My magic fag packet says that if the government offered people the choice of an education voucher worth £4,000 a year instead of a 'free' State school place, it would be fiscally neutral if twenty per cent of pupils took them up (i.e. the seven per cent who already go private plus another thirteen per cent currently in State schools).
If more than twenty per cent took vouchers, there would be an overall saving to the taxpayer (assuming that the massive overheads in State education that bring up the average cost of a State school place to about £8,000 could be scaled down pro rata), so that would enable taxes to be cut (at its simplest by increasing the personal allowance so that everybody benefits equally, enabling more parents to afford take up the vouchers, thus producing more tax savings etc. until some sort of optimum trade-off is reached, i.e. the maximum number of children going private at the lowest cost to the taxpayer).
I know from talking to other parents at the private schools where my children go, that most are pretty much in favour of vouchers (except for the super-snobs); that those parents who aren't happy with their child's State school (most of them) are certainly interested; and that surveys show that more than half of parents would send their children private if they could afford it, but there's no point proposing policies in a vacuum, so this week's Fun Online Poll asks whether you would take the vouchers (or, assuming your children are now grown up, whether you would have taken them).
NB, as a guide, average school fees are about £7,800 a year at primary schools and £9,000 a year at secondary schools (see here). But there are huge variations between the poshest and the most basic; as well as regional variations, so the better-value ones outside London/the South East might be only £5,000 to £6,000 a year. Minus off a £4,000 voucher and millions of parents would be able to afford to send their children to an independent school.
Christmas Day: readings for Year C
10 hours ago
7 comments:
I can easily see that 20%+ of parents would privately educate if given a £4K voucher, but I can't see that the private sector could physically expand from 7% of pupils to 20% very fast. So if 20% is your break even point you would be spending more for a number of years until the extra private places were available. That would be vulnerable politically - 'Why should we pay £Xm to parents of kids at private schools when it could go to my local comp' etc etc.
The other option would be to expand the private market quickly by letting some state schools go private from day 1 - one or two per LEA perhaps, with fees fixed for the first few years.
"..letting some state schools go private..": that's the way to do it.
Sobers, it appears from Sweden that it doesn't take that long for things to adjust (agreed, there might be short term increase in cost to the taxpayer), but"letting some state schools go private from day 1 - one or two per LEA perhaps, with fees fixed for the first few years." is another excellent idea, I shall add it to the manifesto.
There's another bunch of winners with this policy, and that is the teachers - like Mrs Lola.
The monopoly power of the state system has ensured that teachers in both sectors are wildly underpaid and exploited. Mind you the losers would hopefully be the teachers that should be sacked, of which there are a few, but who are sheltered by the endemic producer capture in the state system.
Hey, I'm a policy advisor now!
I still think parental Loans are vastly better than other peoples extorted money.
AC1, if parents want to borrow to pay the difference between vouchers and full cost (i.e. by underpaying on their mortgage for the time being) then good luck to them, there's no need for a policy on that.
Post a Comment