EARLIER this month, MPs voted against an inquiry into removing the charitable tax status of fee-paying schools.

This comes in spite of Labour’s estimate that removal of just one private school tax loophole  – their exemption of VAT – would generate an additional £1.6 billion per year for government spending. 

Other tax breaks enjoyed by private schools include paying no corporation tax on their profits, no capital gains tax when they sell assets, and no inheritance tax on any bequests. In fact, they even receive Gift Aid on many donations, courtesy of taxpayers going through a recession. Labour rightly argues that, upon ending these exemptions, that new pot of billions could be used to strengthen the state education system, with a notable suggestion of recruiting more teachers amid current staff shortages. 

The rejection of this proposal was unfortunate but unsurprising. The House of Commons remains one of the most privately educated workplaces in Britain, with 44 per cent of MPs receiving a private education and an even higher 65 per cent of Cabinet ministers. Although educational choices made by their parents shouldn’t be held against MPs, what they should be held to account for is the incredibly favourable treatment their former schools, as well as the entire private education sector, receive from the government. 

Among the alma maters of the Cabinet, there are the likes of Charterhouse, Eastbourne, and Glendalmond – all of which charge up to £40,000+ for the privilege of an education from them. For the children of parents willing to fork out such eye-watering figures, an elite 7 per cent of pupils are promised the likes of Oxbridge expertise, more resources, and – let’s face it – less interaction with the poor and working class.  

So why were all these schools and more allowed to benefit from the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan during the pandemic? Surely the whole point of independent schools is that they are independent from the state, including when times get tough? The “why” of course lies in the educational bias of those overseeing this scheme. Namely Rishi Sunak, whose prestigious Winchester College education came under scrutiny when he became PM, and Alok Sharma, whose own former school generously received £1.5 million. It is difficult not to read this as a case of “looking out for your own”. 

However, it in fact appears times weren’t that tough after all. Of the 171 independent schools to receive £157 million in taxpayer money, many had healthy financial balances and their books in check. The likes of Gordonstoun even saw an increase in assets during the pandemic, with millions already sitting in the bank. Yet an all-too-willing government dug into its pockets and forked out financial relief the state sector could only dream of. While state schools saw larger attainment gaps as a result of the pandemic, private schools saw larger bank balances courtesy of their indebted alumni.  

It seems independent schools are only independent until it suits them to be state maintained, receiving plush financial support that is nowhere in sight for struggling state schools at risk of bankruptcy. It is currently estimated that nine in 10 state schools will run out of money within the next academic year, and that half will end up in a deficit. Where are the government’s financial relief packages now? Where is the concern for students soon to be left without heating, teachers, even schools? 

Ending tax breaks for private schools could have been a first step towards a more logical and just education system. There is nothing outlandish about wanting all schools to be well funded, and trying to make that happen through ending a charitable status which is nothing more than empty words.

How many other charities charge £40,000 per year for their services? The truth is that there is nothing charitable about educational elitism. MPs have chosen to reject a proposal which should just be common sense and, in turn, issued a damning indication of which education sector they best protect. 

At least the British public are clued into the issue: 55 per cent are in support of private schools losing their charitable status, while a further 17 per cent reason that they should only be allowed to remain charities if they do more to help state schools.

Admittedly, a handful of elite private schools lend their resources and funds in aid of less fortunate schools, but this just exemplifies the excess these schools have to begin with. I would also argue that their motivation for these schemes lies less in good-willed charity and more in hope of good publicity, maintaining their public image in defence of those sweet financial privileges. 

In short, the privilege of private schools relies on the disadvantaging of state schools, a relationship which is unsustainable should the government wish to properly address issues like social mobility and attainment gaps. As such, the only way for private education to truly help its state counterpart is to integrate, merging all private schools into the state sector so that their resources and expertise can be utilised as equitably as possible.  

Such is the ethos of grassroots campaign Integrate Private Schools!, formerly known as Labour Against Private Schools and tongue-in-cheek as “Abolish Eton”. Our stance is clearer than ever, with supporters including Ed Miliband, Ash Sarkar, and a number of the more reasonable MPs.

While removal of charitable status would be a great start, it should also be the bare minimum, with the removal of independent status altogether as the ultimate goal. After all, students deserve better than an education system underpinned by wealth inequality and class segregation.  

Lucia Quadrini is an activist for Integrate Private Schools.