A report out yesterday says that independent schools must cut their fees or face a drop in pupil numbers. Basic economics, I am happy with the recommendation.
Take one of the well known local schools, Harrow School. This is what the Harrow School says on the Charity Commission website. The fees schedule is here. And this just the basics, say another 5k on top, a total of £30k per student.
It also says here
Is there any assistance for those who cannot afford the fees?
There are a number of Scholarships which cover some or all of the fees. Click here for more information about Scholarships.
Additionally, there are a small number of means-tested bursaries which are awarded to boys who win academic or music scholarships and whose family income is less than £35,000 a year.
Bursaries are not normally available for pupils whose parents find that they cannot afford the fees once the boy has started at Harrow. School fees protection insurance will pay for a year's education on the death of the fee-paying parent; details of such insurance will be sent to parents before their son starts at Harrow.
So given that (and I quote), "There are about 160 places in the Shell year (at age 13) for which we have on average 500 applications at the 11+ admissions test stage." quite a lot of parents who are able to pay an eye watering sum of 30k per year on their child, one wonders why the school is tax-exempt?
And the really strange thing is, the grammar school system is frankly paused. If the British populace and politicians are really going after egalitarian objectives and reducing inequality, then how does it manage to justify giving tax breaks to the independent sector while managing to stop Grammar Schools? Confusing or what? And no, they are not apples and pears. Grammar schools were canned (mostly) because they operate on the basis of selection. And how are the independent schools NOT operating on the basis of selection? that too on my tax pounds?
Weird or what? Answers on a tiny postage stamp please.
All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!
1 comment:
Dear Mr. Salty,
You ask the following questions. I am not an expert on any of these matters nor have I read the report cited but my answers are as follows:
1. why is the school tax exempt?
The school is tax exempt because one of the specific fundamental characterics of charitable (and hence tax exempt) institutions is that they are for EDUCATIONAL purposes. The profitablity of such an enterprise is irrelevant. I understand that this has been the case for the many decades (or even centuries) since the concept began.
2. Confusing or what?
It is confusing and I think that this is because the Labour Party is confused. As we all know, whilst it has tried to shed its socialist background to appeal to voters, there are still many in the party (usually the older ones) who have grown up with a class war mindset. It's a beautiful irony that the Grammar Schools which were initially a socialist idea to educate the bright but poor became a pariah to socialists when the idea actually worked. I think they were upset when they saw that the products of the Gramnmar Schools actually wanted to better themselves and get on with life rather that fight the working class cause.
3. How are independent schools NOT operating on the basis of selection
Selection can and is made on a number of bases. Whilst you appear to refer to the basis of monetary selection, there are many schools which select on the basis of academic selection, sporting selection, acting selection, musical selection, geographich selection and religious selection. Whilst not all is available to everyone, there's still a lot of choice out there. We are very lucky. Choice like this does not exist in many if not most other countries.
4. my tax pounds?
One of the things I like about independent schools is precisely the fact they do not steal my tax pounds. I find it difficult to understand that I am paying (in tiny part) for the education for hundreds of thousands of other people's children, most of whom I will not even meet. That does not seem fair at all. I would not expect you to pay for my children's education any more than I would expect you to buy me a car.
5. "weird or what?"
Not particularly weird, although it is not clear which part of your article you are referring to. There are a good many weird thing out there and the fact that one of an organisation which is considered one of the best out of hundreds happens to be making more money seem logical to me. I suspect that if you selected for illustration one of those considered amongst the "worst", there might be cries for its financial assistance.
I should like to make the following other comments:
1. Harrow School charges its (high) fees because it can. If there are 500 applicants for 160 places, there is prima facie evidence that it is correct in doing so. It is also evidence that it must be doing a good job.
2. Whilst the system may be in some eyes flawed or not idealoically sound, the UK has some of the best schools in the world and this is a matter in which we should take pride. I understand a fair proportion of the pupils at the top schools are from abroad which, in addition to helping the balance of trade also assists our influence in the world. Those closer than me inform me that the standard of education at Eton now exceeds that at many universites.
2. Part of the reason for the high fees is lack of competition. I have friends who have tried to start schools and time and time again been rejected by the authorities even though they have dealt with every supposed "concern". If there is anger at high fees, it should be directed not to the schools themselves but to the local authorities who do not facilitate the setting up of new schools which would encourage more competition (both in fee levels and standards of education).
Oh dear, I can't fit it all on a postage stamp.
Post a Comment