how dare i earn decent money and try and provide a better learning experience for my child.
^^ if you add up all the subsidies they are better funded by the taxpayer than local authority schools (source: Nick Davies 'School Report') and if the boarding school near me is anything to go by, those benefits frequently accrue to wealthy overseas students.
Oh, ..........!teamhurtmore - Member
Do the maths on the opposite - then revert. The answer will have poor ducks spinning for ever. But if you guys want Scottish kids to suffer, it’s your choice.
What's the missing word?
Someone help me, I think it's something that hangs between a bull's hind legs.
I'm amazed that THM doesn't support the principle that in these times of Austerity the better off should not be dependent on the public purse, or to be more succinct, No Welfare for the Wealthy.
Tut, tut Danny. None of that racist talk. Careful you will have the posse all over you now.
Don’t worry ducks. He won’t fail, his family prioritise education above most things. And don’t forget one of the consequences of local policies is that he is in a Uni where Scots are a minority. They are the ones you SHOULD be worried about if you value your country. Don’t leave that to us...
No Welfare for the Wealthy.
Oh am I missing a big handout ?
In times of austerity a government has got to be bloody stupid to increase its burden by forcing more children in to state education. There is no logic, apart from the politics of envy
I don’t even know the numbers in private education but I do know that our local state school couldn’t physically cope with an influx of children
[b]@aracer[/b] - It was rhetorical point rather than an actual assertion that it should be the case.
If the parents weren't paying for their child's education the LEA would be, therefore every pupil in private is a subsidy to the LEA from the paying parent.
I'm not actually suggesting that the LEA pays the private school, however I don't see the [i]reduction of rates[/i] for an educational establish meant as a massive problem. Certainly less of a travesty than many of the Academies asset stripping state schools and then dissolving the trust or absorbing those assets into executive salaries.
Joking aside though is this all a bit of politics of envy.
Others would call it social justice.
I wouldn't be surprised if you've never even considered what those words might mean though.
I guess Funky you'll be hoping your son gets the benefit of basic spelling, punctuation and grammar. Also, by the way, 'austerity' is not an era, it is a (failed) policy.
Plus the benefit private education brings to the economy ie Premium car brands/posh clothing
Oh, I went to a Comprehensive, I'd better sell my "premium German car" and stop buying "posh clothing". Good to know how I'm viewed. Thanks.
While we batter around whether it's £4K, £6K, £17K or whatever number you care to pick, shall we also remember that 20% of private school entrants are from overseas so they're not "saving us" a state school place.
Some might suggest that "charitable" exemptions subsidising the education of the offspring of foreign oligarchs isn't the best use of taxpayers' money.
What is the social injustice that is happening?
I call it politics of envy because politicians are using it as a way to win votes/stay in favour. The rich are an easy target.
If you transact it financially it would not benefit the public purse as more kids in private education would transfer to state.
The rich are an easy target.
Not half as easy as the poor
So will it be a significant cost to Scottish Private Schools? Enough to encourage some Scottish parents to send their kids to board at English Provate Schools? If so I can think of at least two struggling private schools that could actually be saved by this.
Lol. No the disabled, disadvantaged and the poor are.The rich are an easy target.
Isn't quoting the phrase 'The Politics of Envy' the same as accusing someone of being 'like Hitler', when it comes to framing your argument, and in how seriously we should all need to take the rest of your opinions?
the Nationalist party that is addicted to self national harm
Like the Tories then?
What is the social injustice that is happening?
[i]Really?[/i]
*insert lost for words/facepalm/boggled meme of choice*
The rich are an easy target.
Dry your eyes princess.
You’ll be telling us £100k salary doesn’t make you rich next...
I call it politics of envy because politicians are using it as a way to win votes/stay in favour. The rich are an easy target.
What would be just would be to bring those "tax efficient" facilities into the public realm and use them to raise every child's education.
What would be just would be to bring those "tax efficient" facilities into the public realm and use them to raise every child's education.
That would be the logical approach rather than taking away a benefit that then incurs more cost.
Unfortunately though it would mean another government department loosing money, so the easy win is to look good to voters but not worry about the long term damage (increased cost to public finances)
Chakaping - go on 2nd time of asking now. What social injustice is there of me sending my child to private school ?
Chakaping - go on 2nd time of asking now. What social injustice is there of me sending my child to private school ?
If you wish to pay a business to educate your child, that's your decision. I'd rather that the government doesn't subsidise it though.
It's an inelegant fudge. The rules will now be: "If you're a charity you get an automatic 80% reduction in business rates unless you are an educational charity that is not a university"
If they don't (for whatever political reasons) want private schools to get the benefits of being a charity why don't they just change the rules on who can be a charity?
My Mrs works as an unqualified teacher in a local private school. If she was full time she'd be on £20k more than me as a state school teacher at the top of the pay scale
I thought the lowest pay scale in teaching was £22,467 rising to £33,160 after 6 years ?!?
It might be I'm on 38k ish she is on 32k ish working 3 days a week in the private school...ok 20k more may be stretchi g it its more like 17 or 18
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/education/2009/jul/19/private-schools-life-privilege-pupils ]Does this help?[/url]
or [url= https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/apr/25/private-schools-do-nothing-to-improve-social-mobility ]this?[/url]
I'm an avowed SNP hater, but this is a good thing. Churches should be next (where they are basically inward looking tax free clubs that dont provide a reasonable benefit to society).
However the SNPs dismal record on education generally (plus the "free" university education that makes tuition free by robbing the grant budget from poorer students which stops them taking advantage) make me think that this is another squirrel! policy to distract from the lack of progress (or surplus of regress :0) they have made on pretty much every educational front while being in power for 10 years.
Ransos - and I agree with you. However the fact is that right now the state system can not cope with and influx of children. The only argument I have made in this thread is that it is illogical at the moment and more of a vote winner
If you wish to pay a business to educate your child, that's your decision. I'd rather that the government doesn't subsidise it though.
I think that sums up the position for me too. Sadly any debate about private education (on here or anywhere else) seems to have to be binary - take your side and private schools should be allowed to operate as they wish and take a load of tax advantage for themselves and their customers* or alternatively they are utterly evil and should be banned. I exaggerate but there's not so many who are comfortable with the concept of the existing but would like some of the charitable advantages to be either removed, or alternatively, properly justified**
*I might come back to this one later if there's time.
**The regulators have had an 'interesting' time over the last few years with the independent education sector meeting the "public benefit" test. Not, I must say, in every case.
Ransos - and I agree with you. However the fact is that right now the state system can not cope with and influx of children.
I don't think there's any likelihood of the entire private school cohort suddenly wanting state education, is there?
I exaggerate but there's not so many who are comfortable with the concept of the existing but would like some of the charitable advantages to be either removed, or alternatively, properly justified**
In a similar vein, I loathe the idea of public money being given to church schools, who then set admission criteria to exclude most of their local population. If you want a church school, fine, but pay for it yourselves.
Will only create more pressure on the state system. Counter productive as the SNP will see.
I don't think there's any likelihood of the entire private school cohort suddenly wanting state education, is there?
I don’t we are suggesting the entire peivate sector school population would move but even 5 or 10% would put on substantial extra pressure and remember if you can afford private school fees you can afford to move right into the heart of the best state schools catchment areas.
People sending their kids to private school are doing the state an economic favour, paying taxes for school places they are not using.
However the fact is that right now the state system can not cope with and influx of children.
Heres a mad, leftfield thought for you - maybe if the rich and privileged didn't opt out of the state system en masse, and thus have little interest in its functioning, it just might
I know..... bonkers, eh?
People sending their kids to private school are doing the state an economic favour, paying taxes for school places they are not using.
Apart, of course, from the 20% from overseas, who aren't.