-
-
Latest Discussions
-
By Dulwich dweller · Posted
. I have messaged you. -
Link to this? I'll post Kuennsberg (spelling) link from this morning later. -
So for those families that can't afford to send children with special needs to private schools it's OK for them to get 'inferior' education? The Guardian article appears quite vague on reductions in numbers at private schools as this is happening in state schools too as the birth rate declines. Do those children going into reception at 4 count as compulsory school age? If so surely those that go private will be subject to VAT On the comment on state school class sizes it's shocking that numbers are larger than when I was at school. I'd like to think that Labour had done a proper assessment. The dieing days of the Tories was shocking, we want this policy, government analyists "poor return on assessment", government policy heads "this won't work" - ministers and SPADs - "just do it". Hoping Labour will be different despite too many early blemishes and poor decisions eg gifts. Telegraph is hardly going to support Labour. Headlines yesterday amused me. One in four pensioners over 80 will not get winter fuel payment. So, Daily Express they aren't short of money. And according to the Mail we are giving the Falklands back. Not that it would bother me, apart from (Port) Stanley is always a good answer on Pointless. But Labour would be silly if this was a policy. Ok, got into politics, and as said time will tell. Ps poor poor handling by Labour on winter fuel allowance
-
By David Peckham · Posted
I did a very quick & dirty calculation on this, based on the available numbers for England. Even assuming an elasticity of zero, ie no pupils leaving the private sector due to the tax rise, the net increase in the budget for the state sector would be around 3.5%. That's before any costs associated with collection and administration, which doesn't seem to have been particularly well thought through, according to the above Guardian article. It does all seem a bit 'dog whistle'. Even The Guardian calls the policy 'eye-catching' - there's very little substance to it. The net effect is negligible, given the trouble it'll cause.
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.