Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Pointy-elbowed parents send their children to good State schools, not bad ones.
And they turn bad schools into good ones. See London.
That is more highly motivated immigrants in inner London academies, middle class white parents send their children to top comprehensive or faith schools in the leafy suburbs or to grammar schools if they do not send them private
Do you not think that immigrants can be pointy-elbowed parents? The high motivation comes from home, doesn't it? The more pointy-elbowed parents there are, the better it is. It would do wonders for coasting state schools in Tory shires, for example.
Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Agreed. But it's the spending part of that policy that i am sceptical about. It will seem unnecessary to most people and therefore wasteful. If it went on better childcare provision for example, it could resonate more.
All these people fretting about tariffs need to relax, the Chinese will make us anything we need. Then watch the German reaction to EU tariffs
That would involve us scrapping intellectual property laws. Watch everyone's reaction to that.
I've no idea why you think Germany is the only country with the capacity and capability to make things. Who knows, leaving the EU might prompt us to start making things again.
Either way, ring Mr BMW and ask him if a tariff on his cars will be good for his business.
I'm afraid your stance is so entrenched you've lost all sense of reason and perspective.
Of course BMW would want to avoid tariffs. But it is not the zero sum game some think it is. Increasing the price of BMW cars may well cause the company some harm, but it has a strong brand and that may well see it through. People want to buy cars with the BMW marque.
If you do not understand that a lot of high-priced premium products that we currently import from EU countries are protected by IP laws and could not be replicated without immediately attracting infringement suits, then I am afraid our conversation is pointless. There is a reason why Chinese-made smartphones are very hard to buy in the US and Europe, for example: patents.
Short term it might be a hiccup. Pfizer made a fortune from Viagra, as soon as the patent ran out cheaper equivalents (doing the same job) flooded the market and the price dropped.
Our conversation is pointless because last week you predicted "a literal apocalypse". Its easy, if the EU imposes a tariff on BMW and the business is hurt they'll find a way around it, industrialists are far smarter than politicians and the market has never, ever, been beaten.
Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Pointy-elbowed parents send their children to good State schools, not bad ones.
And they turn bad schools into good ones. See London.
Nothing to with London receiving more funding per pupil ... than, for example, Labour-run Wales.
Labour treats its heartlands with contempt.
That is why it is losing them (vide Scotland).
Labour has no say over the funding Wales receives. London is a Labour heartland, of course.
We have c. 500, 000 students at private schools in the UK. Fees can range from the thousands to the tens of thousands.
How much would free school meals for all primary children all year cost? It's c. 5 million (banding on uk stats is 3.5 million between 5-9 and 3.6 in 10-14). School dinners are charged at around £3 a day, so £15 a week for 5 million children for 39 weeks a year means gives £2.9 billion needed.
You're looking at getting a VAT bill on the fees each of those students of, on average, nearly £6000 a year. Guess that assumes that the fees being paid are c. £30k a year.
Thoughts?
Typical lefty economics, it is just envy and does not even think that most of teh parents can afford school meals. If the idiots at least looked to do something real about really poor people it might be OK but it is anything but that.
Well, yes, free school meals for all sounds good, but is quite an unfocused response.
As I said, it's difficult to criticise as a Labour policy if, as @BannedInParis has noted, it stacks up mathematically (big if)."
I'm not sure if it does - just wanted to work out a ball park figure.
It's very much a Labour policy and I can see it being popular amongst the converted. Not sure how it will sell in more marginal places, to be bluntly honest.
Mr. Topping/Mr. (Malcolm) G, indeed. It'd thin out the middle. Millionaires would be fine, many people would be unaffected, but those making sacrifices to send their children to public school and can just about afford it would not be able to any longer.
There'd be no more tax money flowing into the system, but demand would rise.
Very class war.
yes, this seems fairly likely. It will change behaviors and raise a lot less money that expected.
I've no idea why you think Germany is the only country with the capacity and capability to make things. Who knows, leaving the EU might prompt us to start making things again.
Either way, ring Mr BMW and ask him if a tariff on his cars will be good for his business.
I'm afraid your stance is so entrenched you've lost all sense of reason and perspective.
You can't run a JIT manufacturing line if your supplier is onthe other side of the World without massive (and expensive) stock piles.
And Mr BMW will be dlighted if tariffs make a fully manufactured BMW cheaper than a Jaguar built with Chinese parts.
Customers will decide how much a car is worth, nobody else.
All these people fretting about tariffs need to relax, the Chinese will make us anything we need. Then watch the German reaction to EU tariffs
That would involve us scrapping intellectual property laws. Watch everyone's reaction to that.
I've no idea why you think Germany is the only country with the capacity and capability to make things. Who knows, leaving the EU might prompt us to start making things again.
Either way, ring Mr BMW and ask him if a tariff on his cars will be good for his business.
I'm afraid your stance is so entrenched you've lost all sense of reason and perspective.
Of course BMW would want to avoid tariffs. But it is not the zero sum game some think it is. Increasing the price of BMW cars may well cause the company some harm, but it has a strong brand and that may well see it through. People want to buy cars with the BMW marque.
If you do not understand that a lot of high-priced premium products that we currently import from EU countries are protected by IP laws and could not be replicated without immediately attracting infringement suits, then I am afraid our conversation is pointless. There is a reason why Chinese-made smartphones are very hard to buy in the US and Europe, for example: patents.
Short term it might be a hiccup. Pfizer made a fortune from Viagra, as soon as the patent ran out cheaper equivalents (doing the same job) flooded the market and the price dropped.
Our conversation is pointless because last week you predicted "a literal apocalypse". Its easy, if the EU imposes a tariff on BMW and the business is hurt they'll find a way around it, industrialists are far smarter than politicians and the market has never, ever, been beaten.
No, I did not predict an apocalypse. I never have and never will.
It is, of course, a whole lot easier and more profitable to produce a generic version of Viagra than it is to invest in creating a factory to build plant and machinery that is necessarily obsolete.
Speaking as a socialist, I don't see that Hamon has objectively much to lose by withdrawing in favour of somebody. If he keeps going he will clearly be fifth, which is just embarrassing for him and his party. If he endorses either Macron or Melanchon, he can claim a share in the good result.
But speaking as a former MP/candidate whoi's talked to other candidates about withdrawing, I know it's remarkably difficult to withdraw. People have been knocking themselves out for you for months, lots of your supporters will dislike whoever you endorse, and the sense of betrayal will be strong. I think he'll stick it out, and then endorse the non-Le Pen finalist.
Le Pen does seem to be weakening slowly if the polls are correct. Her score in the post-debate poll for "most convincing candidate" was only 18%. Fillon's resilience is interesting - he's down a bit but 18% or so of the electorate are still sticking by him despite an avalanche of bad news. Presumably the mainstream conservative vote who find Le Pen too extreme/vulgar and Melanchon too liberal/wet.
Endorsing the non-Le Pen finalist is going to be difficult for Macron if it's a contest between Le Pen and Fillon, which is still a real possibility.
The first fully post debate poll that I saw had Macron 23.5% (-2%) Le Pen 23.5% (-0.5%), Fillon 19% (+1), Melenchon 17% (+2), Hamon 9% (-1). (Changes from the previous polling company's last poll a week ago in brackets). If that is sustained in other polls, it would seem to be in Hamon's gift to put Melenchon into the run off with a withdrawal and an endorsement. Or for that matter to get Macron over the finishing line with an endorsement which for him just means getting into a run off which he would be near certain to win.
The one thing, as someone from the left, that really worries me about Melenchon getting into the 2nd round is that it could easily then be a Melenchon - Le Pen contest, which basically opens up a potential path for Le Pen to win. That ought to weigh on Hamon's mind and might be a further reason why he could choose to soldier on.
Macron's politics are as far from Melenchon's as Fillon's if a fraction closer than he is to Le Pen
Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Agreed. But it's the spending part of that policy that i am sceptical about. It will seem unnecessary to most people and therefore wasteful. If it went on better childcare provision for example, it could resonate more.
Or hiring more teachers or buying more books. That would make more sense to the majority of state school parents I should think.
Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Agreed. But it's the spending part of that policy that i am sceptical about. It will seem unnecessary to most people and therefore wasteful. If it went on better childcare provision for example, it could resonate more.
Yes, or more teachers, although that is difficult to measure. I can see the appeal of "free meals" because the meal is either free or not free whereas there will always be debate about how to count more of or better something.
Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Agreed. But it's the spending part of that policy that i am sceptical about. It will seem unnecessary to most people and therefore wasteful. If it went on better childcare provision for example, it could resonate more.
Or hiring more teachers or buying more books. That would make more sense to the majority of state school parents I should think.
Smaller class sizes rather than subbing school meals for those parents who can already afford to pay is superior.
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
All these people fretting about tariffs need to relax, the Chinese will make us anything we need. Then watch the German reaction to EU tariffs
That would involve us scrapping intellectual property laws. Watch everyone's reaction to that.
I've no idea why you think Germany is the only country with the capacity and capability to make things. Who knows, leaving the EU might prompt us to start making things again.
Either way, ring Mr BMW and ask him if a tariff on his cars will be good for his business.
I'm afraid your stance is so entrenched you've lost all sense of reason and perspective.
Of course BMW would want to avoid tariffs. But it is not the zero sum game some think it is. Increasing the price of BMW cars may well cause the company some harm, but it has a strong brand and that may well see it through. People want to buy cars with the BMW marque.
If you do not understand that a lot of high-priced premium products that we currently import from EU countries are protected by IP laws and could not be replicated without immediately attracting infringement suits, then I am afraid our conversation is pointless. There is a reason why Chinese-made smartphones are very hard to buy in the US and Europe, for example: patents.
Short term it might be a hiccup. Pfizer made a fortune from Viagra, as soon as the patent ran out cheaper equivalents (doing the same job) flooded the market and the price dropped.
Our conversation is pointless because last week you predicted "a literal apocalypse". Its easy, if the EU imposes a tariff on BMW and the business is hurt they'll find a way around it, industrialists are far smarter than politicians and the market has never, ever, been beaten.
No, I did not predict an apocalypse. I never have and never will.
It is, of course, a whole lot easier and more profitable to produce a generic version of Viagra than it is to invest in creating a factory to build plant and machinery that is necessarily obsolete.
Are you suggesting the Chinese aren't capable of recruiting the best engineers to produce anything they wish?
You are so lashed to the EU mast you can't see the wood for the trees, free trade with everybody is good for everybody. If EU imposes tariffs on German manufacturers it will collapse over night
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
Independent schools don't fall far short of that now in terms of bursaries and scholarships.
Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Pointy-elbowed parents send their children to good State schools, not bad ones.
And they turn bad schools into good ones. See London.
Nothing to with London receiving more funding per pupil ... than, for example, Labour-run Wales.
Labour treats its heartlands with contempt.
That is why it is losing them (vide Scotland).
Labour has no say over the funding Wales receives. London is a Labour heartland, of course.
Incorrect, Labour was in power from 1997-2010.
The anomaly of Welsh schools receiving less money per head than London schools didn’t just start in 2010.
And, of course, the one education system that Labour are in charge of -- Wales -- is the worst in the UK, as judged by international tables.
When Labour actually start improving Welsh education, I will start voting for them again.
I will be interested to see if VAT on private school fees even touches the sides of trying to run a free school meals for all programme. Clegg had the idea for infants, but it soon became clear very expensive and lots of schools can't cope without having to do loads of building work to expand kitchen capacity.
I personally don't think in theory feeding all kids at school is a bad thing, but it ain't cheap.
I thought I'd do the numbers on this one.
Taking the current average fees for independent schools in the UK and the number of pupils (and taking into account the different fees for boarding pupils), putting VAT on school fees would raise £2.2 billion. However, that ignores the effect of bursaries and the like which mean that some students pay less than full price. It also assumes that school fees remain the same and that the number of pupils at independent schools remains the same. I think it is reasonable to expect that the number of pupils would fall and that some schools would try to keep numbers up by reducing fees. Overall I would be surprised if VAT on school fees raised more than £2 billion and it could well be significantly less than that.
There are 7.9 million pupils in state funded schools in England of which 1.1 million are already entitled to and receiving free school meals. That gives us 6.8 million additional pupils to receive free school meals. Schools must be open for 190 days per year so that is 1.3 billion meals per year. When free school meals were extended to all infants the cost to the government was £2.30 per meal. If we assume the cost per meal would be the same, the cost of extending free school meals to all pupils would be £3 billion. That figure ignores any rise in the number of state school pupils as parents abandon independent schools due to the increased cost. It also ignores any capital costs for upgrading school facilities to cope with the additional meals as most of those who currently bring packed lunches or go home for lunch opt for free school meals instead.
Note that the last paragraph assumes the government would only provide free school meals in England. If we want to pay for free school meals in Scotland, Wales and Ireland as well (and I assume we would) that gives us an additional 1 million pupils to feed and the annual cost rises to around £3.4 billion.
So, by my calculation, this policy has a black hole of at least £1.4 billion per year plus an unknown capital cost for implementation.
It took me around 30 minutes to find the necessary figures and do the calculations. If Corbyn is putting forward this proposal I can only conclude that he and his team are too lazy to do even the most basic research on the viability of their ideas.
Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Pointy-elbowed parents send their children to good State schools, not bad ones.
And they turn bad schools into good ones. See London.
That is more highly motivated immigrants in inner London academies, middle class white parents send their children to top comprehensive or faith schools in the leafy suburbs or to grammar schools if they do not send them private
Do you not think that immigrants can be pointy-elbowed parents? The high motivation comes from home, doesn't it? The more pointy-elbowed parents there are, the better it is. It would do wonders for coasting state schools in Tory shires, for example.
It is the pointy elbowed parents of immigrants indeed in the inner city academies but most state schools in the shires already do reasonably well anyway, there may be 1 private school in the town or suburb but most middle class parents send their children to the leafy comp, faith school or grammar. The worst state schools at the moment are in deprived seaside towns or declining industrial areas and the 7% going private will do little to change that, it is those areas which were also strongest for Brexit
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
Independent schools don't fall far short of that now in terms of bursaries and scholarships.
All these people fretting about tariffs need to relax, the Chinese will make us anything we need. Then watch the German reaction to EU tariffs
That would involve us scrapping intellectual property laws. Watch everyone's reaction to that.
I've no idea why you think Germany is the only country with the capacity and capability to make things. Who knows, leaving the EU might prompt us to start making things again.
Either way, ring Mr BMW and ask him if a tariff on his cars will be good for his business.
I'm afraid your stance is so entrenched you've lost all sense of reason and perspective.
Of course BMW would want to avoid tariffs. But it is not the zero sum game some think it is. Increasing the price of BMW cars may well cause the company some harm, but it has a strong brand and that may well see it through. People want to buy cars with the BMW marque.
If you do not understand that a lot of high-priced premium products that we currently import from EU countries are protected by IP laws and could not be replicated without immediately attracting infringement suits, then I am afraid our conversation is pointless. There is a reason why Chinese-made smartphones are very hard to buy in the US and Europe, for example: patents.
The problem for the big three premium German brands, BMW, Audi, Merc, is that huge numbers of their sales come through company car buyers. It would't take a huge amount to find themselves dropping of company lists.
I will be interested to see if VAT on private school fees even touches the sides of trying to run a free school meals for all programme. Clegg had the idea for infants, but it soon became clear very expensive and lots of schools can't cope without having to do loads of building work to expand kitchen capacity.
I personally don't think in theory feeding all kids at school is a bad thing, but it ain't cheap.
I thought I'd do the numbers on this one.
Taking the current average fees for independent schools in the UK and the number of pupils (and taking into account the different fees for boarding pupils), putting VAT on school fees would raise £2.2 billion. However, that ignores the effect of bursaries and the like which mean that some students pay less than full price. It also assumes that school fees remain the same and that the number of pupils at independent schools remains the same. I think it is reasonable to expect that the number of pupils would fall and that some schools would try to keep numbers up by reducing fees. Overall I would be surprised if VAT on school fees raised more than £2 billion and it could well be significantly less than that.
There are 7.9 million pupils in state funded schools in England of which 1.1 million are already entitled to and receiving free school meals. That gives us 6.8 million additional pupils to receive free school meals. Schools must be open for 190 days per year so that is 1.3 billion meals per year. When free school meals were extended to all infants the cost to the government was £2.30 per meal. If we assume the cost per meal would be the same, the cost of extending free school meals to all pupils would be £3 billion. That figure ignores any rise in the number of state school pupils as parents abandon independent schools due to the increased cost. It also ignores any capital costs for upgrading school facilities to cope with the additional meals as most of those who currently bring packed lunches or go home for lunch opt for free school meals instead.
Note that the last paragraph assumes the government would only provide free school meals in England. If we want to pay for free school meals in Scotland, Wales and Ireland as well (and I assume we would) that gives us an additional 1 million pupils to feed and the annual cost rises to around £3.4 billion.
So, by my calculation, this policy has a black hole of at least £1.4 billion per year plus an unknown capital cost for implementation.
It took me around 30 minutes to find the necessary figures and do the calculations. If Corbyn is putting forward this proposal I can only conclude that he and his team are too lazy to do even the most basic research on the viability of their ideas.
It looks ridiculously untargetted on the 'spend' side to me, and a net cost to the treasury as you point out.
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
Independent schools don't fall far short of that now in terms of bursaries and scholarships.
Evidence, please?
Not got time to dig it all out now but for example
I will be interested to see if VAT on private school fees even touches the sides of trying to run a free school meals for all programme. Clegg had the idea for infants, but it soon became clear very expensive and lots of schools can't cope without having to do loads of building work to expand kitchen capacity.
I personally don't think in theory feeding all kids at school is a bad thing, but it ain't cheap.
I thought I'd do the numbers on this one.
Taking the current average fees for independent schools in the UK and the number of pupils (and taking into account the different fees for boarding pupils), putting VAT on school fees would raise £2.2 billion. However, that ignores the effect of bursaries and the like which mean that some students pay less than full price. It also assumes that school fees remain the same and that the number of pupils at independent schools remains the same. I think it is reasonable to expect that the number of pupils would fall and that some schools would try to keep numbers up by reducing fees. Overall I would be surprised if VAT on school fees raised more than £2 billion and it could well be significantly less than that.
There are 7.9 million pupils in state funded schools in England of which 1.1 million are already entitled to and receiving free school meals. That gives us 6.8 million additional pupils to receive free school meals. Schools must be open for 190 days per year so that is 1.3 billion meals per year. When free school meals were extended to all infants the cost to the government was £2.30 per meal. If we assume the cost per meal would be the same, the cost of extending free school meals to all pupils would be £3 billion. That figure ignores any rise in the number of state school pupils as parents abandon independent schools due to the increased cost. It also ignores any capital costs for upgrading school facilities to cope with the additional meals as most of those who currently bring packed lunches or go home for lunch opt for free school meals instead.
Note that the last paragraph assumes the government would only provide free school meals in England. If we want to pay for free school meals in Scotland, Wales and Ireland as well (and I assume we would) that gives us an additional 1 million pupils to feed and the annual cost rises to around £3.4 billion.
So, by my calculation, this policy has a black hole of at least £1.4 billion per year plus an unknown capital cost for implementation.
It took me around 30 minutes to find the necessary figures and do the calculations. If Corbyn is putting forward this proposal I can only conclude that he and his team are too lazy to do even the most basic research on the viability of their ideas.
Thumbs up to this - I just did it back of the cigarette package. Thanks.
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
Independent schools don't fall far short of that now in terms of bursaries and scholarships.
Evidence, please?
Not got time to dig it all out now but for example
This VAT exemption feels like an expensive luxury we can no longer afford.
Good point.........
But the money needs to be targeted at social care for the elderly and the homeless...not feeding middle class kids. LaLa Land...a great description for Corbyn's Labour Party.
Will be interesting to see the overlap between those who regularly decry the "elites" but are ready to fight to the death for that mainstay of the establishment: the independent school route for thicker posh kids to get into top universities regardless.
Having said that... removing the zero rating (or outside scope) VAT treatment of education will have lots of side effects: would it still apply to pre-school provision for starters, even if it's a nursery that's part of an Independent School. And summer schools?
Certainly, boarding fees should be VATable if they are not already.
A little OT (and apologies if this has been posted already), but the Remainer holy text, the FT, has an interesting take on the opposition to Mrs May's apparent softening around transition terms:
"Many Eurosceptic Tory MPs are sovereigntists who want to take back parliamentary control. Relatively few are driven by a desire to cut immigration drastically."
Suggests the PM might have an easier time keeping her party inside than has been supposed; and also that the FT are looking for a way to back down and come to an accommodation with the new order...
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
Independent schools don't fall far short of that now in terms of bursaries and scholarships.
The daughter of a friend of ours got a scholarship at an ancient and prestigious private primary school. She loved it but was sacked after six months for being too enthusiastic and taking up too much teacher time. She was eight or nine years old.
I suspect she would have been treated differently if her mother had been paying the £10 000 a year, or whatever it is.
Your case is that Chinese buyers buy Chinese goods, not that European buyers prefer Chinese goods over European manufatured ones.
Fair enough.
Nope, my case is that everything has a ceiling in terms of price, the market ie customers, decide that price. Try selling a BMW 3 series on ebay for £100k.
Govt needs to stay out on the way and let people trade freely
Mr. 43, that sounds utterly stupid, and a great shame for a bright young girl.
Mind you, a friend of mine (probably 12-13 at the time) was criticised by a teacher at parents' evening for asking too many questions. His mother went ballistic, something along the lines of "He's at school, he's meant to ask ****ing questions!"
We have c. 500, 000 students at private schools in the UK. Fees can range from the thousands to the tens of thousands.
How much would free school meals for all primary children all year cost? It's c. 5 million (banding on uk stats is 3.5 million between 5-9 and 3.6 in 10-14). School dinners are charged at around £3 a day, so £15 a week for 5 million children for 39 weeks a year means gives £2.9 billion needed.
You're looking at getting a VAT bill on the fees each of those students of, on average, nearly £6000 a year. Guess that assumes that the fees being paid are c. £30k a year.
Thoughts?
The are weaknesses in the the state education sector. Food is not one of them. I think the VAT/school meals policy fails to cost the impact of moving X0,000 pupils from private to state sectors if the price of private education is raised.
It is your usual ill thought out ideological Labour policy , bad for everybody helps no-one and will cost more money.
Nope, my case is that everything has a ceiling in terms of price, the market ie customers, decide that price.
We have already been round that loop.
European customers have decided they will pay more for cars manufatured in Germany than China, and BMW selling Chinese cars to Chinese customers doesn't alter that fact.
This is a tax on success on hard working parents and children.
It must be opposed.
The optics of this are horrible for Labour. Even their own supporters will have to acknowledge that it stinks to introduce a policy after [insert lengthy list here] Labour politicians have got their own kids privately schooled before introducing it....
A little OT (and apologies if this has been posted already), but the Remainer holy text, the FT, has an interesting take on the opposition to Mrs May's apparent softening around transition terms:
"Many Eurosceptic Tory MPs are sovereigntists who want to take back parliamentary control. Relatively few are driven by a desire to cut immigration drastically."
Suggests the PM might have an easier time keeping her party inside than has been supposed; and also that the FT are looking for a way to back down and come to an accommodation with the new order...
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
Independent schools don't fall far short of that now in terms of bursaries and scholarships.
The daughter of a friend of ours got a scholarship at an ancient and prestigious private primary school. She loved it but was sacked after six months for being too enthusiastic and taking up too much teacher time. She was eight or nine years old.
I suspect she would have been treated differently if her mother had been paying the £10 000 a year, or whatever it is.
Strongly suggest this is hogwash. "Too enthusiastic" sounds like a euphemism.
From personal experience (I went through the private system on a series of scholarships & bursaries - and no, I was no angel at school), once you're in, the schools are blind to whether you're full fee-paying or on some kind of assisted place.
Team Jezzas have got a new tax hike proposal tomorrow....VAT on private school fees to pay for free school meals for ALL.
So 1% increase in NI for middle class self employed bad, 20% on school fees for middle class good...
As Corbyn policies go, that's not a bad one. It's difficult to mount a substantive objection other than it'll trigger a rash of glum looking, crossed armed middle class arsehole photos in the Daily Mail.
In principle, yes. But it feels like "let's think of a policy that suits our agenda" than one that really connects with the public. At the end of the day most parents will feed their children without that job being taken on by the State
As ever it's the unintended consequences. Yes it might force some pointy-elbowed parents to send their children to the local comp with all the undoubted benefit that would bring, but it would also entrench the "elite" and perhaps exacerbate what divide there is between factions within society.
That said, it is difficult to argue in principle that this is something the Labour Party should not be doing.
Agreed. But it's the spending part of that policy that i am sceptical about. It will seem unnecessary to most people and therefore wasteful. If it went on better childcare provision for example, it could resonate more.
Yes ruin some childrens chances and make poor people end up paying for middle class childrens school meals when the sums don't add up and it is found that they need budget increases for extra pupils and free middle class meals.
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
Independent schools don't fall far short of that now in terms of bursaries and scholarships.
The daughter of a friend of ours got a scholarship at an ancient and prestigious private primary school. She loved it but was sacked after six months for being too enthusiastic and taking up too much teacher time. She was eight or nine years old.
I suspect she would have been treated differently if her mother had been paying the £10 000 a year, or whatever it is.
I would image that the wealthiest independent schools could (if they wished) have a needs-blind admissions policy, like the Ivy League Universities in the US.
That is, they admit only by examination/assessment.
The fees are determined afterwards on the basis of parental income, and are completely waived if parent earn less than 25k.
That would give the independent schools a real reason for receiving their tax exemptions.
Nope, my case is that everything has a ceiling in terms of price, the market ie customers, decide that price.
We have already been round that loop.
European customers have decided they will pay more for cars manufatured in Germany than China, and BMW selling Chinese cars to Chinese customers doesn't alter that fact.
People in UK won't give a toss where a BMW is made, they're paying for the brand not ensuring that Fritz polished the handbrake. And if its cheaper for BMW to make cars in China they will do.
Its a shame you don't understand market forces because nothing, ever, has beaten them.
We have c. 500, 000 students at private schools in the UK. Fees can range from the thousands to the tens of thousands.
How much would free school meals for all primary children all year cost? It's c. 5 million (banding on uk stats is 3.5 million between 5-9 and 3.6 in 10-14). School dinners are charged at around £3 a day, so £15 a week for 5 million children for 39 weeks a year means gives £2.9 billion needed.
You're looking at getting a VAT bill on the fees each of those students of, on average, nearly £6000 a year. Guess that assumes that the fees being paid are c. £30k a year.
Thoughts?
The are weaknesses in the the state education sector. Food is not one of them. I think the VAT/school meals policy fails to cost the impact of moving X0,000 pupils from private to state sectors if the price of private education is raised.
It is your usual ill thought out ideological Labour policy , bad for everybody helps no-one and will cost more money.
Yup - that's why they're riding high in the polls. WTF are Labour for? Who are they for?
I think I would simple require all independent schools to offer say 25 per cent of all their places on means-tested scholarships.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
Independent schools don't fall far short of that now in terms of bursaries and scholarships.
The daughter of a friend of ours got a scholarship at an ancient and prestigious private primary school. She loved it but was sacked after six months for being too enthusiastic and taking up too much teacher time. She was eight or nine years old.
I suspect she would have been treated differently if her mother had been paying the £10 000 a year, or whatever it is.
Strongly suggest this is hogwash. "Too enthusiastic" sounds like a euphemism.
From personal experience (I went through the private system on a series of scholarships & bursaries - and no, I was no angel at school), once you're in, the schools are blind to whether you're full fee-paying or on some kind of assisted place.
Could be, but I don't think so. Schools like this one are measured by results, and justify their fees by them. If our friend's daughter asks too many questions that slows the progress of the whole class. Also I know my friend's daughter. She wouldn't deliberately cause trouble. She is genuinely a very enthusiastic person.
FWIW I also know someone who was a supply teacher at the same school. They don't treat their staff very honorably either.
Calling Carlotta, re your crusade on wasteful public spending. I see your pals snouts are deep in the trough, imagine what the public think of the squandering of all this public money on their jamborees. Theresa May flies around Middle East in chartered jet after Prince Charles borrows her official aircraft heresa May is having to use a chartered jet to carry out Government business in the Middle East after the Prince of Wales borrowed her official aircraft for his tour of Europe.
Clarence House booked the Prime Minister’s RAF Voyager jet when it organised the Prince’s nine-day tour, and it has been flying, half empty, between European cities.
Meanwhile Mrs May has been using a Boeing 757 operated by the charter firm Air Partner for her three-day trip to Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Britain's Prince Charles and his wife Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall pose at Pitti Palace in downtown Florence
When the Voyager was refitted at a cost of £10 million last year the Government announced that it would be available for the use of the Prime Minister, other senior ministers and members of the Royal family.
It has now emerged that the aircraft is operated on a first come, first served basis.
Mrs May has held talks on trade and security with King Abdullah of Jordan and King Salman of Saudi Arabia, trying to negotiate billions of pounds worth of new trade deals, as well as discussing the growing terrorist threat in the region and the civil war in Syria. Prime Minister's RAF Voyager
The Prince and the Duchess of Cornwall have been conducting soft diplomacy on behalf of the Foreign Office to promote Britain in Italy, Austria and Romania in the run-up to Brexit. It is part of a long-term strategy to use the Royal family to win hearts and minds in the EU.
They are accompanied by an entourage of around 24 people, together with up to a dozen members of the media.
Care to comment on this squandering of public money Carlotta since you are so worrried about Nicola spending a couple of thousand, how does it compare please enlighten at your leisure.
This is a tax on success on hard working parents and children.
It must be opposed.
The optics of this are horrible for Labour. Even their own supporters will have to acknowledge that it stinks to introduce a policy after [insert lengthy list here] Labour politicians have got their own kids privately schooled before introducing it....
Isn't it a Michael Gove idea that Labour has nicked?
Talking of private schools (sort of) - I believe there is a well documented phenomenon whereby as countries / societies / families get wealthier they also become more physically attractive. I have no idea why. Healthier? Last night I went late to my daughter's school to pick her up from a returning school history class trip to Berlin. 20+ 16 year-old girls getting off the bus together. I'd say 15 or more were really very physically attractive. Are all young people better looking these days? I feel a much higher % of faces on the train are good looking than I remember earlier in my life. Or is it just me getting older and thereby affecting my own view?
Recipients of fee school meals are often targeted and bullied at school, to the extent that they avoid having lunch altogether to avoid the mockery and exclusions. Which means they are underfed and under perform academically.
The point of universal free school meals is to remove the stigma and improve the scholastic performance of children from the poorest families.
I will be interested to see if VAT on private school fees even touches the sides of trying to run a free school meals for all programme. Clegg had the idea for infants, but it soon became clear very expensive and lots of schools can't cope without having to do loads of building work to expand kitchen capacity.
I personally don't think in theory feeding all kids at school is a bad thing, but it ain't cheap.
I thought I'd do the numbers on this one.
Taking the current average fees for independent schools in the UK and the number of pupils (and taking into account the different fees for boarding pupils), putting VAT on school fees would raise £2.2 billion. However, that ignores the effect of bursaries and the like which mean that some students pay less than full price. It also assumes that school fees remain the same and that the number of pupils at independent schools remains the same. I think it is reasonable to expect that the number of pupils would fall and that some schools would try to keep numbers up by reducing fees. Overall I would be surprised if VAT on school fees raised more than £2 billion and it could well be significantly less than that.
There are 7.9 million pupils in state funded schools in England of which 1.1 million are already entitled to and receiving free school meals. That gives us 6.8 million additional pupils to receive free school meals. Schools must be open for 190 days per year so that is 1.3 billion meals per year. When free school meals were extended to all infants the cost to the government was £2.30 per meal. If we assume the cost per meal would be the same, the cost of extending free school meals to all pupils would be £3 billion. That figure ignores any rise in the number of state school pupils as parents abandon independent schools due to the increased cost. It also ignores any capital costs for upgrading school facilities to cope with the additional meals as most of those who currently bring packed lunches or go home for lunch opt for free school meals instead.
Note that the last paragraph assumes the government would only provide free school meals in England. If we want to pay for free school meals in Scotland, Wales and Ireland as well (and I assume we would) that gives us an additional 1 million pupils to feed and the annual cost rises to around £3.4 billion.
So, by my calculation, this policy has a black hole of at least £1.4 billion per year plus an unknown capital cost for implementation.
It took me around 30 minutes to find the necessary figures and do the calculations. If Corbyn is putting forward this proposal I can only conclude that he and his team are too lazy to do even the most basic research on the viability of their ideas.
Have you looked at all pupils rather than only those at primary school?
@malcolmg - if that is a squandering of public money, what is Sturgeon's trip to the US?
Perhaps if you read it Rob you would do a comparison , £10M vanity upgrade of their private jet , then they just hire private ones as well to fly nearly empty around the world, versus Sturgeons's handful of standard flight tickets to the US. Get a grip, at least if you are going to be a sleazy Tory pick a topic a blind man may be able to support. These people are beyond redemption and breed teh Labour idiots with their plundering of teh public purse to make themselves feel important.
Recipients of fee school meals are often targeted and bullied at school, to the extent that they avoid having lunch altogether to avoid the mockery and exclusions. Which means they are underfed and under perform academically.
The point of universal free school meals is to remove the stigma and improve the scholastic performance of children from the poorest families.
True but if they made them payable online or by direct debit etc then there would be no need for anyone to know as no cash would ever change hands for the meals. Easy solution and means it is cost effective. Should be no requirement for cash, otherwise they could issue cards which ar etopped up by same method and again no need to know who is paying.
@malcolmg - if that is a squandering of public money, what is Sturgeon's trip to the US?
Perhaps if you read it Rob you would do a comparison , £10M vanity upgrade of their private jet , then they just hire private ones as well to fly nearly empty around the world, versus Sturgeons's handful of standard flight tickets to the US. Get a grip, at least if you are going to be a sleazy Tory pick a topic a blind man may be able to support. These people are beyond redemption and breed teh Labour idiots with their plundering of teh public purse to make themselves feel important.
I believe the RAF Voyager they converted represents a cost saving over the previous arrangement.
Recipients of fee school meals are often targeted and bullied at school, to the extent that they avoid having lunch altogether to avoid the mockery and exclusions. Which means they are underfed and under perform academically.
The point of universal free school meals is to remove the stigma and improve the scholastic performance of children from the poorest families.
I can't speak for all schools, but we use an electronic payment system for meals which makes it very difficult if not impossible to work out who gets free school meals. A couple of other points about this idea:
Eligibility for Free School Meals is currently used as a beanch mark for a number of things in education. Making eveyone eligible would mean a new measure would be needed which would not be easy (largly due to the fact that parents have to apply for FSM and would have no incentive to give out their finacial details without a reward at the end);
Why not give the money to the schools and let them decide the best way to use it?
Would it apply to fees charged by state boarding schools?
It is also interesting to see some who are opposed to the existance of grammar schools supporting the independent sector. Obviously selection by ability to pay is more important than selection by ability.
Comments
Our conversation is pointless because last week you predicted "a literal apocalypse". Its easy, if the EU imposes a tariff on BMW and the business is hurt they'll find a way around it, industrialists are far smarter than politicians and the market has never, ever, been beaten.
It's very much a Labour policy and I can see it being popular amongst the converted. Not sure how it will sell in more marginal places, to be bluntly honest.
yes, this seems fairly likely. It will change behaviors and raise a lot less money that expected.
It is, of course, a whole lot easier and more profitable to produce a generic version of Viagra than it is to invest in creating a factory to build plant and machinery that is necessarily obsolete.
This is a tax on success on hard working parents and children.
It must be opposed.
The scholarships have to be means-tested -- the problem with the old direct grant system was that it largely educated for free the intelligent children of parents who could afford the fees.
Presumably this is what motivated Gove’s original thinking ... as he was a poor kid who got a scholarship to an independent school.
And right now customers decide that a BMW is worth more than any car made in China
You are so lashed to the EU mast you can't see the wood for the trees, free trade with everybody is good for everybody. If EU imposes tariffs on German manufacturers it will collapse over night
The anomaly of Welsh schools receiving less money per head than London schools didn’t just start in 2010.
And, of course, the one education system that Labour are in charge of -- Wales -- is the worst in the UK, as judged by international tables.
When Labour actually start improving Welsh education, I will start voting for them again.
Taking the current average fees for independent schools in the UK and the number of pupils (and taking into account the different fees for boarding pupils), putting VAT on school fees would raise £2.2 billion. However, that ignores the effect of bursaries and the like which mean that some students pay less than full price. It also assumes that school fees remain the same and that the number of pupils at independent schools remains the same. I think it is reasonable to expect that the number of pupils would fall and that some schools would try to keep numbers up by reducing fees. Overall I would be surprised if VAT on school fees raised more than £2 billion and it could well be significantly less than that.
There are 7.9 million pupils in state funded schools in England of which 1.1 million are already entitled to and receiving free school meals. That gives us 6.8 million additional pupils to receive free school meals. Schools must be open for 190 days per year so that is 1.3 billion meals per year. When free school meals were extended to all infants the cost to the government was £2.30 per meal. If we assume the cost per meal would be the same, the cost of extending free school meals to all pupils would be £3 billion. That figure ignores any rise in the number of state school pupils as parents abandon independent schools due to the increased cost. It also ignores any capital costs for upgrading school facilities to cope with the additional meals as most of those who currently bring packed lunches or go home for lunch opt for free school meals instead.
Note that the last paragraph assumes the government would only provide free school meals in England. If we want to pay for free school meals in Scotland, Wales and Ireland as well (and I assume we would) that gives us an additional 1 million pupils to feed and the annual cost rises to around £3.4 billion.
So, by my calculation, this policy has a black hole of at least £1.4 billion per year plus an unknown capital cost for implementation.
It took me around 30 minutes to find the necessary figures and do the calculations. If Corbyn is putting forward this proposal I can only conclude that he and his team are too lazy to do even the most basic research on the viability of their ideas.
I once saw an advertising billboard which read something like "Pay monthly for the gym? Never Go? We're cheaper"
https://www.ft.com/content/aceb3e46-0d48-11e6-b41f-0beb7e589515
Fair enough.
Its a yes/no question
No
It is not unreasonable for some proper statistics on this from ISC if they wish the VAT exemption to continue.
Good point.........
But the money needs to be targeted at social care for the elderly and the homeless...not feeding middle class kids. LaLa Land...a great description for Corbyn's Labour Party.
Having said that... removing the zero rating (or outside scope) VAT treatment of education will have lots of side effects: would it still apply to pre-school provision for starters, even if it's a nursery that's part of an Independent School. And summer schools?
Certainly, boarding fees should be VATable if they are not already.
https://www.ft.com/content/050bb30c-1a0a-11e7-bcac-6d03d067f81f
Key quote:
"Many Eurosceptic Tory MPs are sovereigntists who want to take back parliamentary control. Relatively few are driven by a desire to cut immigration drastically."
Suggests the PM might have an easier time keeping her party inside than has been supposed; and also that the FT are looking for a way to back down and come to an accommodation with the new order...
I suspect she would have been treated differently if her mother had been paying the £10 000 a year, or whatever it is.
Govt needs to stay out on the way and let people trade freely
Mind you, a friend of mine (probably 12-13 at the time) was criticised by a teacher at parents' evening for asking too many questions. His mother went ballistic, something along the lines of "He's at school, he's meant to ask ****ing questions!"
European customers have decided they will pay more for cars manufatured in Germany than China, and BMW selling Chinese cars to Chinese customers doesn't alter that fact.
From personal experience (I went through the private system on a series of scholarships & bursaries - and no, I was no angel at school), once you're in, the schools are blind to whether you're full fee-paying or on some kind of assisted place.
That is, they admit only by examination/assessment.
The fees are determined afterwards on the basis of parental income, and are completely waived if parent earn less than 25k.
That would give the independent schools a real reason for receiving their tax exemptions.
What happens to scholarships though - do they cost 20% more ?
Spending it on free school meals is daft though - better off spending on better teachers and IT equipment.
Its a shame you don't understand market forces because nothing, ever, has beaten them.
FWIW I also know someone who was a supply teacher at the same school. They don't treat their staff very honorably either.
Theresa May flies around Middle East in chartered jet after Prince Charles borrows her official aircraft
heresa May is having to use a chartered jet to carry out Government business in the Middle East after the Prince of Wales borrowed her official aircraft for his tour of Europe.
Clarence House booked the Prime Minister’s RAF Voyager jet when it organised the Prince’s nine-day tour, and it has been flying, half empty, between European cities.
Meanwhile Mrs May has been using a Boeing 757 operated by the charter firm Air Partner for her three-day trip to Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
Britain's Prince Charles and his wife Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall pose at Pitti Palace in downtown Florence
When the Voyager was refitted at a cost of £10 million last year the Government announced that it would be available for the use of the Prime Minister, other senior ministers and members of the Royal family.
It has now emerged that the aircraft is operated on a first come, first served basis.
Mrs May has held talks on trade and security with King Abdullah of Jordan and King Salman of Saudi Arabia, trying to negotiate billions of pounds worth of new trade deals, as well as discussing the growing terrorist threat in the region and the civil war in Syria.
Prime Minister's RAF Voyager
The Prince and the Duchess of Cornwall have been conducting soft diplomacy on behalf of the Foreign Office to promote Britain in Italy, Austria and Romania in the run-up to Brexit. It is part of a long-term strategy to use the Royal family to win hearts and minds in the EU.
They are accompanied by an entourage of around 24 people, together with up to a dozen members of the media.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/05/theresa-may-flies-around-middle-east-chartered-jet-prince-charles/
Care to comment on this squandering of public money Carlotta since you are so worrried about Nicola spending a couple of thousand, how does it compare please enlighten at your leisure.
Guido FawkesVerified account @GuidoFawkes 35s35 seconds ago
More
EXCLUSIVE: Labour Gorton Candidate Accuses Israel of "Genocide" in Secret Recording [AUDIO] https://order-order.com/2017/04/06/labour-gorton-candidate-accused-israel-of-genocide/ …
Last night I went late to my daughter's school to pick her up from a returning school history class trip to Berlin. 20+ 16 year-old girls getting off the bus together. I'd say 15 or more were really very physically attractive. Are all young people better looking these days? I feel a much higher % of faces on the train are good looking than I remember earlier in my life. Or is it just me getting older and thereby affecting my own view?
The point of universal free school meals is to remove the stigma and improve the scholastic performance of children from the poorest families.
Get a grip, at least if you are going to be a sleazy Tory pick a topic a blind man may be able to support. These people are beyond redemption and breed teh Labour idiots with their plundering of teh public purse to make themselves feel important.
NEW THREAD
Eligibility for Free School Meals is currently used as a beanch mark for a number of things in education. Making eveyone eligible would mean a new measure would be needed which would not be easy (largly due to the fact that parents have to apply for FSM and would have no incentive to give out their finacial details without a reward at the end);
Why not give the money to the schools and let them decide the best way to use it?
Would it apply to fees charged by state boarding schools?
It is also interesting to see some who are opposed to the existance of grammar schools supporting the independent sector. Obviously selection by ability to pay is more important than selection by ability.