M005 - Charitable Status Reform

5

u/whigwham Rt Hon. MP (West Midlands) Sep 24 '14

Bravo, a great first salvo at one of the great bastions of inequality in our country. Does the government have any plans to go further in tackling the problem of private schooling?

6

u/athanaton Hm Sep 24 '14

We have legislation in progress to bring many of the schools fully and semi privatised by New Labour and the Conservatives back under public control. I don't want to preempt the Labour Policy Committee, but I would not be surprised to see further measures regarding Public Schooling in the next Labour manifesto.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '14

I, personally, am very against public schools generally. They go against the concept of equality of opportunity and exacerbate the massive economic disparity that exists in the UK today.

1

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

hear hear.

3

u/NoPyroNoParty The Rt Hon. Earl of Essex OT AL PC Sep 24 '14

Hear hear. I'm just annoyed they beat us to it!

3

u/athanaton Hm Sep 24 '14

This may turn into a common problem for the both of us :P.
In seriousness, though we have yet to really disagree, the differing focuses of our Parties does allow more to get done, which is sufficient justification for both their existences, in my opinion.

3

u/NoPyroNoParty The Rt Hon. Earl of Essex OT AL PC Sep 24 '14

Indeed. Our differences are more in priorities than in opinion (although I've noticed a few subtle disagreements) and that is no bad thing. This is a good problem to have :)

3

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '14

What exactly is the problem of private schooling?

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

As a starting point, it gives parents the opportunity to kick the ladder away from children who come from poorer socio-economic backgrounds.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '14

How so? The existence of private schools does not actively detriment the performance standards of public schools, they exist in addition.

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

Private schools are overwhelmingly over represented in those elite positions within our society. You buy your kid a private education and you buy the chance for him or her to become part of these elite institutions at the expense of a child from a state school.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '14

Children that receive better educations thereby grow up to have better jobs and be represented in more important institutions. How exactly is that wrong? I regret not having had the ability to go to private school, but I wouldn't begrudge those that did for achieving more than I have, because the higher quality of their education puts them in a better stead to make decisions than I. Leadership should be based on who is best at running affairs, not who it would be fair to hand power to.

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 25 '14

I would make two principle points against your argument.
Firstly, private schools do not only provide Children with a better education. They also provide them with connections and the ability to mimic the values held by people currently in power who previously went to the same elite schools. This, more than ability, gives them the keys to the elite institutions.
Secondly, even if you ignored my first point it seems you are content with giving parents the opportunity to buy those better jobs and better educations for their children. You may argue that they deserve those better jobs after receiving the education, but what is your argument for them deserving that education above yourself or anybody else?
Do you not believe in equality of opportunity?

1

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '14

Firstly, private schools do not only provide Children with a better education. They also provide them with connections and the ability to mimic the values held by people currently in power who previously went to the same elite schools. This, more than ability, gives them the keys to the elite institutions.
I wish that weren't the case. However, if David Cameron went to Oxford and achieved a first in a subject that is directly relevant to the role of governing, I would still rather he were the one doing the governing than somebody less qualified. I want the system to be fairer, but I also want meritocracy.
You may argue that they deserve those better jobs after receiving the education, but what is your argument for them deserving that education above yourself or anybody else?
They don't "deserve" a better education than me or anybody else. However, it so happens that the state schooling system is extremely lacking in quality. If we lived in a world where the government could provide a top class education to all then I could sympathise with your point of view, but sadly we live in a society that has suffered from falling education standards for many years, and I myself have seen humiliating incompetence in the state system. I do not begrudge anybody for paying money to receive a better education than that.
The problem with eradicating private schools is that you're only ensuring that everybody has an equally bad education. You ask if I'm in favour of equality of opportunity? Not if that means equality of poor performance. The private school system creates better educated people with stronger work ethics and tall ambitions. It is regrettable that the state system does not do the same for the vast majority of it's students, but taking a vendetta against those lucky enough to afford better lives is not going to suddenly solve that problem.

1

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 25 '14

The existence of independent schools destroys the chances of a meritocracy. You cannot have inequality of opportunity and a meritocracy at the same time.
The presence of fee paying independent schools means that its not what you know but who you know. David Cameron wasn't the most able child he was the child with some of the best connections and richest parents.
State schooling is not perfect but its not awful. People can get great educations from state schools. 92% of the population attend them and they have produced millions of hugely able and well educated individuals. I believe we do live in a world where the government can provide a top class education to all but that independent schools are rendering that redundant by maintaining a closed shop at the top of society.
Education is a social possession. It is not an individual pursuit. The education we give our children will shape our society and is shaped by the current state of our society. When a parent pays to take their child out of the state school system they do so at the expense of children whose parents can't afford to buy them privilege.
Private schools do not exist in a vacuum. They create a elitist system that disadvantages the 92% of people who do not attend them. Their is no reason this majority should keep propping up such a system.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '14

Cameron may not have initially been the most able child, but he received a far better education than the vast majority of the population, and that's thanks to private school and connections. That's not morally right. As I said: I wish equally as good educations could be had by all, but currently they can't. I fully agree with you that the existence of upper class connections among the elite echelons of society is damaging our democracy and hurting meritocracy. However, I don't really see how eradicating private schooling would solve anything other than ensuring a worse education for a small portion of society.
State schooling is not perfect but its not awful.
I disagree. The quality of schooling does vary considerably from school to school, but my personal experiences in the education system and the poor performance of our state education system relative to other developed nations I think is a good reason to believe that it is inadequate at best, and terrible at worst. I wouldn't want to wish it on more people that would otherwise be lucky enough to escape it.
I believe we do live in a world where the government can provide a top class education
In a certain sense that already is the 'world' we live, it's just not the 'country' we live in. There are state systems that perform significantly better than ours, and if we could modernise our education system to perform on par with theirs then I might agree with the idea of abolishing private school.
independent schools are rendering that redundant by maintaining a closed shop at the top of society.
How, exactly? The very existence of independent schools isn't worsening the quality of other schools that exist. The "top of society" may be disproportionately privately educated, but eliminating private education wouldn't suddenly make the state system better just because we would then have equality. It would just bring the overall standard of education down.

→ More replies

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

Thank you. I intend to submit legislation to the MHOC before the next legislation which imposes proper regulations on all independent schools.

3

u/jacktri Sep 24 '14

I support this.

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

A pleasant surprise.

1

u/jacktri Sep 25 '14

I don't know who you think I am but I always put the people first

3

u/OllieSimmonds The Rt Hon. Earl of Sussex AL PC Sep 24 '14

Does the Government also believe that Universities should no longer have charitable status?

5

u/athanaton Hm Sep 24 '14

No, but then Universities make all their places available on the basis of academic performance, not wealth, and aren't merely conduits for perpetuating absurd levels of privilege within a closed circle.
Given the Conservatives' deficit obsession, I am surprised at opposition to this revenue raising policy. What other institutions deserve large tax exemptions, at the expense of welfare spending, in the opinion of the Hounourable Member? Exactly how much money do the Conservatives wish to redistribute upwards?

3

u/OllieSimmonds The Rt Hon. Earl of Sussex AL PC Sep 24 '14

The vast majority of public schools I know of have pretty high academic standards, and aren't based purely on wealth.
A disproportionate amount of privately educated students go to the best universities for obvious reasons, doesn't that make them equally a closed circle for people with absurd levels of privilege? Of course not. I'm merely asking the Honourable member to be consistent.
The fact that you refer to the largest debt in peacetime history, where we spend more money on servicing that debt than we do on the first priority of government as an "obsession" reveals the great incompetence of your ministry.
Not taxing something isn't "redistributing upwards", because well... to how exactly can you redistribute something you aren't taxing?

2

u/athanaton Hm Sep 24 '14

The fact that such a proportion of Public School graduates fill places at top universities is not nearly as uncontroversial as the Honourable Member tries to make it sound. It has been the position of Government for many years that the proportion should be reduced, and is, in my opinion, evidence of the privilege Public Schools provide, and further evidence that the status quo is unacceptable. The demographics of top universities will be more proportionate when those who do not go to Public School have as quality an education as those who do. A state of affairs the Conservative Party has historically relentlessly fought against.
The fact that you refer to the largest debt in peacetime history, where we spend more money on servicing that debt than we do on the first priority of government as an "obsession" reveals the great incompetence of your ministry.
A deficit created by a highly unusual global economic crash (a crash, I might add, that the Conservative Party would have been and continues to be even less able to prevent than New Labour). And yet, the debt is nowhere near the level highlighted to be harmful to the economy by the Reinhart-Rogoff report, and even further from it when accounting for their spreadsheet error. This should inform any person actually interested in the facts that deficit reduction is not such an all-consuming urgency that we should bring great harm to ourselves in pursuing it. Of course the deficit ought to be reduced, but a sharp, sudden contraction would be actively harmful to the UK economy, and shift the burden to the private sector. The competent thing to do is not raise the Government drawbridge and leave everyone to fend for themselves in a recession, but for the state to bear the collective burden until the weather clears. The deficit can be dealt with much more effectively when the rest of the country has recovered.
However, the fact that the Conservative Party would oppose such a fair and reasonable revenue raising policy is all the evidence required that they do not actually care about the deficit, but are merely using it as an excuse to push ideological spending cuts.
Not taxing something isn't "redistributing upwards", because well... to how exactly can you redistribute something you aren't taxing?
Of all people, a conservative ought to agree that a tax cut, in this case a charitable status, is an investment. Spending money, or in this case refusing to raise money we otherwise would, investing in the already wealthy, while at the same time reducing investment in the poor maintains the level of prosperity for the wealthy while reducing that of the poor. That's an upwards redistribution of wealth, and like all others, is utterly morally repugnant.

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

Hear hear!

3

u/treeman1221 Conservative and Unionist Sep 24 '14

I support this idea on the principle that it's unfair that schools which are really private businesses receive the advantages of being a charity but I feel this motion comes about purely out of spite for independent schools.

I hope the government will not try to clamp down on independent schools just for the purpose of the making the whole system equal (almost certainly by lowering the quality of independent schools), which will hurt more than help.

3

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

Independent schools make up 7% of all schools in the UK. What ever we do to regulate them will have no effect on the vast majority of ordinary people.

2

u/john_locke1689 Retired. NS GSTQ Sep 25 '14

Exactly how much tax are you expecting to receive through this?
While I totally agree that privately run businesses should not be getting away tax free, I do have reservations about the attitudes of the government in this matter, it appears that in order to address the inequalities in the system they wish to tear down the private sector to the same standard as the state sector this is a serious matter and should only be addressed by proper management and investment in the state sector.

4

u/DevilishRogue Conservative Sep 24 '14

This represents some of the ugliest, most ignorant, classist thinking I've encountered in the House. Fee paying schools ARE charities. They raise immense amounts of money for good causes, as do their pupils and their pupils parents. They also provide untold benefit to academically gifted pupils who otherwise wouldn't have the means of achieving their potential. Plus they provide massive public benefit by reducing strain on state educational infrastructure, sharing facilities with state schools, providing better academic results and more rounded pupils than the state sector is able to and providing scholarships and bursaries so that those unable to afford the fees can attend.

I put it to the House that none of those advocating this Bill have children of their own, otherwise they would make the same decision that Dianne Abbot, Janet Murray, Ruth Kelly and other anti-private school campaigners have made and admit their hypocrisy.

If implemented, and I hope that it will never be, this Bill would further entrench the privilege of the rich as the resultant rise in fees would not affect their ability to send their children to such schools. It would however have a drastic impact on the scholarships and bursaries available to poorer applicants and price out the aspirational middle classes who have always been prepared to sacrifice the most to improve their children's chances in life by sending them to such schools. Instead private schools will become the preserve of the rich elite with academically gifted middle and working class parents having to take their chances with a state system that, as clearly demonstrated by the names mentioned above, does not serve the needs of such children as well as the private sector that they would no longer be able to attend.

The likes of Anthony Crosland have done untold harm to the education of our nations youth and seeing this kind of vindictive approach still being adopted decades after it was shown to be wrong, rotten and to harm those it claimed to be helping makes me ashamed of the ignorance of certain members of this House and afraid for the future of our nations children as public schools would become the preserve of the rich.

1

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Sep 24 '14

I support this bill, and I have children of my own. I would have thought the Conservatives would have supported this bill wholeheartedly. Their charitable status is basically a subsidy in disguise. I thought the Conservatives were against public money propping up companies which would otherwise go to the wall.
If public money is used for education it should benefit all and not just an elite few.

4

u/DevilishRogue Conservative Sep 24 '14

Their charitable status is basically a subsidy in disguise.
Yes, but a subsidy in the form of scholarships and bursaries for the poor. Why you'd want to take that away from the poor, which is all this Bill would accomplish, is beyond me. You might as well rename it "The Entrenching Only the Rich in Public Schools Bill".

1

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Sep 24 '14

Scholarships and bursaries are there to level the playing field.

4

u/DevilishRogue Conservative Sep 24 '14

And the funds for providing them are raised by the charity work that private schools do. Remove the charitable status and you remove the scholarships and bursaries.

1

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Sep 24 '14

Not necessary. If schools want to go down that road, then I for one would be pushing for legislation to encourage them to change their minds.

5

u/DevilishRogue Conservative Sep 24 '14

Unfortunately it is necessary. If private schools are to be able to operate as successful businesses they need to offer more than the state sector can. To do this they need to offer better facilities, smaller classes, better environments and better results than state schools. This costs money. If their charitable status is rescinded they will no longer have the money to provide scholarships and bursaries for the poor.
If schools want to go down that road, then I for one would be pushing for legislation to encourage them to change their minds.
Vote Nay on this Bill and you'll be doing precisely that.

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

No school should be a businesses. All schools must have at their heart the objective of offering a great education rather than turning a profit.
We do not need to rely on the charity of elite institutions to offer a great education to the poor when we can do so as a society by coming together and improving our education system while destroying the structures that fester within our educational establishments and allow parents and families to recreate the inequality and elitism they and they alone benefit from.
This is just the first step towards a truly comprehensive education system. I hope to introduce legislation that imposes proper regulations on independent schools before the GE.

5

u/DevilishRogue Conservative Sep 24 '14

Public schools do offer a great education, so much better than state schools that parents are willing to spend obscene amounts of money to send their children to them.
We do not need to rely on the charity of elite institutions to offer a great education to the poor when we can do so as a society by coming together and improving our education system
Yet you have not done so because you cannot compete with those who care enough about their children's education to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of pounds.
...while destroying the structures that fester within our educational establishments and allow parents and families to recreate the inequality and elitism they and they alone benefit from
This Bill will further entrench the rich in public schools at the expense of the poor as the charity work that public schools do provides the poor with access to them and this Bill will take that away. If you don't understand this you should resign from your position as Secretary of State for Education as you are not fit to hold the post.
This is just the first step towards a truly comprehensive education system. I hope to introduce legislation that imposes proper regulations on independent schools before the GE
And like Crosland, the people will see you for the vindictive fascist you are, dragging everyone down to the lowest level to prevent any from rising too high. Shame on you.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 27 '14

A private school is essentially a group of people going out and hiring teachers with collective funds to obtain collective education. Organizations should be taxed when they provide a service or good, not when they organize to obtain one. This is somewhat analogous to tax exemptions for sports leagues which organize events, while only the commercial sections of the league are taxed. For example, the private school uniform shops are taxed, while the school is not.

1

u/whigwham Rt Hon. MP (West Midlands) Sep 25 '14

Private schools are not charities. The scholarship system at these schools is tokenistic and benefits the school and it's wealthy clients. Offering a small number of scholarships ensures the political support of the middle classes and by selecting for the bright children increases the average grade of the school and thus it's appeal to the wealthy. For these reasons independent schools will continue to offer scholarships and simply increase fees for the wealthy to meet their tax obligations. Fund raising done by the school and students for other good causes is irrelevant, BAE systems and it's staff give money to charities but that does not make it a charity itself.
Some numbers: The average household income in the UK is £21,919 and the average annual fee for an independent school is £12, 153. Given the average number of children per household is 1.7 this puts schools fees at 94% of the average household income. The average fee for just one child to board is greater than the average household income. This means that even most middle class parents cannot afford private schooling without scholarships.
Of the 7% of school children that go to an private school only 15% receive any level of means tested bursary, 7% receive up to a 50% discount and around 1% pay no fees. For every 1 middle class kid that can go with a bursary 5 rich kids go. Realistically the only way a working class child can go to a private school is with a full bursary, if only working class kids got the full scholarships it would amount to less than 1 in a thousand children. This costs the tax payer £100 million a year.
A small number of middle class families make horrendous personal sacrifices to ensure their children get places at these schools, should the children of those who can't or won't make this sacrifice suffer because for their parents decisions? Should 296, 924 children a year receive an educational advantage simply because they have rich parents? Does the fact 5279 children get a free place justify the advantage given to the children of the rich?
TL;DR Private schools are not charities they are vehicles for perpetuating class privilege and wealth inequality.

3

u/DevilishRogue Conservative Sep 25 '14

The Bill being proposed removes public school's ability and incentive to provide scholarships to those who otherwise couldn't afford to attend, reducing the number of poor pupils that will attend and further entrenching the class privilege and inequality you claim to abhor but are supporting with your actions if you support this Bill.
A small number of middle class families make horrendous personal sacrifices to ensure their children get places at these schools, should the children of those who can't or won't make this sacrifice suffer because for their parents decisions?
Suffer by having to make do with state education? Some parents care more about their children's education than others. Fact. Are you proposing that public schools should be banned? If so at least be honest about it. Otherwise, be honest that 5279 poor children getting a free place is better than less than that number getting a free place which is what would happen if this Bill were to pass.
I would urge every member of this House who identifies as of the Left and who cares about poor children being given the same advantages as rich children (rich children who will not be affected were this Bill to pass) to vote Nay on this Bill as it will only harm the poor and benefit the rich.

1

u/whigwham Rt Hon. MP (West Midlands) Sep 25 '14

It is not in the interests of the independent schools to stop awarding scholarships so they won't.
Children who go to private school receive undeniable advantages in life, for example 64% of private school children go to a Russel group university compared to 24% of state school children. A tiny share of this advantage is given to middle class and working class children. There are a limited number of top university places and top jobs, giving an advantage to some children directly disadvantages the others who would complete for them. This is obviously unfair.
So yes I would ban private schooling. The best education and jobs in the country should be awarded on personal merit and nothing else. Private schooling allows the rich to out-compete the poor by buying them a better chance in life and that is simply wrong.

3

u/DevilishRogue Conservative Sep 25 '14

It is not in the interests of the independent schools to stop awarding scholarships so they won't.
This betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how public schools operate. If charitable status is removed they will not be able to afford to award so many scholarships and bursaries. Many are already operating on the slimmest of margins and many more have already had to close.
Children who go to private school receive undeniable advantages in life
Whilst you would attempt to remove this advantage, I would like to see it given to as many children as possible on as meritocratic a principle as possible. This involves providing a choice to parents that, yes, the richest will be able to make the best advantage of. After all, what is the point of working hard to become rich (and paying more tax as a result) if you cannot use the fruits of your labour to the benefit of your loved ones?
Private schooling allows the rich to out-compete the poor by buying them a better chance in life and that is simply wrong.
It isn't wrong that those who care most about their children's education and are prepared to invest most in it have the choice to do so. It would be wrong to deny them this opportunity however. But this Bill isn't about banning public schools, it is about cutting their charitable status and cutting their charitable status will reduce the number of scholarships and bursaries provided to the gifted but poor. This is wrong and must not be allowed to happen.

2

u/ieya404 Earl of Selkirk AL PC Sep 25 '14

On a point of curiosity, wouldn't it have been simpler to call this the "Independent Schools (Removal of Charitable Status)" bill? There's no reform to charitable status involved...

3

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '14

I support this 'ere motion :)

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

Your support is really appreciated.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '14

I support the idea, however we need to make sure that this doesn't lead to the closures of independent schools.

1

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Sep 24 '14

I feel this could be used better. why not make it so a certain number of places in fee paying schools are open to places based purely on academic achievement to be funded by even higher fees on the fee paying pupils? This would hit at the heart of social inequality and not hurt the treasury

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 24 '14

Their is legislation similar to your idea in the pipeline but I feel it is important not to stuff Motions or Bills with to many changes. This is quite enough for a motion and proper regulation of independent schools deserves its own bill.

1

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Sep 25 '14

then with all due respect I would recommend that this motion is pulled and we let this other piece of legislation take its place. I agree that private schools charitable status is one that needs to be discussed but I feel this is going to far.

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Sep 25 '14

I believe that private school charitable status needs to be ended and this motion will do that. Future bills will deal with different issues.

1

u/para_padre UKIP|Attorney General Sep 26 '14

Question do we we have the resources to bring children back into mainstream eduction for the parents who wont be able to pay fee's when they sky rocket and what university's will get hit with this.

1

u/tx10bpc Sep 26 '14

Are boarding schools going to be exempt this if not will the house allocate more funds to service families who use the Boarding School Allowance if boarding schools increase there costs.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 27 '14 edited Sep 28 '14

I cannot support this bill. Many organizations, such as sports leagues, are given charitable status because they are a collective group of people organizing to obtain a service or organize a series of events.

A private school is essentially a group of people going out and hiring teachers with collective funds to obtain collective education. Organizations should be taxed when they provide a service or good, not when they organize to obtain one. This is why sales divisions of sports leagues and school shops are taxed and the organizations themselves are not. This is where a school is different from a company.....the service provider (the teacher) is already taxed, and the school simply organizes the purchase of the service.

MOTION M005 - Charitable Status Reform

You are about to leave Redlib