The Today programme carried a sober segment on the UAP whistleblower this morning. Most read story in the Guardian. As much as many of you don’t want it to be, this slowly but surely is turning one of the most notable political events of our lifetime.
Sworn testimony by the guy who used to hand-deliver intelligence to the West Wing for the Daily Briefing. He held higher security clearance then AARO, the body setup last year to explore anomalous objects in controlled military airspace. And so is seriously reported by serious journalists, testimony has also been made by people he named to congress as having first hand knowledge / experience of these programmes. Insinuations from him that murders have been committed to keep the secret out of proper democratic scrutiny. Congressional oversight committee members now demanding answers.
Maybe it’s all one big setup for reasons that are hard to fathom. Maybe they’ve all been duped by the deep state, again for reasons it’s hard to fathom. Or maybe what they say is true. Whichever, that anyone on a supposedly serious political news blog is talking about anything else defies belief.
Maybe because these far-fetched claims have been made for decades, so not exactly news?
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
None of those kids will go to other private schools? None of the teachers will find jobs in the state or independent sector? Seems unlikely. If a business is only viable when it doesn't have to pay taxes that other businesses pay (and those taxes are required to fund the infrastructure and services that all the businesses rely upon) then why should it stay in business?
Charities are businesses. Should they be made to pay the taxes that other businesses pay?
Charities pay vat. This rule is about educational institutions not charities.
While having no skin in the game as I don't own any vehicle besides one of those electric scooters.
Much is said of it depends if you have a driveway. Never seen it pointed out as yet that actually doesn't tell the whole story. Many families , moreso now that children aren't flying the nest so young, will be of necessity multi car households. Being able to charge overnight on the driveway is one thing....being able to charge all cars overnight quite another.
I charge my Rivian once a week, when the range dips below about 180 miles. I wouldn't worry about adding a second EV, unless I expected to be doing 20,000 miles/year (at least) on my vehicles.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
None of those kids will go to other private schools? None of the teachers will find jobs in the state or independent sector? Seems unlikely. If a business is only viable when it doesn't have to pay taxes that other businesses pay (and those taxes are required to fund the infrastructure and services that all the businesses rely upon) then why should it stay in business?
Two other private schools who are relatively nearby were open this last weekend to interview parents who might want to come there. Some will undoubtedly go to these schools or others. The school had a significant boarder element too. I think quite a number of the parents would have been focused on their little darlings being educated without those disruptive and noisy boy things getting in the way. My guess is that quite a proportion of them might come from the Middle East so we have lost an export opportunity. Some of these will have to go much further afield to find an all girls school.
But there are still a significant chunk of fairly local kids from Perth and its environs who will not want the commute to Dundee or Strathallan and end up at local schools which may struggle to cope. Also, whilst most of the teachers will be fine, many of the support staff might struggle to find equivalent local work.
As to why it should stay in business: that really comes back to its charitable status. No one was drawing dividends or profits from the school. All monies were ploughed back in again. It was providing a useful service and saving the taxpayer some money as well as providing employment.
Don’t really understand why he half hour wait is such a big deal. Most people would take a break of that order anyway on a long drive. And it’s not as if looking for a petrol station, waiting for a pump and filling up is instant.
Good morning
Taking a break on a long journey is one thing, but queuing and waiting half and hour or more on more than one occasion is not attractive
I drive the 450 miles to my family in Lossiemouth without filling up, and on that journey have maybe three or four stops.
Additionally I can drive a further 150 miles without replenishing the tank and get over 55 mpg
My BMW 520D is in a class of its own on such a long journey and indeed complies with ULEZ and at a £30 annual road tax
Why on earth would I consider a ev, and that is without considering paying up to £30,000 more to change
I will continue to look 'all smug' as I have no intention of buying a ev
EVs don't work for everyone. But on your trips to Lossie where you make 3 or 4 stops? An EV would charge whilst you did so. Depends on which generation of 5-series you have, but its hardly in a class of its own - Audi and Mercedes as starters for 10 offer similar vehicles with similar interiors.
Then we have the drivetrain point. Your car either has a manual box or a ZF 8-speed auto. Manual boxes are something out of the ark (though I know they can be pleasing to play with), the ZF box is pretty much industry leading. But neither are anything compared to electric transmission. Once you've had an electric motor instead of a gearbox, any cog shifting feels as backwards as it is.
So lets take a real world example - traffic. I have two recent example on my trip through England last week. Stuck in a big queue on the edge of cities. In a manual I would be endlessly having to blend out the clutch. In an automatic there is less work, but with either on your 4 pot diesel you're belching filth into the environment where people live and work.
Whereas I sat there. Literally. The car driving itself. Steering, acceleration, braking. No input from me. Whilst not spewing filth out into people's lungs. Its *easier* to drive an EV.
Of course from 2030 sale of petrol and diesel cars will be banned in the UK and by 2035 sale of hybrid cars, so we won't have much choice but to go electric then
The issue will become more and more irrelevant as the move will be away from the car anyway and more onto "Active Travel". That is the trajectory and it is only going to gather pace.
The conspiracy theories on 15 minute cities are nonsense but there is a move away from cars and car ownership. A Green councillor made the point in an interview on our local politics show in the lakes that electric cars are all well and fine but they still need an infrastructure and this will hurt "the planet" due to the work involved in putting it in and maintaining it.
Fewer and fewer people will own cars.
So we need to look at what future transport is going to be and I suspect it will be electric scooters, electric bikes and the like and the world will become a much bigger place.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
None of those kids will go to other private schools? None of the teachers will find jobs in the state or independent sector? Seems unlikely. If a business is only viable when it doesn't have to pay taxes that other businesses pay (and those taxes are required to fund the infrastructure and services that all the businesses rely upon) then why should it stay in business?
Two other private schools who are relatively nearby were open this last weekend to interview parents who might want to come there. Some will undoubtedly go to these schools or others. The school had a significant boarder element too. I think quite a number of the parents would have been focused on their little darlings being educated without those disruptive and noisy boy things getting in the way. My guess is that quite a proportion of them might come from the Middle East so we have lost an export opportunity. Some of these will have to go much further afield to find an all girls school.
But there are still a significant chunk of fairly local kids from Perth and its environs who will not want the commute to Dundee or Strathallan and end up at local schools which may struggle to cope. Also, whilst most of the teachers will be fine, many of the support staff might struggle to find equivalent local work.
As to why it should stay in business: that really comes back to its charitable status. No one was drawing dividends or profits from the school. All monies were ploughed back in again. It was providing a useful service and saving the taxpayer some money as well as providing employment.
The issue will become more and more irrelevant as the move will be away from the car anyway and more onto "Active Travel". That is the trajectory and it is only going to gather pace.
The conspiracy theories on 15 minute cities are nonsense but there is a move away from cars and car ownership. A Green councillor made the point in an interview on our local politics show in the lakes that electric cars are all well and fine but they still need an infrastructure and this will hurt "the planet" due to the work involved in putting it in and maintaining it.
Fewer and fewer people will own cars.
So we need to look at what future transport is going to be and I suspect it will be electric scooters, electric bikes and the like and the world will become a much bigger place.
It seems to me that the biggest need for cars is ferrying children around.
Don’t really understand why he half hour wait is such a big deal. Most people would take a break of that order anyway on a long drive. And it’s not as if looking for a petrol station, waiting for a pump and filling up is instant.
Good morning
Taking a break on a long journey is one thing, but queuing and waiting half and hour or more on more than one occasion is not attractive
I drive the 450 miles to my family in Lossiemouth without filling up, and on that journey have maybe three or four stops.
Additionally I can drive a further 150 miles without replenishing the tank and get over 55 mpg
My BMW 520D is in a class of its own on such a long journey and indeed complies with ULEZ and at a £30 annual road tax
Why on earth would I consider a ev, and that is without considering paying up to £30,000 more to change
I will continue to look 'all smug' as I have no intention of buying a ev
EVs don't work for everyone. But on your trips to Lossie where you make 3 or 4 stops? An EV would charge whilst you did so. Depends on which generation of 5-series you have, but its hardly in a class of its own - Audi and Mercedes as starters for 10 offer similar vehicles with similar interiors.
Then we have the drivetrain point. Your car either has a manual box or a ZF 8-speed auto. Manual boxes are something out of the ark (though I know they can be pleasing to play with), the ZF box is pretty much industry leading. But neither are anything compared to electric transmission. Once you've had an electric motor instead of a gearbox, any cog shifting feels as backwards as it is.
So lets take a real world example - traffic. I have two recent example on my trip through England last week. Stuck in a big queue on the edge of cities. In a manual I would be endlessly having to blend out the clutch. In an automatic there is less work, but with either on your 4 pot diesel you're belching filth into the environment where people live and work.
Whereas I sat there. Literally. The car driving itself. Steering, acceleration, braking. No input from me. Whilst not spewing filth out into people's lungs. Its *easier* to drive an EV.
Self driving tech on modern EVs is insane. If I'm in traffic, I just engage Driver+ on my Rivian, and I can take my hands off the steering wheel, my feet off the pedals, and it'll do everything for me.
The first Tucker on Twitter video is a study in Russian propaganda & attacks Zelensky for being “rat-like” and a “persecutor of Christians” while singling out (((Bill Kristol))). Subtle stuff! ... https://twitter.com/Timodc/status/1666233392071835650
I look forward to Tucker being sent to The Hague. He can join the rest of the senior media from Moscow, spewing out the same regime lies.
I bought the original Tesla Roadster, and then a Model S.
More recently, I bought a Rivian.
EVs are great if:
(a) you have somewhere to charge it at home (b) you don't regularly do 300+ mile trips
If either of those things are not true, then either a straight ICE or a plug-in hybrid is perfect for you.
There's another requirement: (c) If you can afford one. EVs are still hellishly expensive compared to ICE cars - unless you go for ones with limitations, such as even more reduced range.
The cost differential is closing every day.
The crossover will come by the end of the decade, quite probably.
People will continue to grouse about the charging problem. It will be solved quickly for the wealthy, which might slow the process of solving it for everyone else.
The charging problem is rather a chicken and egg one. It isn't economic to build them until there is a market.
Range anxiety is pretty short lived when owning an EV. How often do you drive more than 250 miles without a half hour break? EV cars are also a pleasure to drive, smooth, powerful and very quick acceleration.
Lots of people do once a year, over Christmas and New Year. Just one three hour wait then (and there were plenty) is enough to spoil your whole year, especially with small children with you. Giles Coren did a piece saying he is retransitioning for this reason.
One three hour wait is enough to ruin your entire year?
I own an electric car (well truck). Over Christmas, the family got into the truck and headed up the mountains to Big Bear. Over the Christmas week, we went round the ski resorts in the area, returning to our AirBnB every night.
Aside from one 20 minute wait for a fast charger, we had no problems whatsoever with a 500 mile round trip.
If you have a driveway, don't regularly travel 300m+ a day, and can afford it, an electric car is best.
Of course, they could all be brainwashed. But the real world evidence is that people who buy Teslas buy Teslas again. And on this very board, everyone who has bought an EV (myself, Foxy, Dura, FrequentLurker) would do so again.
The biggest problem is the variable quality of the charging infrastructure. There is a reason that Ford has broken ranks with the other manufacturers and signed a deal to use the Tesla network.
America has a unique problem with charging systems in that in a VHS vs Betamax battle it has been stuck with Video 2000.
The global standard connector is CCS2 - a 7-pin Type 2 connector (AC), and two pins below (DC) for rapid charging. America managed to get stuck with the older Type 1 AC connector. Which means it has been using CCS1 (older and slower 5-pin Type 1 for AC plus 2 pin Type 2 DC) which gets a lot of complaints.
Tesla in America uses its own version of Type 2, now rebranded as the "NACS" North American Charging Standard. The deal with Ford will see its CCS1 sockets replaced with NACS. Will others follow? Possibly...
There's CCS in the US and there's NACS.
NACS is smaller and more convenient. CCS is (slightly) more prevalent and handles a higher maximum throughput.
In the US, 40% of new EVs are Teslas, which use NACS, but where you can buy an adaptor and then use CCS chargers. 60% use CCS. Now Tesla is opening up their charging, I think a lot of the problems will improve.
There are also some older vehicles which use the old Toyota fast DC charging standard of ChDaMo, but that's on the way out now.
My point is that nether standard is standard. Your CCS is based on Type 1 - which is dead outside of the US and Japan and offers 1/3rd the speed of the Type 2 which is pretty universal in most markets. So your CCS isn't anyone else's CCS, its a frankenstein's monster. "NACS" is a cute rebrand of the old proprietary Tesla charger, and there is yet another proprietary rework of Type 2 in China (though not one that will go elsewhere).
We managed to coalesce petrol pump design around something universal - you can drive a car across the globe and a fuel nossel will fit your tank. That isn't the same with EVs - even Tesla isn't universal. I couldn't order a Rivian or F150 and import it here and have it work on our chargers - would need a Type 1 to Type 2 adaptor, and for AC charging you're stuck down on 3.6kW.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
They aren't being blocked from standing for Parliament - only blocked doing so as Labour candidates. They are perfectly free to scab off and run as TUSC or Socialism Now or Left Unity or NHA or Socialist Labour or whatever, and get that world-transforming 1.3% of the vote.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Q A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
It is mainly ideology and not simply a money raising exercise. On the bigger ideology what's good about middle class parents enthusiastically spending £ridiculous a year to avoid their children going to state schools? It isn't a big ideology in much of the rest of Europe where only religiously committed parents are interested in private schools for their children.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
None of those kids will go to other private schools? None of the teachers will find jobs in the state or independent sector? Seems unlikely. If a business is only viable when it doesn't have to pay taxes that other businesses pay (and those taxes are required to fund the infrastructure and services that all the businesses rely upon) then why should it stay in business?
Charities are businesses. Should they be made to pay the taxes that other businesses pay?
Charities pay vat. This rule is about educational institutions not charities.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
None of those kids will go to other private schools? None of the teachers will find jobs in the state or independent sector? Seems unlikely. If a business is only viable when it doesn't have to pay taxes that other businesses pay (and those taxes are required to fund the infrastructure and services that all the businesses rely upon) then why should it stay in business?
Two other private schools who are relatively nearby were open this last weekend to interview parents who might want to come there. Some will undoubtedly go to these schools or others. The school had a significant boarder element too. I think quite a number of the parents would have been focused on their little darlings being educated without those disruptive and noisy boy things getting in the way. My guess is that quite a proportion of them might come from the Middle East so we have lost an export opportunity. Some of these will have to go much further afield to find an all girls school.
But there are still a significant chunk of fairly local kids from Perth and its environs who will not want the commute to Dundee or Strathallan and end up at local schools which may struggle to cope. Also, whilst most of the teachers will be fine, many of the support staff might struggle to find equivalent local work.
As to why it should stay in business: that really comes back to its charitable status. No one was drawing dividends or profits from the school. All monies were ploughed back in again. It was providing a useful service and saving the taxpayer some money as well as providing employment.
Imagine where we would be as a country if some of the defenders of private schools instead ploughed a fraction of the energy they put into defending the interests of a privileged few into championing the rights of all kids to a high quality well-funded education.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
You get someone to tow you.
It's a pain.
But I'm 48 years old and have never run out of fuel. It's not that common a scenario.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
I bought the original Tesla Roadster, and then a Model S.
More recently, I bought a Rivian.
EVs are great if:
(a) you have somewhere to charge it at home (b) you don't regularly do 300+ mile trips
If either of those things are not true, then either a straight ICE or a plug-in hybrid is perfect for you.
There's another requirement: (c) If you can afford one. EVs are still hellishly expensive compared to ICE cars - unless you go for ones with limitations, such as even more reduced range.
The cost differential is closing every day.
The crossover will come by the end of the decade, quite probably.
People will continue to grouse about the charging problem. It will be solved quickly for the wealthy, which might slow the process of solving it for everyone else.
The charging problem is rather a chicken and egg one. It isn't economic to build them until there is a market.
Range anxiety is pretty short lived when owning an EV. How often do you drive more than 250 miles without a half hour break? EV cars are also a pleasure to drive, smooth, powerful and very quick acceleration.
Lots of people do once a year, over Christmas and New Year. Just one three hour wait then (and there were plenty) is enough to spoil your whole year, especially with small children with you. Giles Coren did a piece saying he is retransitioning for this reason.
One three hour wait is enough to ruin your entire year?
I own an electric car (well truck). Over Christmas, the family got into the truck and headed up the mountains to Big Bear. Over the Christmas week, we went round the ski resorts in the area, returning to our AirBnB every night.
Aside from one 20 minute wait for a fast charger, we had no problems whatsoever with a 500 mile round trip.
If you have a driveway, don't regularly travel 300m+ a day, and can afford it, an electric car is best.
Of course, they could all be brainwashed. But the real world evidence is that people who buy Teslas buy Teslas again. And on this very board, everyone who has bought an EV (myself, Foxy, Dura, FrequentLurker) would do so again.
The biggest problem is the variable quality of the charging infrastructure. There is a reason that Ford has broken ranks with the other manufacturers and signed a deal to use the Tesla network.
America has a unique problem with charging systems in that in a VHS vs Betamax battle it has been stuck with Video 2000.
The global standard connector is CCS2 - a 7-pin Type 2 connector (AC), and two pins below (DC) for rapid charging. America managed to get stuck with the older Type 1 AC connector. Which means it has been using CCS1 (older and slower 5-pin Type 1 for AC plus 2 pin Type 2 DC) which gets a lot of complaints.
Tesla in America uses its own version of Type 2, now rebranded as the "NACS" North American Charging Standard. The deal with Ford will see its CCS1 sockets replaced with NACS. Will others follow? Possibly...
There's CCS in the US and there's NACS.
NACS is smaller and more convenient. CCS is (slightly) more prevalent and handles a higher maximum throughput.
In the US, 40% of new EVs are Teslas, which use NACS, but where you can buy an adaptor and then use CCS chargers. 60% use CCS. Now Tesla is opening up their charging, I think a lot of the problems will improve.
There are also some older vehicles which use the old Toyota fast DC charging standard of ChDaMo, but that's on the way out now.
My point is that nether standard is standard. Your CCS is based on Type 1 - which is dead outside of the US and Japan and offers 1/3rd the speed of the Type 2 which is pretty universal in most markets. So your CCS isn't anyone else's CCS, its a frankenstein's monster. "NACS" is a cute rebrand of the old proprietary Tesla charger, and there is yet another proprietary rework of Type 2 in China (though not one that will go elsewhere).
We managed to coalesce petrol pump design around something universal - you can drive a car across the globe and a fuel nossel will fit your tank. That isn't the same with EVs - even Tesla isn't universal. I couldn't order a Rivian or F150 and import it here and have it work on our chargers - would need a Type 1 to Type 2 adaptor, and for AC charging you're stuck down on 3.6kW.
There are CCS chargers in the US which offer 350KW (and I've charged my late lamented Taycan at that rate).
Of course from 2030 sale of petrol and diesel cars will be banned in the UK and by 2035 sale of hybrid cars, so we won't have much choice but to go electric then
Sale of petrol and diesel and hybrid sales will not be banned, that is totally misleading. Only sales of new ones. I don't know the figures but it would surprise me if at least 70% of cars sold were not second hand.
Interestingly a knockon effect might be ice and diesel cars are kept on the road longer than currently and their resale value rises
They aren't being blocked from standing for Parliament - only blocked doing so as Labour candidates. They are perfectly free to scab off and run as TUSC or Socialism Now or Left Unity or NHA or Socialist Labour or whatever, and get that world-transforming 1.3% of the vote.
They aren't being blocked from standing for Parliament - only blocked doing so as Labour candidates. They are perfectly free to scab off and run as TUSC or Socialism Now or Left Unity or NHA or Socialist Labour or whatever, and get that world-transforming 1.3% of the vote.
Carping from the sidelines in perpetuity but retaining one's purity is the best way to fight Tories and Pink Tories, no?
Do we have sufficient generation capacity to charge 3 million electric car batteries on a night when the wind isn't blowing?
Yes, or we can do. The more interesting question is about transmission. Fossil fuel, whether oil or gas, is cheap to move in bulk across the world by pipeline or tanker. Electricity has to go down copper wires, which have relatively lower capacity and the material to make them is expensive and in limited supply. As we become more electrified our energy sources must be more local to avoid unaffordable transmission costs. Lots of wind, because that's what the UK has. It has implications for geo politics and energy security.
The whole electricity network will need to be upgraded if EVs are going to be become the norm. There is absolutely no sign of that happening.
My boss got himself a top of range electric mercedes eqv a year ago. It was very nice, fast and comfortable. He has already given it up as it was impractical and hideously expensive to charge. He had to abandon the vehicle 3 times as it had run out of charge and there was nowhere to charge it.
I don't think that's necessarily true.
Let's imagine that there are 20 million EVs on the streets in the UK, and that they each require charging once per week, which consumes 100KWh of Electricity.
That means that there are 3 million cars, recieving 100KWh per day, which is 30GWh. Averaged over 10 hours, this is 3GW/hour. Which is a lot, but is massively less than the difference between 12pm (30GW UK demand) and 12am (20GW).
Its the ability to be able to carry the electricity required that is the problem. The wiring infrastucture will have to be upgraded. If you want a quickcharging station in the UK you have to be build one next to a electricity substation.
There is so much work that needs to be done and it is not happening. So far this year we have fitted 4 EV charging points on public buildings. We should be fitting 4000 a year if ICE are going to be banned by 2030.
Do we have sufficient generation capacity to charge 3 million electric car batteries on a night when the wind isn't blowing?
Yes, or we can do. The more interesting question is about transmission. Fossil fuel, whether oil or gas, is cheap to move in bulk across the world by pipeline or tanker. Electricity has to go down copper wires, which have relatively lower capacity and the material to make them is expensive and in limited supply. As we become more electrified our energy sources must be more local to avoid unaffordable transmission costs. Lots of wind, because that's what the UK has. It has implications for geo politics and energy security.
The whole electricity network will need to be upgraded if EVs are going to be become the norm. There is absolutely no sign of that happening.
My boss got himself a top of range electric mercedes eqv a year ago. It was very nice, fast and comfortable. He has already given it up as it was impractical and hideously expensive to charge. He had to abandon the vehicle 3 times as it had run out of charge and there was nowhere to charge it.
I don't think that's necessarily true.
Let's imagine that there are 20 million EVs on the streets in the UK, and that they each require charging once per week, which consumes 100KWh of Electricity.
That means that there are 3 million cars, recieving 100KWh per day, which is 30GWh. Averaged over 10 hours, this is 3GW/hour. Which is a lot, but is massively less than the difference between 12pm (30GW UK demand) and 12am (20GW).
One interesting thing comes into play. At a moderate number charging “stalls” a stationary battery, as a buffer, becomes cost competitive.
Which gives you the ability to time shift electricity.
The generating companies and the charging providers are already considering deals which suit both parties - cheaper electricity from off peak generating capacity.
This then leads to consideration of oversizing the charging site batteries to store power and sell it back to the grid. Which gives us distributed grid stabilisation/storage….
Do we have sufficient generation capacity to charge 3 million electric car batteries on a night when the wind isn't blowing?
Yes, or we can do. The more interesting question is about transmission. Fossil fuel, whether oil or gas, is cheap to move in bulk across the world by pipeline or tanker. Electricity has to go down copper wires, which have relatively lower capacity and the material to make them is expensive and in limited supply. As we become more electrified our energy sources must be more local to avoid unaffordable transmission costs. Lots of wind, because that's what the UK has. It has implications for geo politics and energy security.
The whole electricity network will need to be upgraded if EVs are going to be become the norm. There is absolutely no sign of that happening.
My boss got himself a top of range electric mercedes eqv a year ago. It was very nice, fast and comfortable. He has already given it up as it was impractical and hideously expensive to charge. He had to abandon the vehicle 3 times as it had run out of charge and there was nowhere to charge it.
I don't think that's necessarily true.
Let's imagine that there are 20 million EVs on the streets in the UK, and that they each require charging once per week, which consumes 100KWh of Electricity.
That means that there are 3 million cars, recieving 100KWh per day, which is 30GWh. Averaged over 10 hours, this is 3GW/hour. Which is a lot, but is massively less than the difference between 12pm (30GW UK demand) and 12am (20GW).
One interesting thing comes into play. At a moderate number charging “stalls” a stationary battery, as a buffer, becomes cost competitive.
Which gives you the ability to time shift electricity.
The generating companies and the charging providers are already considering deals which suit both parties - cheaper electricity from off peak generating capacity.
This then leads to consideration of oversizing the charging site batteries to store power and sell it back to the grid. Which gives us distributed grid stabilisation/storage….
Yep: that's a whole other interesting part of the equation.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
You know you can buy a boost pack which brings a 12v battery back to life? The same thing for your traction battery - a portable pack with a couple of kWh's of charge and a connector on the end. Plug it in, get enough charge to trundle back to the charging station, return the pack.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
I remember back in 1989 travelling from South to North Wales in a diesel Cavalier. All the little garages from Builth Wells to Carnarvon didn't stock diesel (farmers stocked their own supply) . A little bit of an unseen panic. It wasn't a problem for long as diesels became more ubiquitous.
I bought the original Tesla Roadster, and then a Model S.
More recently, I bought a Rivian.
EVs are great if:
(a) you have somewhere to charge it at home (b) you don't regularly do 300+ mile trips
If either of those things are not true, then either a straight ICE or a plug-in hybrid is perfect for you.
There's another requirement: (c) If you can afford one. EVs are still hellishly expensive compared to ICE cars - unless you go for ones with limitations, such as even more reduced range.
The cost differential is closing every day.
The crossover will come by the end of the decade, quite probably.
People will continue to grouse about the charging problem. It will be solved quickly for the wealthy, which might slow the process of solving it for everyone else.
I also expect the batteries to continue to improve in capacity (equivalent to weight in that you can use smaller ones) charging time and cost.
I bought the original Tesla Roadster, and then a Model S.
More recently, I bought a Rivian.
EVs are great if:
(a) you have somewhere to charge it at home (b) you don't regularly do 300+ mile trips
If either of those things are not true, then either a straight ICE or a plug-in hybrid is perfect for you.
There's another requirement: (c) If you can afford one. EVs are still hellishly expensive compared to ICE cars - unless you go for ones with limitations, such as even more reduced range.
The cost differential is closing every day.
The crossover will come by the end of the decade, quite probably.
People will continue to grouse about the charging problem. It will be solved quickly for the wealthy, which might slow the process of solving it for everyone else.
The charging problem is rather a chicken and egg one. It isn't economic to build them until there is a market.
Range anxiety is pretty short lived when owning an EV. How often do you drive more than 250 miles without a half hour break? EV cars are also a pleasure to drive, smooth, powerful and very quick acceleration.
Lots of people do once a year, over Christmas and New Year. Just one three hour wait then (and there were plenty) is enough to spoil your whole year, especially with small children with you. Giles Coren did a piece saying he is retransitioning for this reason.
One three hour wait is enough to ruin your entire year?
I own an electric car (well truck). Over Christmas, the family got into the truck and headed up the mountains to Big Bear. Over the Christmas week, we went round the ski resorts in the area, returning to our AirBnB every night.
Aside from one 20 minute wait for a fast charger, we had no problems whatsoever with a 500 mile round trip.
If you have a driveway, don't regularly travel 300m+ a day, and can afford it, an electric car is best.
Of course, they could all be brainwashed. But the real world evidence is that people who buy Teslas buy Teslas again. And on this very board, everyone who has bought an EV (myself, Foxy, Dura, FrequentLurker) would do so again.
The biggest problem is the variable quality of the charging infrastructure. There is a reason that Ford has broken ranks with the other manufacturers and signed a deal to use the Tesla network.
America has a unique problem with charging systems in that in a VHS vs Betamax battle it has been stuck with Video 2000.
The global standard connector is CCS2 - a 7-pin Type 2 connector (AC), and two pins below (DC) for rapid charging. America managed to get stuck with the older Type 1 AC connector. Which means it has been using CCS1 (older and slower 5-pin Type 1 for AC plus 2 pin Type 2 DC) which gets a lot of complaints.
Tesla in America uses its own version of Type 2, now rebranded as the "NACS" North American Charging Standard. The deal with Ford will see its CCS1 sockets replaced with NACS. Will others follow? Possibly...
There's CCS in the US and there's NACS.
NACS is smaller and more convenient. CCS is (slightly) more prevalent and handles a higher maximum throughput.
In the US, 40% of new EVs are Teslas, which use NACS, but where you can buy an adaptor and then use CCS chargers. 60% use CCS. Now Tesla is opening up their charging, I think a lot of the problems will improve.
There are also some older vehicles which use the old Toyota fast DC charging standard of ChDaMo, but that's on the way out now.
My point is that nether standard is standard. Your CCS is based on Type 1 - which is dead outside of the US and Japan and offers 1/3rd the speed of the Type 2 which is pretty universal in most markets. So your CCS isn't anyone else's CCS, its a frankenstein's monster. "NACS" is a cute rebrand of the old proprietary Tesla charger, and there is yet another proprietary rework of Type 2 in China (though not one that will go elsewhere).
We managed to coalesce petrol pump design around something universal - you can drive a car across the globe and a fuel nossel will fit your tank. That isn't the same with EVs - even Tesla isn't universal. I couldn't order a Rivian or F150 and import it here and have it work on our chargers - would need a Type 1 to Type 2 adaptor, and for AC charging you're stuck down on 3.6kW.
There are CCS chargers in the US which offer 350KW (and I've charged my late lamented Taycan at that rate).
Sure - that's the DC pins. Its the AC part where you are non-standard. Though it sounds like a lot of the US Tesla network is also old if you say most are only 150kW. Upgrades needed!
Do we have sufficient generation capacity to charge 3 million electric car batteries on a night when the wind isn't blowing?
Yes, or we can do. The more interesting question is about transmission. Fossil fuel, whether oil or gas, is cheap to move in bulk across the world by pipeline or tanker. Electricity has to go down copper wires, which have relatively lower capacity and the material to make them is expensive and in limited supply. As we become more electrified our energy sources must be more local to avoid unaffordable transmission costs. Lots of wind, because that's what the UK has. It has implications for geo politics and energy security.
The whole electricity network will need to be upgraded if EVs are going to be become the norm. There is absolutely no sign of that happening.
My boss got himself a top of range electric mercedes eqv a year ago. It was very nice, fast and comfortable. He has already given it up as it was impractical and hideously expensive to charge. He had to abandon the vehicle 3 times as it had run out of charge and there was nowhere to charge it.
I don't think that's necessarily true.
Let's imagine that there are 20 million EVs on the streets in the UK, and that they each require charging once per week, which consumes 100KWh of Electricity.
That means that there are 3 million cars, recieving 100KWh per day, which is 30GWh. Averaged over 10 hours, this is 3GW/hour. Which is a lot, but is massively less than the difference between 12pm (30GW UK demand) and 12am (20GW).
Its the ability to be able to carry the electricity required that is the problem. The wiring infrastucture will have to be upgraded. If you want a quickcharging station in the UK you have to be build one next to a electricity substation.
There is so much work that needs to be done and it is not happening. So far this year we have fitted 4 EV charging points on public buildings. We should be fitting 4000 a year if ICE are going to be banned by 2030.
ICE isn't due to be abandoned by 2030. Sale of new, non plug in vehicles are banned after 2030.
Even if every new vehicle in the UK sold today was a BEV (which won't happen), it would still take almost a decade before a majority of vehicles on the roads were BEVs. Given that PHEV are still allowed, and it's from 2030, we have even more time.
They aren't being blocked from standing for Parliament - only blocked doing so as Labour candidates. They are perfectly free to scab off and run as TUSC or Socialism Now or Left Unity or NHA or Socialist Labour or whatever, and get that world-transforming 1.3% of the vote.
Carping from the sidelines in perpetuity but retaining one's purity is the best way to fight Tories and Pink Tories, no?
Crankies want the Tories in power beating up workers. That way there is something to protest against. Why else do you think the likes of Derek Robinson wanted to break the companies they worked for? Sure the BL management was continuously crap. But there were spells where they could have had a smash hit product and Red Robbo had to make sure that didn't happen.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
You get someone to tow you.
It's a pain.
But I'm 48 years old and have never run out of fuel. It's not that common a scenario.
Towing costs a fair amount of money as I know from when I had to get towed off a motorway when my last car broke down.
Running out of fuel is more common than you think especially in cold weather where you are stuck in a jam and need the engine running for heat. Something I suspect just as common in ev's as ice. Most I know have run out of fuel at least once in their life due to this
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
I have to say that if you can block off for a moment the fact we were in the midst of an epidemic (a hard ask I know so forgive me) then the first lockdown in the Spring of 2020 was one of the most wonderful periods I can remember. For all that I am in the depths of the country, my place is close to the A153 which is heavy with lorries and cars all day. The lack of traffic noise for those few months transformed the place and gave me one of the best springs of my life.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
The biggest price rise though is in the big boarding schools, for new fancy theatres and sports halls etc. Small private day schools are not targeting the global rich like the elite boarding schools but local middle class parents and so their fees don't rise so much
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
But isn't that partly due to increased numbers of people from overseas? THis is very much the impression I get from a friend who has children in the Headmaster's Conference school which he attended himself. The children of local factory owners and accountants have ben priced out of the market and replaced by nouveaux riches from all over the world.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
I do not think that is the case. I think it is more the point that parents will do what they can to keep their children in private schools but there becomes a tipping point at which they cannot / will not pay. I certainly hear that from our friends who do have children in private school.
All that will happen with this is that the private schools will become the exclusivity of rich foreigners as well as very wealthy individuals here. Ironically, that may give more momentum to the call for Grammar schools in the most impacted areas.
As a political aside, I think the Tories should be hammering the LDs on this in the Blue Wall seats and asking whether they would back Labour.
Additionally, there will come a point where petrol and diesel engines are so uncommon that those clinging on to their old ones will have a lot of trouble filling up. They won't keep all that petrol station infra running just for the occasional aficionado.
Tesco Momentum is already one of the few fuels available to run your pre-2000 classic.
Don’t really understand why he half hour wait is such a big deal. Most people would take a break of that order anyway on a long drive. And it’s not as if looking for a petrol station, waiting for a pump and filling up is instant.
Good morning
Taking a break on a long journey is one thing, but queuing and waiting half and hour or more on more than one occasion is not attractive
I drive the 450 miles to my family in Lossiemouth without filling up, and on that journey have maybe three or four stops.
Additionally I can drive a further 150 miles without replenishing the tank and get over 55 mpg
My BMW 520D is in a class of its own on such a long journey and indeed complies with ULEZ and at a £30 annual road tax
Why on earth would I consider a ev, and that is without considering paying up to £30,000 more to change
I will continue to look 'all smug' as I have no intention of buying a ev
EVs don't work for everyone. But on your trips to Lossie where you make 3 or 4 stops? An EV would charge whilst you did so. Depends on which generation of 5-series you have, but its hardly in a class of its own - Audi and Mercedes as starters for 10 offer similar vehicles with similar interiors.
Then we have the drivetrain point. Your car either has a manual box or a ZF 8-speed auto. Manual boxes are something out of the ark (though I know they can be pleasing to play with), the ZF box is pretty much industry leading. But neither are anything compared to electric transmission. Once you've had an electric motor instead of a gearbox, any cog shifting feels as backwards as it is.
So lets take a real world example - traffic. I have two recent example on my trip through England last week. Stuck in a big queue on the edge of cities. In a manual I would be endlessly having to blend out the clutch. In an automatic there is less work, but with either on your 4 pot diesel you're belching filth into the environment where people live and work.
Whereas I sat there. Literally. The car driving itself. Steering, acceleration, braking. No input from me. Whilst not spewing filth out into people's lungs. Its *easier* to drive an EV.
Thank you for that
My BMW is automatic and conforms with ULEZ so not belching particles into the air
I would suggest that at my age there is simply no case for changing what is an excellent reliable and comfortable long distance driving experience at a cost of £30,000 plus and having to tailor my travel around charging points
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
But isn't that partly due to increased numbers of people from overseas? THis is very much the impression I get from a friend who has children in the Headmaster's Conference school which he attended himself. The children of local factory owners and accountants have ben priced out of the market and replaced by nouveau riches from all over the world.
Indeed, the top private boarding schools like Eton, Winchester, Harrow, Rugby and Stowe are filled with pupils from the Far East, the Middle East and India and Nigeria and Russia now ie offspring of the global super rich. The only British parents who can afford their fees are mostly executives of big corporations and corporate and commercial lawyers, investment bankers and hedge fund managers and surgeons and A and B list celebs (unless their children get a scholarship or bursary)
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
Until you can't get anywhere because your EV car has run out of power and there is no charging point nearby. Not that relaxing.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
Additionally, there will come a point where petrol and diesel engines are so uncommon that those clinging on to their old ones will have a lot of trouble filling up. They won't keep all that petrol station infra running just for the occasional aficionado.
With wifey leaving education and opening a shop, our car usage has changed again. We only need 1 decent car and then an older one for back-up / leaving at the airport etc. So with her Ioniq EV going back, we bought a 14 year old Hyundai i30 as the newold car. She ran the same car (1.4 petrol, manual box, comfort trim level) from new in 2009, so its a blast from the past owning one again.
Its fun, but it feels ancient. No big screen media system, no Bluetooth, manual gearbox, manual handbrake lever, no cruise control. Great retro fun, but as a modern proposition? OK so most cars now have a media screen and lane assist systems (if they want 5* Euro NCAP). But the rest? Same set-up - mechanical engine, manual gearbox, things that need adjusting and replacing.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
But isn't that partly due to increased numbers of people from overseas? THis is very much the impression I get from a friend who has children in the Headmaster's Conference school which he attended himself. The children of local factory owners and accountants have ben priced out of the market and replaced by nouveau riches from all over the world.
Indeed, the top private boarding schools like Eton, Winchester, Harrow, Rugby and Stowe are filled with pupils from the Far East, the Middle East and India and Nigeria and Russia now ie offspring of the global super rich. The only British parents who can afford their fees are executives of big corporations and corporate lawyers and surgeons (unless their children get a scholarship or bursary)
So what is the point, for the UK, of giving these schools [edit, thanks to NP,s post] relief from certain taxes? Rather than taxing what is evidently a self-perpetuating business (sensu Malmesbury).
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
Until you can't get anywhere because your EV car has run out of power and there is no charging point nearby. Not that relaxing.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
I spend far less time at charging stations than you do, because I charge my car at home once a week. Those five or ten minutes add up over the year, and I'm saving time and money.
Now, is that true of everyone? No.
But for a substantial minority of people, EVs are the better option today. And every day the size of that minority increases.
Of course from 2030 sale of petrol and diesel cars will be banned in the UK and by 2035 sale of hybrid cars, so we won't have much choice but to go electric then
I expect that date to change not least at the demand of German car makers and it will be many years before petrol and diesel cars become extinct, it at all
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
You get someone to tow you.
It's a pain.
But I'm 48 years old and have never run out of fuel. It's not that common a scenario.
Towing costs a fair amount of money as I know from when I had to get towed off a motorway when my last car broke down.
Running out of fuel is more common than you think especially in cold weather where you are stuck in a jam and need the engine running for heat. Something I suspect just as common in ev's as ice. Most I know have run out of fuel at least once in their life due to this
Yes. Once in your life, you may spend £150 for towing your EV. Rather than trudging to the nearest petrol station, buying a plastic container, and trudging back.
But against that, maintenance costs are dramatically lower.
Do we have sufficient generation capacity to charge 3 million electric car batteries on a night when the wind isn't blowing?
Yes, or we can do. The more interesting question is about transmission. Fossil fuel, whether oil or gas, is cheap to move in bulk across the world by pipeline or tanker. Electricity has to go down copper wires, which have relatively lower capacity and the material to make them is expensive and in limited supply. As we become more electrified our energy sources must be more local to avoid unaffordable transmission costs. Lots of wind, because that's what the UK has. It has implications for geo politics and energy security.
The whole electricity network will need to be upgraded if EVs are going to be become the norm. There is absolutely no sign of that happening.
My boss got himself a top of range electric mercedes eqv a year ago. It was very nice, fast and comfortable. He has already given it up as it was impractical and hideously expensive to charge. He had to abandon the vehicle 3 times as it had run out of charge and there was nowhere to charge it.
I don't think that's necessarily true.
Let's imagine that there are 20 million EVs on the streets in the UK, and that they each require charging once per week, which consumes 100KWh of Electricity.
That means that there are 3 million cars, recieving 100KWh per day, which is 30GWh. Averaged over 10 hours, this is 3GW/hour. Which is a lot, but is massively less than the difference between 12pm (30GW UK demand) and 12am (20GW).
Its the ability to be able to carry the electricity required that is the problem. The wiring infrastucture will have to be upgraded. If you want a quickcharging station in the UK you have to be build one next to a electricity substation.
There is so much work that needs to be done and it is not happening. So far this year we have fitted 4 EV charging points on public buildings. We should be fitting 4000 a year if ICE are going to be banned by 2030.
rastructure and services that all the businesses rely upon) then why should it stay in business?
Charities are businesses. Should they be made to pay the taxes that other businesses pay?
Charities pay vat. This rule is about educational institutions not charities.
Yes. Clearly education is a Good Thing, though opinions are at best divided on whether separate fee-paying education is a good thing. But lots of non-profit organisations that do Good Things pay VAT, so it's an anomaly. The main reason that abolition is controversial is the usual one with any change in the tax system - that schools have got used to it, so there will as DavidL's example shows be marginal cases that can no longer afford to operate at all, and all private schools will feel the pinch to some extent.
I don't think that's a reason not to end the anomaly, but I'd suggest bringing it in with a few years' warning, so that schools on the margin have time to look for other options than closure (merger, sponsorship, economies, fee increases?).
Don’t really understand why he half hour wait is such a big deal. Most people would take a break of that order anyway on a long drive. And it’s not as if looking for a petrol station, waiting for a pump and filling up is instant.
Good morning
Taking a break on a long journey is one thing, but queuing and waiting half and hour or more on more than one occasion is not attractive
I drive the 450 miles to my family in Lossiemouth without filling up, and on that journey have maybe three or four stops.
Additionally I can drive a further 150 miles without replenishing the tank and get over 55 mpg
My BMW 520D is in a class of its own on such a long journey and indeed complies with ULEZ and at a £30 annual road tax
Why on earth would I consider a ev, and that is without considering paying up to £30,000 more to change
I will continue to look 'all smug' as I have no intention of buying a ev
EVs don't work for everyone. But on your trips to Lossie where you make 3 or 4 stops? An EV would charge whilst you did so. Depends on which generation of 5-series you have, but its hardly in a class of its own - Audi and Mercedes as starters for 10 offer similar vehicles with similar interiors.
Then we have the drivetrain point. Your car either has a manual box or a ZF 8-speed auto. Manual boxes are something out of the ark (though I know they can be pleasing to play with), the ZF box is pretty much industry leading. But neither are anything compared to electric transmission. Once you've had an electric motor instead of a gearbox, any cog shifting feels as backwards as it is.
So lets take a real world example - traffic. I have two recent example on my trip through England last week. Stuck in a big queue on the edge of cities. In a manual I would be endlessly having to blend out the clutch. In an automatic there is less work, but with either on your 4 pot diesel you're belching filth into the environment where people live and work.
Whereas I sat there. Literally. The car driving itself. Steering, acceleration, braking. No input from me. Whilst not spewing filth out into people's lungs. Its *easier* to drive an EV.
Thank you for that
My BMW is automatic and conforms with ULEZ so not belching particles into the air
I would suggest that at my age there is simply no case for changing what is an excellent reliable and comfortable long distance driving experience at a cost of £30,000 plus and having to tailor my travel around charging points
Many will enjoy evs but they are not for me
I absolutely understand why you don't want to change and don't need to change. You and millions of others making a rational choice.
On emissions, low emission is not no emission. Stand next to a busy road inside the ULEZ and you can literally taste the particulates coming out of all of those ULEZ-compliant exhausts. The reason why so many cities are now ramping up their restrictions on fossil vehicles is because air quality is still dangerously low.
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
Until you can't get anywhere because your EV car has run out of power and there is no charging point nearby. Not that relaxing.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
I spend far less time at charging stations than you do, because I charge my car at home once a week. Those five or ten minutes add up over the year, and I'm saving time and money.
Now, is that true of everyone? No.
But for a substantial minority of people, EVs are the better option today. And every day the size of that minority increases.
Perhaps in the US. I would question that in the UK.
At the end of the day, there is an implicit class / socio-economic issue here. If you are fairly well-off you will be fine (you will have a drive, a decent car, can afford the electricity etc). If you are poor and rely on your car for essentials, you are screwed.
Additionally, there will come a point where petrol and diesel engines are so uncommon that those clinging on to their old ones will have a lot of trouble filling up. They won't keep all that petrol station infra running just for the occasional aficionado.
Petrol stations are cheap; but yes, that will become an issue.
F*** me! I've been trying to tune into PB all evening and I just keep getting Mumsnet.
I had a quick skim through the evening's output and, between Leon's stupid boomer Facebook shit and what to tell your kids about cocks, it was fairly lame.
On topic: is it worth waiting an extra 20 minutes at Clackett Lane to reduce CO2 emissions? Probably, yes. Are there significant infrastructure and behavioural challenges to overcome with BEVs? Probably, also yes.
EVs reduce NOx pollution as well, but increased tyre dust pollution, largely owing to EV weight, should be a concern.
Tyre wear is very vehicle dependent. Our i4 had tyre wear comparable to an ICE car (maybe even a bit better) but our iX has a ferocious appetite for tyres. I've just rotated them at 6,000 miles and I reckon all 4 will be done by 12,000 miles. They are super expensive tyres too with internal foams for noise suppression but they are included in the BMW service plan. The iX preloads torque onto all axles even when the front motor is theoretically not being used for propulsion to eliminate parasitic drag from the hubs, etc. This may have something to do with the tyre wear but even an OBD2 wizard like me can't figure out to disable the feature.
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
Until you can't get anywhere because your EV car has run out of power and there is no charging point nearby. Not that relaxing.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
I spend far less time at charging stations than you do, because I charge my car at home once a week. Those five or ten minutes add up over the year, and I'm saving time and money.
Now, is that true of everyone? No.
But for a substantial minority of people, EVs are the better option today. And every day the size of that minority increases.
Perhaps in the US. I would question that in the UK.
At the end of the day, there is an implicit class / socio-economic issue here. If you are fairly well-off you will be fine (you will have a drive, a decent car, can afford the electricity etc). If you are poor and rely on your car for essentials, you are screwed.
Oh, I agree, for now they're not for everyone.
But the number of people who will benefit from going EV is growing all the time. You can't buck the market.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
That's not how you operate a BEV. On a long journey you let the software plan the route via charging stations so if you run out of electrons in that scenario you are a fucking moron who deviated from briefed flight plan.
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
Until you can't get anywhere because your EV car has run out of power and there is no charging point nearby. Not that relaxing.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
Or, we upgrade the infrastructure. That is a car capable of 350kW charging sipping at a legacy 50kW charger. Once Gridserve replace those old units with the new 350kW ones, his stop would be rapid. My Tesla "only" does 250kW, but on a long trip by the time I have used the loo and gone in the shop, charging is done.
I did a comparison of one 500+ trip in the Tesla vs the same trip in my previous Outlander PHEV (petrol). The Tesla was *quicker* on the longer trip - the balancing point between speed and efficiency is higher in the Tesla (70mph vs 65mpg), with my need to take a break the same in both cars. Then add on a refuelling stop in the Outlander that isn't needed with the Tesla, and it was 20 minutes faster in the Tesla. As well as £50 cheaper.
Of course from 2030 sale of petrol and diesel cars will be banned in the UK and by 2035 sale of hybrid cars, so we won't have much choice but to go electric then
I expect that date to change not least at the demand of German car makers and it will be many years before petrol and diesel cars become extinct, it at all
Yes. German car makers ride to the rescue again. Like we were promised last time.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
You get someone to tow you.
It's a pain.
But I'm 48 years old and have never run out of fuel. It's not that common a scenario.
Rare is not the same as infrequent. An individual may have a low probability of running out, but a population will have a range and if the population is large then it'll happen every day. If there are 100 million EVs in the US, how many will be out of juice every day?
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
I bought the original Tesla Roadster, and then a Model S.
More recently, I bought a Rivian.
EVs are great if:
(a) you have somewhere to charge it at home (b) you don't regularly do 300+ mile trips
If either of those things are not true, then either a straight ICE or a plug-in hybrid is perfect for you.
There's another requirement: (c) If you can afford one. EVs are still hellishly expensive compared to ICE cars - unless you go for ones with limitations, such as even more reduced range.
The cost differential is closing every day.
The crossover will come by the end of the decade, quite probably.
People will continue to grouse about the charging problem. It will be solved quickly for the wealthy, which might slow the process of solving it for everyone else.
I also expect the batteries to continue to improve in capacity (equivalent to weight in that you can use smaller ones) charging time and cost.
One of the most interesting EVs in my view is the Dacia Spring. It's very much a version 1 model and is mediocre in most respects, but I think think its design approach is the way forward.
Most EVs are over-engineered. To get more range manufacturers add bigger batteries, which add weight and massively increase cost.
The starting point for the Spring is the smallest viable battery from which the designers work out an.acceptable tradeoff of range, performance and internal space. Compared with ICE the smaller motor and greater torque of an electric car allow a smaller vehicle and less overall power for a similar experience.
The small battery means the Spring weighs less and costs about £18 000, just a few thousand more than the equivalent ICE before subsidies. It can be charged overnight on a standard 13A plug.
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
Until you can't get anywhere because your EV car has run out of power and there is no charging point nearby. Not that relaxing.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
I spend far less time at charging stations than you do, because I charge my car at home once a week. Those five or ten minutes add up over the year, and I'm saving time and money.
Now, is that true of everyone? No.
But for a substantial minority of people, EVs are the better option today. And every day the size of that minority increases.
Perhaps in the US. I would question that in the UK.
At the end of the day, there is an implicit class / socio-economic issue here. If you are fairly well-off you will be fine (you will have a drive, a decent car, can afford the electricity etc). If you are poor and rely on your car for essentials, you are screwed.
Oh, I agree, for now they're not for everyone.
But the number of people who will benefit from going EV is growing all the time. You can't buck the market.
Again, I would question that.
The car manufacturers are not showing much inclination to develop mass market EV models. Instead, what they have done - and some such as BMW and Mercedes have been explicit about this - is to raise prices structurally. Wealthier people can afford this, poorer people can't.
I go back to the point that there is an implicit class / socio-economic point thing here. The unstated aim of many who are pushing the EV agenda is to force people - mainly the poorer types - onto public transport by pricing them out of the market when it comes to buying and maintaining a car. There is a reason why so many wealthy middle-class individuals are perfectly happy with pushing an EV agenda because they can afford the price as well as knowing others cannot. You see the same dynamic with such types calling for a reduction in air flights - they are not thinking about their trips to Tuscany or Provence, they are thinking those awful plebs who go on package holidays to cheap destinations.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
But isn't that partly due to increased numbers of people from overseas? THis is very much the impression I get from a friend who has children in the Headmaster's Conference school which he attended himself. The children of local factory owners and accountants have ben priced out of the market and replaced by nouveaux riches from all over the world.
Even less reason to give them a tax break. Why should we be subsidising the education of a bunch of junior oligarchs?
Having a driveway in which to park is a massive factor in EV practicability. I have a drive and a home charger, and I love my Leaf, but I think the relationship would be a lot more strained if I have to use public chargers all the time.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
That's not how you operate a BEV. On a long journey you let the software plan the route via charging stations so if you run out of electrons in that scenario you are a fucking moron who deviated from briefed flight plan.
I'd rather stay in control than cede it to a calculating machine or drive along thinking I'm doing my bit in a team effort.
Liberace would have owned a fleet of Teslas.
The solution to Pagan2's problem is to drive a proper (ICE) car and keep a can of fuel in the boot for emergencies, but mostly to calculate reliably and be able to depend on yourself.
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
Until you can't get anywhere because your EV car has run out of power and there is no charging point nearby. Not that relaxing.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
I spend far less time at charging stations than you do, because I charge my car at home once a week. Those five or ten minutes add up over the year, and I'm saving time and money.
Now, is that true of everyone? No.
But for a substantial minority of people, EVs are the better option today. And every day the size of that minority increases.
Perhaps in the US. I would question that in the UK.
At the end of the day, there is an implicit class / socio-economic issue here. If you are fairly well-off you will be fine (you will have a drive, a decent car, can afford the electricity etc). If you are poor and rely on your car for essentials, you are screwed.
Oh, I agree, for now they're not for everyone.
But the number of people who will benefit from going EV is growing all the time. You can't buck the market.
Again, I would question that.
The car manufacturers are not showing much inclination to develop mass market EV models. Instead, what they have done - and some such as BMW and Mercedes have been explicit about this - is to raise prices structurally. Wealthier people can afford this, poorer people can't.
I go back to the point that there is an implicit class / socio-economic point thing here. The unstated aim of many who are pushing the EV agenda is to force people - mainly the poorer types - onto public transport by pricing them out of the market when it comes to buying and maintaining a car. There is a reason why so many wealthy middle-class individuals are perfectly happy with pushing an EV agenda because they can afford the price as well as knowing others cannot. You see the same dynamic with such types calling for a reduction in air flights - they are not thinking about their trips to Tuscany or Provence, they are thinking those awful plebs who go on package holidays to cheap destinations.
How would you go about reducing CO2 emissions from transport then?
Don’t really understand why he half hour wait is such a big deal. Most people would take a break of that order anyway on a long drive. And it’s not as if looking for a petrol station, waiting for a pump and filling up is instant.
Good morning
Taking a break on a long journey is one thing, but queuing and waiting half and hour or more on more than one occasion is not attractive
I drive the 450 miles to my family in Lossiemouth without filling up, and on that journey have maybe three or four stops.
Additionally I can drive a further 150 miles without replenishing the tank and get over 55 mpg
My BMW 520D is in a class of its own on such a long journey and indeed complies with ULEZ and at a £30 annual road tax
Why on earth would I consider a ev, and that is without considering paying up to £30,000 more to change
I will continue to look 'all smug' as I have no intention of buying a ev
EVs don't work for everyone. But on your trips to Lossie where you make 3 or 4 stops? An EV would charge whilst you did so. Depends on which generation of 5-series you have, but its hardly in a class of its own - Audi and Mercedes as starters for 10 offer similar vehicles with similar interiors.
Then we have the drivetrain point. Your car either has a manual box or a ZF 8-speed auto. Manual boxes are something out of the ark (though I know they can be pleasing to play with), the ZF box is pretty much industry leading. But neither are anything compared to electric transmission. Once you've had an electric motor instead of a gearbox, any cog shifting feels as backwards as it is.
So lets take a real world example - traffic. I have two recent example on my trip through England last week. Stuck in a big queue on the edge of cities. In a manual I would be endlessly having to blend out the clutch. In an automatic there is less work, but with either on your 4 pot diesel you're belching filth into the environment where people live and work.
Whereas I sat there. Literally. The car driving itself. Steering, acceleration, braking. No input from me. Whilst not spewing filth out into people's lungs. Its *easier* to drive an EV.
None of which really addreses Big G's point (and mine which I made the other day). It takes me 8 hours to drive to Aberdeen on a lot less than a single tank of diesel. How long would it take me to do that drive in an EV? HOw long would I currently have to be sat wasting time at a servoce station whilst thecr is chartged? Even if I can actually get to a charger.
For anyone regularly travelling long distances with time constraints EVs are impractical at present. I don't want them to be but they are. And of course my last ICE vehicle cost me £500 second hand. Not seeing any viable comparisons in the EV market any time soon.
I'm caught by this dilemma right at the moment. The London ULEZ forces me to change my diesel Mondeo probably 3-5 years earlier than I had planned. Apart from the fact that I need the 3 years to save up for a new car (my policy is to buy brand new and run into the ground) I can't see anything on the market I want to buy.
If I own it for the next 15 years it has to be an EV. I want something that will allow me to drive from where I live to the Lake District (say) without charging. Yes, I know I will take 2 breaks in that journey, but I prefer just to drive off the A1 at Stanford or Grantham and somewhere in Yorkshire and have a walk around somewhere pleasant. I don't stop at Motorway Service Stations unless forced to. So I won't be charging my car en route. When I checked a few months ago only the top of the range Tesla and BMW (just) had a long enough range.
Secondly, I don't want a big car. I want something between a VW Golf and a Ford Focus in size. Currently there are almost no EV models in this category; they are either all at the large SUV or Luxury end of the range or at the toy (Mini) end with almost nothing in between. Again a few months ago only Skoda and Renault had an EV in that class. Neither are remotely close to 300 miles on range.
Unlike most people in my road, I also have off street parking but the passageway between the houses is narrow and my Mondeo is a bit wide for comfort. So ideally it needs to be narrower, but most EVs including the Tesla and BMW mentioned above are wider.
Given that Dad's Taxi Service is increasingly not required, and it's probably cost-effective to hire a car for weekends away when I want one, I've come to the conclusion that I'm going to sit it out carless for the next couple of years while I wait for the market to catch up. I may find by then that I don't need a car at all. I wonder how may others will be doing the same?
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
That's not how you operate a BEV. On a long journey you let the software plan the route via charging stations so if you run out of electrons in that scenario you are a fucking moron who deviated from briefed flight plan.
I'd rather stay in control than cede it to a calculating machine or drive along thinking I'm doing my bit in a team effort.
Liberace would have owned a fleet of Teslas.
Also a briefed flight plan is no use to you when you are stuck in a stationary jam due to an overturned lorry for several hours and need to keep the heating going which accounted for the one time I ran out of petrol. I was far from the only one who did.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Worth repeating my back of a fruity flavoured vape packet calculation from December of last year:
There are 615,000 private school places in the UK, with fees averaging £15654 per year.
If we assume unitary elasticity for a moment, a 20% tax would reduce the number of public school students to 492,000. This would mean the 20% tax would raise an extra £3130 per head, or £1539 million in all.
Divide that by the number of state school pupils (approx 10.5m), and you get £149.20 more per pupil per year to spend.
Ah yes, but there's a problem here. Finding places for the other 123,000 former private school students who now need a state school place.
Average spend per head in the state system was 6970 last year, so you'd need to find an extra 857m just to pay for the extra state places required.
This would therefore mean you'd actually only be looking at an extra £64.33 spend per pupil.
And for that, you would be uprooting the lives of 123,000 children, as well as significantly reducing their educational outcomes, and reducing social mobility (due to the increased bifurcation I mentioned in my previous post) all for an extra £64.33 spend per state school pupil.
The numbers don't add up.
And that's before you get to private school closures that would cost jobs, and tax revenues, the extra infrastructure and expansion in state schools to accommodate the extra new pupils - the opex is being costed but not the capex - and the further spike in house prices near the best state schools that will further price out less well-off families outside the catchment area.
It's a dumb policy that will cost the exchequer money, not add to it, will shrink the overall size of the education sector and reduce education outcomes overall - which is why no government of any stripe has done it before.
But, that's not what it's really about: SKS is looking to buy the support of his left-flank, and this is the price, and, politically, it works.
Of course from 2030 sale of petrol and diesel cars will be banned in the UK and by 2035 sale of hybrid cars, so we won't have much choice but to go electric then
I expect that date to change not least at the demand of German car makers and it will be many years before petrol and diesel cars become extinct, it at all
Die Großen Drei German OEMs (BMW, Mercedes, VAG) absolutely love EVs and are building their product roadmaps around them. Why? Because the cost of designing and engineering ICE powertrains is now phenomenally expensive (see JLR just giving up and using BMW engines) and the Chinese market has a high demand for EVs.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
The transition to electric vehicles can't come soon enough for one key reason: noise. Not all traffic noise is engine noise but it's the most significant part. The gradual end of revving, roaring, popping noise pollution will make every part of this country better in ways that I don't think many people really give credit for.
It'll take a long time for it to filter down through the second hand market, and I expect there will be "classics" knocking around for decades, but anyone who lives within a couple of kilometres of a main road, which is basically everyone, will gradually start to live better, more relaxing lives.
Until you can't get anywhere because your EV car has run out of power and there is no charging point nearby. Not that relaxing.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
I spend far less time at charging stations than you do, because I charge my car at home once a week. Those five or ten minutes add up over the year, and I'm saving time and money.
Now, is that true of everyone? No.
But for a substantial minority of people, EVs are the better option today. And every day the size of that minority increases.
Perhaps in the US. I would question that in the UK.
At the end of the day, there is an implicit class / socio-economic issue here. If you are fairly well-off you will be fine (you will have a drive, a decent car, can afford the electricity etc). If you are poor and rely on your car for essentials, you are screwed.
Oh, I agree, for now they're not for everyone.
But the number of people who will benefit from going EV is growing all the time. You can't buck the market.
Again, I would question that.
The car manufacturers are not showing much inclination to develop mass market EV models. Instead, what they have done - and some such as BMW and Mercedes have been explicit about this - is to raise prices structurally. Wealthier people can afford this, poorer people can't.
I go back to the point that there is an implicit class / socio-economic point thing here. The unstated aim of many who are pushing the EV agenda is to force people - mainly the poorer types - onto public transport by pricing them out of the market when it comes to buying and maintaining a car. There is a reason why so many wealthy middle-class individuals are perfectly happy with pushing an EV agenda because they can afford the price as well as knowing others cannot. You see the same dynamic with such types calling for a reduction in air flights - they are not thinking about their trips to Tuscany or Provence, they are thinking those awful plebs who go on package holidays to cheap destinations.
You use this word plebs a lot. It really says a great deal more about you than it does about the groups you are cack-handedly trying to attack.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
It's an absolute disgrace. Costs for real people and real lives.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
But isn't that partly due to increased numbers of people from overseas? THis is very much the impression I get from a friend who has children in the Headmaster's Conference school which he attended himself. The children of local factory owners and accountants have ben priced out of the market and replaced by nouveau riches from all over the world.
Indeed, the top private boarding schools like Eton, Winchester, Harrow, Rugby and Stowe are filled with pupils from the Far East, the Middle East and India and Nigeria and Russia now ie offspring of the global super rich. The only British parents who can afford their fees are executives of big corporations and corporate lawyers and surgeons (unless their children get a scholarship or bursary)
So what is the point, for the UK, of giving these schools [edit, thanks to NP,s post] relief from certain taxes? Rather than taxing what is evidently a self-perpetuating business (sensu Malmesbury).
As it benefits small cheaper private day schools offering choice to the local middle classes, they are who Labour's policy will impact, the expensive boarding schools will be fine either way
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
You get someone to tow you.
It's a pain.
But I'm 48 years old and have never run out of fuel. It's not that common a scenario.
Towing costs a fair amount of money as I know from when I had to get towed off a motorway when my last car broke down.
Running out of fuel is more common than you think especially in cold weather where you are stuck in a jam and need the engine running for heat. Something I suspect just as common in ev's as ice. Most I know have run out of fuel at least once in their life due to this
I’ve never come close to running out of fuel and I’m in my mid 40s. You have to be pretty absent minded to allow that to happen.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
Worth repeating my back of a fruity flavoured vape packet calculation from December of last year:
There are 615,000 private school places in the UK, with fees averaging £15654 per year.
If we assume unitary elasticity for a moment, a 20% tax would reduce the number of public school students to 492,000. This would mean the 20% tax would raise an extra £3130 per head, or £1539 million in all.
Divide that by the number of state school pupils (approx 10.5m), and you get £149.20 more per pupil per year to spend.
Ah yes, but there's a problem here. Finding places for the other 123,000 former private school students who now need a state school place.
Average spend per head in the state system was 6970 last year, so you'd need to find an extra 857m just to pay for the extra state places required.
This would therefore mean you'd actually only be looking at an extra £64.33 spend per pupil.
And for that, you would be uprooting the lives of 123,000 children, as well as significantly reducing their educational outcomes, and reducing social mobility (due to the increased bifurcation I mentioned in my previous post) all for an extra £64.33 spend per state school pupil.
The numbers don't add up.
And that's before you get to private school closures that would cost jobs, and tax revenues, the extra infrastructure and expansion in state schools to accommodate the extra new pupils - the opex is being costed but not the capex - and the further spike in house prices near the best state schools that will further price out less well-off families outside the catchment area.
It's a dumb policy that will cost the exchequer money, not add to it, will shrink the overall size of the education sector and reduce education outcomes overall - which is why no government of any stripe has done it before.
But, that's not what it's really about: SKS is looking to buy the support of his left-flank, and this is the price, and, politically, it works.
The flaw in the argument above is in "Average spend per head in the state system was 6970 last year, so you'd need to find an extra 857m just to pay for the extra state places required.". You can't take the average cost of anything and apply it to the marginal cost of enlarging - the average cost includes a large amount for the basic cost of having a school at all. Adding some pupils to it is not proportionate, even if it means building an extra classroom.
My electric car will do 200 miles on a charge, further than I can go without having to stop. In the 20 minutes it takes to get from the car park to the toilet and back it will have charged up by 70 miles. Stay and have something to drink and you've added over 100 miles. Stop at the services on the way back too and you've got 400 miles of range without having to do anything that you wouldn't do anyway. I don't make many journeys of over 400 miles in a day.
My recent experience of hiring an EV for two days has really put me off - although I remain emotionally committed to the concept. There's too much detail to bore everyone with here (ask my family!) but here are a few points to consider.
1) A technological system always needs another technological system to enable it to work. With EVs, that's not just charging points - you need a functioning mobile phone system, and a functioning on-line banking system. If either of those is down, you are stuck in a Morrison's car park somewhere off the M25, in the rain, at midnight.
2) Some charging points could not recognise my phone's existence, even though I was standing right next to the wretched thing.
3) I don't want a myriad of meaningful lifetime relationships with a load of different suppliers. I want a cheap and sordid commercial transaction when I re-fuel - I do not want to download yet another app, with another password, e-mail, gang sign, haiku, 17 digit prime number etc etc etc. Not nearly enough charging points allow credit card only transactions.
4) I have poor eyesight. I cannot see the screen on my mobile phone well enough in bright daylight to navigate the information required by the websites (although, to be fair, I do have a very small phone.)
5) I want to know how much I have paid for my fuel. One of the simple joys of motoring is complaining about the price paid for petrol, and having one's spouse point out how much cheaper it would have been if one had re-fuelled when she first suggested it. With EVs, I don't know how much I have paid until I get my credit card bill.
On the positive side, one does meet a better class of motorist with EVs - many hours stood chatting to other motorists whilst queueing for the pump, getting help with downloading the apps, filling in the details required etc.
Also, a big shout-out to the young lady at Morrison's car park somewhere off the M25 who kindly used her phone and her credit card to re-fuel my car for me! I insisted that she sent me her bank details so that I could repay her a few days later, but it really shouldn't have come to that.
Labour’s tax raid on private school fees could raise ‘very little’
At best the party’s calculations could be off by £600m, a report finds
Labour’s plan to add VAT to private school fees is badly flawed and could raise very little revenue, according to a think tank.
The party has said ending the tax breaks enjoyed by independent schools would raise £1.6 billion, which it would invest in the state sector.
However, a new analysis suggests that the figure is likely to be much lower and that in a “best case” scenario for Labour, the changes would bring in £1 billion. In a “worst case” scenario, there would be “very little” new revenue.
EDSK, an education think tank, said the wealthiest parents and the most expensive schools would be the least affected.
Most independent schools have charitable status, giving them at least 80 per cent relief on business rates. In September 2021, Labour said that in government it would end the charitable status of England’s private schools, raising an estimated £1.6 billion from VAT and £100 million from business rates.
The think tank’s report claims that the calculations behind the £1.6 billion figure do not take into account a drop-off in demand for private schools if VAT is added to fees or the extra taxpayer money needed to teach pupils who would be moved to state schools.
The most optimistic scenario is that 5 per cent of pupils would leave private schools and the addition of VAT to fees would only raise about £1 billion a year, it said.
The more pessimistic projection that 25 per cent of pupils would leave private schools means that adding VAT to fees would raise very little new revenue, especially when additional administration costs for HM Revenue & Customs are taken into account.
A local, private, all girls school announced this week it is closing in June for good. The decisive factor was the removal of the charity exemption for rates. So rather than raising more money the policy in this case has cost well over 100 jobs and will throw quite a number of kids onto the local authorities. It will not be the only one.
The inability of politicians, in this case the Scottish government, to recognise that actions have consequences and people and businesses react to being taxed, is truly remarkable.
They don't care, as it's not about money or helping people. It's about ideology.
Yes, but they also like to claim they can fund other things they want to do by the policy in exactly the same way as Labour are claiming with VAT on school fees.
They’ll be funding a lot more school places for a start. Although where they get the money from, is a different question!
Under any reasonable assumption on switching, the policy will pay for more state school places with money left over to raise per pupil funding. A policy that raises school funding while removing an unfair tax distortion that funnels money to the well off, what's not to like about that?
I really don't think it will 'under any reasonable assumption'. BOAFP: Labour need to ensure no more than one in four children move from private to state sector just to break even. It isn't obvious that this will be the case.
People who have studied this in detail have found that spending on private education is fairly price-inelastic, as is evident in the fact that fees have gone up significantly in recent years while the proportion of children in the private sector hasn't changed much.
So you can increase the cost of a thing - to which there is a free alternative - by 20% without the demand for that thing going down? That seems a bold assumption. You would have thought if that were the case then the producers of that thing would have already increased the cost of the thing to take advantage of that.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
You get someone to tow you.
It's a pain.
But I'm 48 years old and have never run out of fuel. It's not that common a scenario.
Towing costs a fair amount of money as I know from when I had to get towed off a motorway when my last car broke down.
Running out of fuel is more common than you think especially in cold weather where you are stuck in a jam and need the engine running for heat. Something I suspect just as common in ev's as ice. Most I know have run out of fuel at least once in their life due to this
I’ve never come close to running out of fuel and I’m in my mid 40s. You have to be pretty absent minded to allow that to happen.
The light comes on with about 70 miles left in the tank these days.
Don’t really understand why he half hour wait is such a big deal. Most people would take a break of that order anyway on a long drive. And it’s not as if looking for a petrol station, waiting for a pump and filling up is instant.
Good morning
Taking a break on a long journey is one thing, but queuing and waiting half and hour or more on more than one occasion is not attractive
I drive the 450 miles to my family in Lossiemouth without filling up, and on that journey have maybe three or four stops.
Additionally I can drive a further 150 miles without replenishing the tank and get over 55 mpg
My BMW 520D is in a class of its own on such a long journey and indeed complies with ULEZ and at a £30 annual road tax
Why on earth would I consider a ev, and that is without considering paying up to £30,000 more to change
I will continue to look 'all smug' as I have no intention of buying a ev
EVs don't work for everyone. But on your trips to Lossie where you make 3 or 4 stops? An EV would charge whilst you did so. Depends on which generation of 5-series you have, but its hardly in a class of its own - Audi and Mercedes as starters for 10 offer similar vehicles with similar interiors.
Then we have the drivetrain point. Your car either has a manual box or a ZF 8-speed auto. Manual boxes are something out of the ark (though I know they can be pleasing to play with), the ZF box is pretty much industry leading. But neither are anything compared to electric transmission. Once you've had an electric motor instead of a gearbox, any cog shifting feels as backwards as it is.
So lets take a real world example - traffic. I have two recent example on my trip through England last week. Stuck in a big queue on the edge of cities. In a manual I would be endlessly having to blend out the clutch. In an automatic there is less work, but with either on your 4 pot diesel you're belching filth into the environment where people live and work.
Whereas I sat there. Literally. The car driving itself. Steering, acceleration, braking. No input from me. Whilst not spewing filth out into people's lungs. Its *easier* to drive an EV.
None of which really addreses Big G's point (and mine which I made the other day). It takes me 8 hours to drive to Aberdeen on a lot less than a single tank of diesel. How long would it take me to do that drive in an EV? HOw long would I currently have to be sat wasting time at a servoce station whilst thecr is chartged? Even if I can actually get to a charger.
For anyone regularly travelling long distances with time constraints EVs are impractical at present. I don't want them to be but they are. And of course my last ICE vehicle cost me £500 second hand. Not seeing any viable comparisons in the EV market any time soon.
It is unreasonable to expect to be able to transition to a net zero economy while retaining every single aspect of our current unsustainable way of living. Some things may be lost, such as the ability to be anywhere in the country within a short amount of time. Businesses and individuals will adapt to cope with this.
Where of course ev's really fail is a scenario I think most have done once
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
It’s your own naivety for letting the car run so low on fuel in that scenario. I was told always to leave a minimum of 50 miles range in the tank, then you’d never be in a tight spot. Proved to be an excellent rule of thumb.
Comments
But there are still a significant chunk of fairly local kids from Perth and its environs who will not want the commute to Dundee or Strathallan and end up at local schools which may struggle to cope. Also, whilst most of the teachers will be fine, many of the support staff might struggle to find equivalent local work.
As to why it should stay in business: that really comes back to its charitable status. No one was drawing dividends or profits from the school. All monies were ploughed back in again. It was providing a useful service and saving the taxpayer some money as well as providing employment.
Then we have the drivetrain point. Your car either has a manual box or a ZF 8-speed auto. Manual boxes are something out of the ark (though I know they can be pleasing to play with), the ZF box is pretty much industry leading. But neither are anything compared to electric transmission. Once you've had an electric motor instead of a gearbox, any cog shifting feels as backwards as it is.
So lets take a real world example - traffic. I have two recent example on my trip through England last week. Stuck in a big queue on the edge of cities. In a manual I would be endlessly having to blend out the clutch. In an automatic there is less work, but with either on your 4 pot diesel you're belching filth into the environment where people live and work.
Whereas I sat there. Literally. The car driving itself. Steering, acceleration, braking. No input from me. Whilst not spewing filth out into people's lungs. Its *easier* to drive an EV.
Jamie Driscoll is not alone.
Up and down the country, socialists and trade unionists are being blocked from standing for Parliament by the Labour machine.'
https://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/1666148405347745793?s=20
The conspiracy theories on 15 minute cities are nonsense but there is a move away from cars and car ownership. A Green councillor made the point in an interview on our local politics show in the lakes that electric cars are all well and fine but they still need an infrastructure and this will hurt "the planet" due to the work involved in putting it in and maintaining it.
Fewer and fewer people will own cars.
So we need to look at what future transport is going to be and I suspect it will be electric scooters, electric bikes and the like and the world will become a much bigger place.
We managed to coalesce petrol pump design around something universal - you can drive a car across the globe and a fuel nossel will fit your tank. That isn't the same with EVs - even Tesla isn't universal. I couldn't order a Rivian or F150 and import it here and have it work on our chargers - would need a Type 1 to Type 2 adaptor, and for AC charging you're stuck down on 3.6kW.
Driving along you realise you have overestimated your fuel/charge due to conditions. You start muttering prayers as you head to the nearest filling station but run out short.
Now in an ice car its a total inconvenience and you swear as you trudge/hitchhike to the nearest bp then do the reverse journey with a flagon of petrol.
In an ev you do? Difficult to go fetch a bucket of electricity
https://feweek.co.uk/no-plans-to-exempt-colleges-from-vat-says-treasury-secretary/
It's a pain.
But I'm 48 years old and have never run out of fuel. It's not that common a scenario.
Interestingly a knockon effect might be ice and diesel cars are kept on the road longer than currently and their resale value rises
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_North_of_Tyne_mayoral_election
https://labourlist.org/2023/06/metro-mayor-jamie-driscoll-north-tyne-north-east-left-nec-ban/
https://news.sky.com/story/left-wing-labour-mayor-not-ruling-out-legal-action-over-blocked-candidacy-12896975
If you want a quickcharging station in the UK you have to be build one next to a electricity substation.
There is so much work that needs to be done and it is not happening. So far this year we have fitted 4 EV charging points on public buildings. We should be fitting 4000 a year if ICE are going to be banned by 2030.
Morning all - o/t but a nice piece of archaeology in a Berkshire garden. Must be great to have one's personal peat deposit ...
Which gives you the ability to time shift electricity.
The generating companies and the charging providers are already considering deals which suit both parties - cheaper electricity from off peak generating capacity.
This then leads to consideration of oversizing the charging site batteries to store power and sell it back to the grid. Which gives us distributed grid stabilisation/storage….
Even if every new vehicle in the UK sold today was a BEV (which won't happen), it would still take almost a decade before a majority of vehicles on the roads were BEVs. Given that PHEV are still allowed, and it's from 2030, we have even more time.
Running out of fuel is more common than you think especially in cold weather where you are stuck in a jam and need the engine running for heat. Something I suspect just as common in ev's as ice. Most I know have run out of fuel at least once in their life due to this
All that will happen with this is that the private schools will become the exclusivity of rich foreigners as well as very wealthy individuals here. Ironically, that may give more momentum to the call for Grammar schools in the most impacted areas.
As a political aside, I think the Tories should be hammering the LDs on this in the Blue Wall seats and asking whether they would back Labour.
My BMW is automatic and conforms with ULEZ so not belching particles into the air
I would suggest that at my age there is simply no case for changing what is an excellent reliable and comfortable long distance driving experience at a cost of £30,000 plus and having to tailor my travel around charging points
Many will enjoy evs but they are not for me
Mr. Farooq, I partly agree on noise, but do wonder how the blind are going to deal with cars being practically silent.
Look at what Mike said. 30 minutes or more at a charging station. We have been told for ages that the technology is getting "better" but the simple fact is that petrol cars are still most effective.
Its fun, but it feels ancient. No big screen media system, no Bluetooth, manual gearbox, manual handbrake lever, no cruise control. Great retro fun, but as a modern proposition? OK so most cars now have a media screen and lane assist systems (if they want 5* Euro NCAP). But the rest? Same set-up - mechanical engine, manual gearbox, things that need adjusting and replacing.
Now, is that true of everyone? No.
But for a substantial minority of people, EVs are the better option today. And every day the size of that minority increases.
But against that, maintenance costs are dramatically lower.
Yes. Clearly education is a Good Thing, though opinions are at best divided on whether separate fee-paying education is a good thing. But lots of non-profit organisations that do Good Things pay VAT, so it's an anomaly. The main reason that abolition is controversial is the usual one with any change in the tax system - that schools have got used to it, so there will as DavidL's example shows be marginal cases that can no longer afford to operate at all, and all private schools will feel the pinch to some extent.
I don't think that's a reason not to end the anomaly, but I'd suggest bringing it in with a few years' warning, so that schools on the margin have time to look for other options than closure (merger, sponsorship, economies, fee increases?).
On emissions, low emission is not no emission. Stand next to a busy road inside the ULEZ and you can literally taste the particulates coming out of all of those ULEZ-compliant exhausts. The reason why so many cities are now ramping up their restrictions on fossil vehicles is because air quality is still dangerously low.
At the end of the day, there is an implicit class / socio-economic issue here. If you are fairly well-off you will be fine (you will have a drive, a decent car, can afford the electricity etc). If you are poor and rely on your car for essentials, you are screwed.
But the number of people who will benefit from going EV is growing all the time. You can't buck the market.
Surely not.
https://twitter.com/ArielJestJeden/status/1666342310706126848
I did a comparison of one 500+ trip in the Tesla vs the same trip in my previous Outlander PHEV (petrol). The Tesla was *quicker* on the longer trip - the balancing point between speed and efficiency is higher in the Tesla (70mph vs 65mpg), with my need to take a break the same in both cars. Then add on a refuelling stop in the Outlander that isn't needed with the Tesla, and it was 20 minutes faster in the Tesla. As well as £50 cheaper.
Most EVs are over-engineered. To get more range manufacturers add bigger batteries, which add weight and massively increase cost.
The starting point for the Spring is the smallest viable battery from which the designers work out an.acceptable tradeoff of range, performance and internal space. Compared with ICE the smaller motor and greater torque of an electric car allow a smaller vehicle and less overall power for a similar experience.
The small battery means the Spring weighs less and costs about £18 000, just a few thousand more than the equivalent ICE before subsidies. It can be charged overnight on a standard 13A plug.
https://insideevs.com/features/498558/dacia-spring-less-weight-efficiency/
The car manufacturers are not showing much inclination to develop mass market EV models. Instead, what they have done - and some such as BMW and Mercedes have been explicit about this - is to raise prices structurally. Wealthier people can afford this, poorer people can't.
I go back to the point that there is an implicit class / socio-economic point thing here. The unstated aim of many who are pushing the EV agenda is to force people - mainly the poorer types - onto public transport by pricing them out of the market when it comes to buying and maintaining a car. There is a reason why so many wealthy middle-class individuals are perfectly happy with pushing an EV agenda because they can afford the price as well as knowing others cannot. You see the same dynamic with such types calling for a reduction in air flights - they are not thinking about their trips to Tuscany or Provence, they are thinking those awful plebs who go on package holidays to cheap destinations.
https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1666087508323749889
Liberace would have owned a fleet of Teslas.
The solution to Pagan2's problem is to drive a proper (ICE) car and keep a can of fuel in the boot for emergencies, but mostly to calculate reliably and be able to depend on yourself.
For anyone regularly travelling long distances with time constraints EVs are impractical at present. I don't want them to be but they are. And of course my last ICE vehicle cost me £500 second hand. Not seeing any viable comparisons in the EV market any time soon.
If I own it for the next 15 years it has to be an EV. I want something that will allow me to drive from where I live to the Lake District (say) without charging. Yes, I know I will take 2 breaks in that journey, but I prefer just to drive off the A1 at Stanford or Grantham and somewhere in Yorkshire and have a walk around somewhere pleasant. I don't stop at Motorway Service Stations unless forced to. So I won't be charging my car en route. When I checked a few months ago only the top of the range Tesla and BMW (just) had a long enough range.
Secondly, I don't want a big car. I want something between a VW Golf and a Ford Focus in size. Currently there are almost no EV models in this category; they are either all at the large SUV or Luxury end of the range or at the toy (Mini) end with almost nothing in between. Again a few months ago only Skoda and Renault had an EV in that class. Neither are remotely close to 300 miles on range.
Unlike most people in my road, I also have off street parking but the passageway between the houses is narrow and my Mondeo is a bit wide for comfort. So ideally it needs to be narrower, but most EVs including the Tesla and BMW mentioned above are wider.
Given that Dad's Taxi Service is increasingly not required, and it's probably cost-effective to hire a car for weekends away when I want one, I've come to the conclusion that I'm going to sit it out carless for the next couple of years while I wait for the market to catch up. I may find by then that I don't need a car at all. I wonder how may others will be doing the same?
It's a dumb policy that will cost the exchequer money, not add to it, will shrink the overall size of the education sector and reduce education outcomes overall - which is why no government of any stripe has done it before.
But, that's not what it's really about: SKS is looking to buy the support of his left-flank, and this is the price, and, politically, it works.
I had a very disillusioned Remainer ex-Tory voter at work yesterday spit teeth about how stupid their North Sea oil & gas policy was.
1) A technological system always needs another technological system to enable it to work. With EVs, that's not just charging points - you need a functioning mobile phone system, and a functioning on-line banking system. If either of those is down, you are stuck in a Morrison's car park somewhere off the M25, in the rain, at midnight.
2) Some charging points could not recognise my phone's existence, even though I was standing right next to the wretched thing.
3) I don't want a myriad of meaningful lifetime relationships with a load of different suppliers. I want a cheap and sordid commercial transaction when I re-fuel - I do not want to download yet another app, with another password, e-mail, gang sign, haiku, 17 digit prime number etc etc etc. Not nearly enough charging points allow credit card only transactions.
4) I have poor eyesight. I cannot see the screen on my mobile phone well enough in bright daylight to navigate the information required by the websites (although, to be fair, I do have a very small phone.)
5) I want to know how much I have paid for my fuel. One of the simple joys of motoring is complaining about the price paid for petrol, and having one's spouse point out how much cheaper it would have been if one had re-fuelled when she first suggested it. With EVs, I don't know how much I have paid until I get my credit card bill.
On the positive side, one does meet a better class of motorist with EVs - many hours stood chatting to other motorists whilst queueing for the pump, getting help with downloading the apps, filling in the details required etc.
Also, a big shout-out to the young lady at Morrison's car park somewhere off the M25 who kindly used her phone and her credit card to re-fuel my car for me! I insisted that she sent me her bank details so that I could repay her a few days later, but it really shouldn't have come to that.