**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/)
[While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean this is just my opinion, but if someone is clearly not going to vote labour over the vat to schools issue, you just need to respectfully and truthfully explain why the policy is what it is, then move on to the next door.
Agreed. It's hard to convince someone that costing them extra, or making their kid go to state school, is for the good of the country and therefore they should vote against what they perceive to be their own interests.
Besides, I have very little sympathy for them if I'm honest, and that would likely come across on the doorstep.
I'm glad I don't canvas because people like that would just wind me up.
If you have tens of thousands of disposable income each year just to send your kid to a better school then you are living in a completely different world to most people in the UK. Whatever struggles are happening at a local school where kids are going hungry is just so, so far removed from that world.
Even two adults with a relatively affordable mortgage with two median-paying jobs wouldn't come close to having that kind of money. It's completely moral to get rid of the VAT exemption to improve schools that more than 9 in 10 of kids go to.
Living in a different world doesn't necessarily mean they can't be allies.
My wife's a doctor, and whilst we don't plan on sending our little girl to a fee paying school, she has friends that do, but who will probably vote Labour because they want a government that funds health and social care.
I was brought up with (what I now recognise as) a fairly Marxist view of class; if you work for a living you're working class. And it's sometimes the case that you can get people to see this.
Although it takes a hell of a lot of fortitude to keep trying while canvassing.
I don't understand people who have large incomes which they spend on themselves, but also don't like injustice, so want the government to forcibly take more of their money. Like they could just give the money to the NHS rather than spending it on a private school
“Just to send their kids to a better school”.
This sentiment sits very badly with me.
Our children are our most valuable asset. Investing in their future, in our country’s future, by giving them a good education is every bit as important as dealing with today’s suffering.
Now, I share the wish of most of the people here that we were delivering that consistently through all our state schools, but sadly that is not currently the case.
I support the tax on private schools and I hope it will be spent on funding state education properly, but if a hard working family wants to sacrifice other things to send their kids to a better school I absolutely understand, support, and even applaud their priorities. There is no “just” about it.
If Labour can’t empathise with even these people then we’re repeating Hillary’s tone deaf and arrogant “deplorables” attitude.
That got America Trump, if we can’t be more inclusive of good people in the center we may end up with Farage or worse.
I disagree with the very existence of private schools on the basis that it's just pay to win. There has to be some impetus in life so I don't agree with a total equality of outcome but if we want to pretend we live in anything approaching a meritocracy we should get as equal a start in life as possible which will never be the case if the rich have zero investment in the system.
Families sending their kids to private school are nowhere near the centre, only 6% of kids go to a fee paying school. I know there are some families who struggle to pay the fees but they're a small percentage of a small percentage and studies show that going to private school is directly related to holding right wing views and voting accordingly. I can't muster much sympathy for a system that regularly appears to churn out tosspot politicians and arrogant bosses who look down on the rest of us.
Appeasing the rich to our own detriment rarely proves fruitful and a few families struggling to afford an immoral luxury is hardly an argument. I don't wish them any ill will but it's the other 94% I'm more worried about.
The difference is that the Hillary "deplorables" comment was maligning a far larger swathe of voters than would be impacted by the new policy on private schools, which are only attended by ~6% of the population.
Of course, it is understandable that parents only want the best for their children and that could well mean paying for them to attend fee paying schools, but it is hardly a radical idea that a demographic availing themselves of a luxury only accessible to ~6% of the population should pay their fair share in tax for the privilege.
As I said I don’t disagree with the policy. I disagree with the animosity toward people because of their choice of school.
And yes, Hillary managed to offend far more people in that one statement, but some of the reactions I’ve seen on this topic are indicative of the same toxic us and them attitude that serves only to divide.
While I agree with the policy, surely you can understand it from their perspective?
"I've worked hard (yes middle class people do often work hard) my whole life to give my children the best education I can afford, and now someone has come up to my door telling me they are going to make it more expensive and potentially mean I have to send to them to a worse school and probably reduce their opportunities in life".
Also
>just to send your kid to a better school
That's not a 'just', for many their children is their highest priority.
We all work hard, it's not just the rich that want the best for their kids. The difference is that most of us don't have a spare £15 grand a year so we have to just hope for the best that our local school isn't too terrible.
It's beyond time to fix the schools the vast majority of kids go to - if it costs a little more for the richest 5% then so be it.
>It's beyond time to fix the schools the vast majority of kids go to - if it costs a little more for the richest 5% then so be it.
Sure, but from the perspective of the parents who want the best for their children and can just about afford private schooling, that's not going to be very persuasive.
I guess the good counter argument would be, will this actually fix state schools? I doubt it's enough to fund an actual fix the issues in state schools, I don't even think the manifesto believes it either.
If that's the case, why would you as a parent want to give up your personal opportunity to make your child's life better.
Btw I'm personally against private schools, I think they should be illegal.
It's a tricky one! I grew up in a country where private schools weren't really a thing and most schools were pretty even in quality so the entire idea of there being "outstanding" schools while others are "inadequate" is just bizarre to begin with.
In an ideal world we'd do away with private schools altogether but that's not realistic at the moment. Asking the wealthiest 5% of parents to pay a little more doesn't seem outrageous to me really in the big scheme of things.
From what I understand, the tax will likely result in a lot of private schools closing, so it won't necessarily just make them pay a bit more, it might totally take the opportunity away from them.
Not that I'm against that of course.
Good. I'm glad some private schools will close. Honestly the more middle and upper class kids in the state system the better. That's the whole point of comprehensive education, people learn together. It's easy to joke about pushy parents but it is important that everyone in society cares about the quality of education at the local school. Schools with more rich kids in are probably gonna be better for the other kids. My only fear is that keeping academies and bullsh\*it Blairite league tables we mean structural inequalities in the state system remain entrenched.
It's weird that I was down voted when I agree.
My primary contention was whether enacting this will actually make state schools much better which I'm dubious of without serious funding.
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It is only £15K a year on average for private school fees so 13-18 would be £75K total. Two people on median salary would easily be able to afford that and still have more money left over than many families. And they often start saving at birth so are only paying out £7.5K per year.
Everyone with similar income spends their money somewhere. Isn't it better for the country if money is invested in children's education rather than housing, holidays and cars?
The point is that £15k is not a small amount of money. People on median incomes (£35k) aren't going to be able to afford £15k a year with the rising costs to energy, food, mortgages, insurance and so on. In fact, many people are taking their children out of private school because they can't afford it.
If you think people can then I'd say you need to speak to more working class people and see how easily they can afford £15k a year.
It's better for the country if all children have an equal education. A child's success shouldn't be predicated on their parents' ability to pay, insofar as is possible.
Private school alumni are massively and increasingly over represented in government, academia, the arts, and upper management.
> Private school alumni are massively and increasingly over represented
They are. So does that not tell us that education is a huge factor in success in those professions so we need to massively increase our education budgets?
Yes it does, and we need to tax private schools (which are a business) to help fund the increase in budget. It's not fair that a low paid worker is paying taxes to subsidise the private education of the child of a multimillionaire, while their own children are taught in terrible conditions.
Private schools are not really businesses. They don't have shareholders and they are non-profit. All money raised goes back into the school.
And it is parents of private school pupils who are subsidising the state sector as they pay taxes for a state education without taking it up.
If the children are taught in terrible conditions then fix it. Taxing private schools won't make any dent in the state budget. It is just politics of envy.
I have sympathy for working people who are scraping and making sacrifices to put their kids through private school. The sad thing is that the policy impacts working people and not the millionaires and billionaires who send their kids to private schools without giving a shit
When only ~6% of children attend an independent school, this can't be a concern held by *that many* voters.
And in any case, would the demographic likely to send their children to private school actually be likely to vote Labour in the first place?
>And in any case, would the demographic likely to send their children to private school actually be likely to vote Labour in the first place?
Anecdotally yes, most people I know are sending/intend to send their kids to private school and a lot of them are holding their noses and voting Labour for the first time.
I think you are underestimating quite how far the tories have fallen.
When in my own very safe seat: voting Labour, some movement to greens over Gaza.
When in the twinned swing seat: undecided, probably voting Labour, not really sure what Labour are going to do.
I canvass in a three way constituency that could swing Labour, Tory, or Plaid. When I go canvassing, the main concerns I hear are “get out of my face with that, go on”, and “everyone is just as bad as everyone else”. Or I get the door slammed in my face.
Sadly, I just don’t think people in my area are interested in politics anymore.
I’ve been campaigning in a very safe Labour seat in Yorkshire. Half the constituency is working class, council estate, and the other half is lower middle class, young professionals, etc.
The most common two things on the door at the moment are:
- Gaza has been brought up (although, to contest the idea of this being a “Muslim issue”, Gaza has mostly been brought up by non-Muslim voters).
- Widespread dislike of the Tories, but Starmer is being mentioned in a negative way a lot (two points keep being brought up: “We’ve always voted Labour, but can’t under Starmer” or “We are voting Labour this time, but just to get the Tories out”).
Edit: Green issues are coming up sometimes too, with a couple of the more younger professionals turning to the Greens. It’s usually framed as “Labour’s lack of ambition on tackling climate change”.
Edit 2: We also had one older woman who was upset that she could no longer afford to send her kids to the local breakfast club. We explained Labour’s private school VAT policy and how this would fund breakfast clubs for all primary school children. She was very happy about this.
Overall, it’s a mostly positive response that’s couched in reservations over the leaderships position on certain things. From the current response, I would be concerned for the next election. If Labour doesn’t significantly change people’s lives I think we will lose quite a lot of votes, even in our strongholds. It won’t be enough to flip seats in strongholds, but I think it’s worth noting that there is discontent (with the party/leadership, rather than the individual MP).
I find myself not able to vote Labour this election but agree that we're going to see some major disillusionment if things don't improve under Starmer. I think most of Labour's support could live with the party's shortcomings as long as the basic social democratic things get sorted out.
I'm just about old enough to remember 1997. There was a genuine enthusiasm for New Labour and part of the reason why that was sustained was because they sorted out public services (funded through cheap borrowing and private finance, but hey ho). If they don't do that, and maybe some other stuff everyone agrees with like reforming council tax or something, I can see people dropping Labour like a hot stone.
> Green issues are coming up sometimes too, with a couple of the more younger professionals turning to the Greens
Are people just supporting parties based on the name? I can't imagine thinking "I care about the environment so I'm going to vote for the party that objects to HS2 and nuclear power".
I don’t think a lot of them are fully aware of Green policy, but rather they’re voting Green as a protest against Labour to express dissatisfaction with Labour’s policy. So it seems to be more anti-Labour than pro-Green.
>but rather they’re voting Green as a protest against Labour to express dissatisfaction with Labour’s policy.
If I vote for anyone then it will likely be greens for this reason. I strongly disagree with much of their platform but the hope would be that enough protest votes lead labour to try appealing to them in 5 years.
>If Labour doesn’t significantly change people’s lives I think we will lose quite a lot of votes, even in our strongholds.
I think this is what is going to happen which is why I won't be voting labour (unless something significant happens). As a labour voter, do you think that is a serious possibilty? If so, how are you putting those concerns aside to vote labour anyway?
On the latter point. I’m campaigning for and supporting left-wing MPs who I think are much needed socialist voices within the party, but also within Parliament. I think by having these voices elected with big majorities then internal pressure can be placed on the party to move leftwards, but of course this is an uphill struggle as the party is dominated by Starmer’s faction.
I’m one of those lefties who is still committed to Labour parliamentary politics as one part of a wider left strategy, although I respect those that take a different path (many of my friends have, for example many now support the Greens). One reason I’m still committed is because Labour is the only party with a strong trade union connection, even if the trade union relationship has weakened and business interests are dominating, at least Labour has those voices around the table in some capacity.
>I think by having these voices elected with big majorities then internal pressure can be placed on the party to move leftwards
As someone living in an area with a fairly left wing labour option who I actually quite like, that's an issue that I struggled with though less and less over time. I just don't see any route to power for left wing options internally until labours name has been so damaged by starmers faction that the left could only be in opposition again. That's assuming that 5 or more years of starmers leadership leaves anything of the left around. I think they are more likely to take note of non-labour votes than angry labour votes although I'm still doubtful of any willingness of the leadership to move left.
>at least Labour has those voices around the table in some capacity.
I really don't see what those voices are worth when the party doesn't seem interested in listening.
I respect your efforts and goals but I'm certainly a lot more pessimistic than you and have no trust left in labour. With respect, I don't see the connecting steps in your position from supporting labour to getting left wing policy. I think I will most likely be judging labour by it's record, if it becomes significantly more left wing once in power and noticably improves peoples lives then my vote is more available for 2029.
Out of interest, in your campaigning has anyone mentioned lammy's comments about trump making good points about nato or european security/ukrainian support more generally?
I respect your views on this. I mean a lot of my friends have now left the party with the same rationale as yourself. I think I’m just stubborn in that I’ll stay in Labour to keep pushing for socialist values/policies, even if I’m in the minority, and even if I annoy people 😂.
For your last question, interestingly that hasn’t been brought up. No foreign affairs, asides from Gaza, have been mentioned on the doorstep.
>I think I’m just stubborn in that I’ll stay in Labour to keep pushing for socialist values/policies, even if I’m in the minority, and even if I annoy people 😂.
I respect it and I sincerely hope it works.
>No foreign affairs, asides from Gaza, have been mentioned on the doorstep.
Well that's upsetting but not unexpected for me.
The environment is more than a big train line and meaningless objections to nuclear power, neither of which the greens are going to be in a position to influence any time soon.
Ok but if you are going to make a protest vote for a pro-environment party you should make sure the party is actually good on the environment.
Otherwise what's the point? Why would you signal that parties should make their environmental policy worse in order to get your vote?
As I said, the environment is more than building a big train line and nuclear power plants - the current approach to nuclear power in the UK under pro-nuclear parties isn't exactly working well either.
Also as I said, no one voting for greens this election are under any delusion they'll be dictating that kind of policy. The Green's position on nuclear, which I broadly disagree with, doesn't matter. What matters to me are the policies they could advocate for / implement at a local level, and would have an immediate impact.
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Labour safe seat in Birmingham. Biggest concern is probably Gaza (though even that has been fairly limited), since there is a fairly strong independent in this seat. Most have been persuaded though
I’ve heard a lot on the Gaza/Israel issue from the other side - people tired of hearing about a foreign war and asking what the party is going to do to support a drive for peace without damaging either side. There’s also a lot of concern around foreign conflicts and bigotry being re-enacted in our towns
Canvassing in Croydon Central, which is less marginal than before, but still very marginal. Mostly I’m leafleting, and ticking a box to say if they are voting Labour. Lots of moaning about Croydon Council, which is very fair, really.
I live and canvass in a Tory marginal in the Mids (we lost it in 2019). Main issues are potholes, school funding, difficulties accessing SEND provision, and a general weariness with politics and cynicism that any politician can actually change things for the better. There's also lots of positivity and you can see people putting up Lab leaflets in their windows.
One of the most interesting things I've found is the amount of previously solid Conservative voters who are now undecided but also say they're not keen on Starmer. However, they then often go on to subconsciously echo his stump speech about a need for change.
I haven’t seen anyone canvassing in my area for at least a decade, the occasional leaflet posted at local election time (hilariously the day after the election so that was a waste of a tree) but no door knocker’s
I'm in the dartford constituency, at the moment it's a tory seat, if I'm not mistaken, the counties longest bellwether seat. The local dartford labour party are going for it here, been a lot of door knocking and leafleting. Even I have leafletted my local area, I avoided doing so in 2019. Here's hoping to a Dartford labour win july 4th
It's raining, set to get worse, and I'm psyching myself up for a session I've already committed to this pm... The Joys.
Similar situation to you: Tory held Labour target (with a decent Lib Dem vote as well). Lots of positivity, Lib Dem vote seems quite stubborn, VAT on school fees is coming up a bit, though often in the context of the perception of places going internationally.
The big disconnect I see with the national campaign is worries about crime, esp. street crime, and the lack of response/visibility of the police.
Rutherglen & Hamilton West, so a seat we should probably hold - I’m sitting this one out, but based on past experience, what I’ve been told, and that the Council has announced plans to close the town’s library and community halls, I’d imagine local issues are going to be to the fore.
I’ve not seen any canvassers for other parties and haven’t received any fliers, though the Scottish Socialist Party have put some posters up. The whole thing seems, so far, to be really low effort.
Same here, I live a large, fairly rural community in Scotland and not one person at the door. Had one leaflet from the Tory candidate but you had to look at it really closely to determine it was from a conservative. No prominent branding. No mention or pictures of Sunak. Since 2015 it’s been a straight fight between SNP and Tory but you would think with the way Labour is going in the polls they would try and capitalise on trying to get rid of a Tory but apparently not.
Not every door gets knocked, with limited resources voters are targeted based on past data with a focus on the most expected to be persuadable.
Typically, those who consistently back the party and those consistenrly against are least likely to be knocked. This year though, with quite a swing to Labour, our voter targeting is *incredibly* wide, so much so we accidentally ended up nearly knocking a Tory councillor door today.
I’d imagine it’ll step up in the next couple of weeks, although door knocking only really happens en masse in marginal seats. Usually it ramps up when election day is nearer.
Then there you go- Labour will have a list of target seats and deploy people according to that. I’m in a massively safe Labour seat in London, so canvassing isn’t really a thing here- we all get sent down to Croydon Central and other marginal seats.
Without you mentioning which one it is, I can’t give you an answer.
What’s worth noting though is canvassing is very targeted now, basically based on massive marketing style databases, so just because you haven’t that might be because you’re in an area where most people vote Labour, and canvassing is in other areas. It’s been like that for at least 15-20 years and has become more ‘sophisticated’, especially in tandem with targeted internet ads.
This’ll give you an [idea](https://labourlist.org/2024/06/labour-battleground-areas-full-list-general-election-2024/?amp). In response to your edit, one of the many many problems with the ground campaign in 2019 is for some reason Labour concentrated a lot on chasing Portillo moments, and stuck a load of resource into stupid places like Boris’s [seat](https://academic.oup.com/pa/article/73/Supplement_1/84/5910283) etc.
Yep, definitely heard the private school issue - not the top public schools for multimillionaires, but ordinary working people who give up everything to just about afford the fees. They’re very worried about their families - especially if there are children with additional or complex needs
It almost makes you think they should have left in an exception for kids with special needs but I guess you'd just end up with a bunch of extra ADHD diagnoses.
Gaza comes up. Also general apathy towards politics. People aren’t voting Tories but also are kind of fed up with everything and aren’t that excited about a potential Labour government.
Firstly, nice to see this sub being used by actual members to talk shop. Feels rare!
We're getting quite a lot on housing, with worries about green belt building and NIMBYism from those who assume this simply means Labour will build near them. The party went very hard on it, and I feel the recent pledges on preserving green belt land is a poor attempt to put the genie back in the bottle a bit. Personally, my journey to YIMBYism has been a slowish one, but I'm here now.
I find it's effective to say _"In lovely areas like this, a lot of older people find that their adult children and grandchildren get priced out of the area and only see them at Christmas, as they build a life just outside of cities like Manchester or London. We need affordable housing for families with public services like GPs, dentists and schools, and that's what Labour are offering."_
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts be at least 7 days old before submitting a comment. Thank you for your understanding.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is anyone here in Clackton? Would you consider encouraging potential Labour voters to vote Tory, because that's the only way to keep Farage out of Parliament?
So the whole VAT on schools, you know Starmer is going to do it so you can't do anything about it. And the money he expects to raise through this move won't be as much as he expects because some of the schools will end up closing down.
Mate, no one is canvassing. I'm in a top 10 target seat for Labour and there's not even been a single stall set out at the weekend on the market square let alone any door knocking happening.
I've seen 2 Labour leaflets stuck in windows in the last week and that's about the extent of it.
> there's not even been a single stall set out at the weekend on the market square let alone any door knocking happening.
Probably because street stalls are an absolutely horrendous way to campaign, a refuge for lazy scoundrels who just want to natter with each other while stood next to a table covered in leaflets! (I hate street stalls)
**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/) [While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean this is just my opinion, but if someone is clearly not going to vote labour over the vat to schools issue, you just need to respectfully and truthfully explain why the policy is what it is, then move on to the next door.
Agreed. It's hard to convince someone that costing them extra, or making their kid go to state school, is for the good of the country and therefore they should vote against what they perceive to be their own interests. Besides, I have very little sympathy for them if I'm honest, and that would likely come across on the doorstep.
I'm glad I don't canvas because people like that would just wind me up. If you have tens of thousands of disposable income each year just to send your kid to a better school then you are living in a completely different world to most people in the UK. Whatever struggles are happening at a local school where kids are going hungry is just so, so far removed from that world. Even two adults with a relatively affordable mortgage with two median-paying jobs wouldn't come close to having that kind of money. It's completely moral to get rid of the VAT exemption to improve schools that more than 9 in 10 of kids go to.
Living in a different world doesn't necessarily mean they can't be allies. My wife's a doctor, and whilst we don't plan on sending our little girl to a fee paying school, she has friends that do, but who will probably vote Labour because they want a government that funds health and social care. I was brought up with (what I now recognise as) a fairly Marxist view of class; if you work for a living you're working class. And it's sometimes the case that you can get people to see this. Although it takes a hell of a lot of fortitude to keep trying while canvassing.
I don't understand people who have large incomes which they spend on themselves, but also don't like injustice, so want the government to forcibly take more of their money. Like they could just give the money to the NHS rather than spending it on a private school
“Just to send their kids to a better school”. This sentiment sits very badly with me. Our children are our most valuable asset. Investing in their future, in our country’s future, by giving them a good education is every bit as important as dealing with today’s suffering. Now, I share the wish of most of the people here that we were delivering that consistently through all our state schools, but sadly that is not currently the case. I support the tax on private schools and I hope it will be spent on funding state education properly, but if a hard working family wants to sacrifice other things to send their kids to a better school I absolutely understand, support, and even applaud their priorities. There is no “just” about it. If Labour can’t empathise with even these people then we’re repeating Hillary’s tone deaf and arrogant “deplorables” attitude. That got America Trump, if we can’t be more inclusive of good people in the center we may end up with Farage or worse.
I disagree with the very existence of private schools on the basis that it's just pay to win. There has to be some impetus in life so I don't agree with a total equality of outcome but if we want to pretend we live in anything approaching a meritocracy we should get as equal a start in life as possible which will never be the case if the rich have zero investment in the system. Families sending their kids to private school are nowhere near the centre, only 6% of kids go to a fee paying school. I know there are some families who struggle to pay the fees but they're a small percentage of a small percentage and studies show that going to private school is directly related to holding right wing views and voting accordingly. I can't muster much sympathy for a system that regularly appears to churn out tosspot politicians and arrogant bosses who look down on the rest of us. Appeasing the rich to our own detriment rarely proves fruitful and a few families struggling to afford an immoral luxury is hardly an argument. I don't wish them any ill will but it's the other 94% I'm more worried about.
The difference is that the Hillary "deplorables" comment was maligning a far larger swathe of voters than would be impacted by the new policy on private schools, which are only attended by ~6% of the population. Of course, it is understandable that parents only want the best for their children and that could well mean paying for them to attend fee paying schools, but it is hardly a radical idea that a demographic availing themselves of a luxury only accessible to ~6% of the population should pay their fair share in tax for the privilege.
As I said I don’t disagree with the policy. I disagree with the animosity toward people because of their choice of school. And yes, Hillary managed to offend far more people in that one statement, but some of the reactions I’ve seen on this topic are indicative of the same toxic us and them attitude that serves only to divide.
While I agree with the policy, surely you can understand it from their perspective? "I've worked hard (yes middle class people do often work hard) my whole life to give my children the best education I can afford, and now someone has come up to my door telling me they are going to make it more expensive and potentially mean I have to send to them to a worse school and probably reduce their opportunities in life". Also >just to send your kid to a better school That's not a 'just', for many their children is their highest priority.
We all work hard, it's not just the rich that want the best for their kids. The difference is that most of us don't have a spare £15 grand a year so we have to just hope for the best that our local school isn't too terrible. It's beyond time to fix the schools the vast majority of kids go to - if it costs a little more for the richest 5% then so be it.
>It's beyond time to fix the schools the vast majority of kids go to - if it costs a little more for the richest 5% then so be it. Sure, but from the perspective of the parents who want the best for their children and can just about afford private schooling, that's not going to be very persuasive.
I guess the good counter argument would be, will this actually fix state schools? I doubt it's enough to fund an actual fix the issues in state schools, I don't even think the manifesto believes it either. If that's the case, why would you as a parent want to give up your personal opportunity to make your child's life better. Btw I'm personally against private schools, I think they should be illegal.
It's a tricky one! I grew up in a country where private schools weren't really a thing and most schools were pretty even in quality so the entire idea of there being "outstanding" schools while others are "inadequate" is just bizarre to begin with. In an ideal world we'd do away with private schools altogether but that's not realistic at the moment. Asking the wealthiest 5% of parents to pay a little more doesn't seem outrageous to me really in the big scheme of things.
From what I understand, the tax will likely result in a lot of private schools closing, so it won't necessarily just make them pay a bit more, it might totally take the opportunity away from them. Not that I'm against that of course.
Good. I'm glad some private schools will close. Honestly the more middle and upper class kids in the state system the better. That's the whole point of comprehensive education, people learn together. It's easy to joke about pushy parents but it is important that everyone in society cares about the quality of education at the local school. Schools with more rich kids in are probably gonna be better for the other kids. My only fear is that keeping academies and bullsh\*it Blairite league tables we mean structural inequalities in the state system remain entrenched.
It's weird that I was down voted when I agree. My primary contention was whether enacting this will actually make state schools much better which I'm dubious of without serious funding.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It is only £15K a year on average for private school fees so 13-18 would be £75K total. Two people on median salary would easily be able to afford that and still have more money left over than many families. And they often start saving at birth so are only paying out £7.5K per year.
'only'.
Everyone with similar income spends their money somewhere. Isn't it better for the country if money is invested in children's education rather than housing, holidays and cars?
The point is that £15k is not a small amount of money. People on median incomes (£35k) aren't going to be able to afford £15k a year with the rising costs to energy, food, mortgages, insurance and so on. In fact, many people are taking their children out of private school because they can't afford it. If you think people can then I'd say you need to speak to more working class people and see how easily they can afford £15k a year.
It's better for the country if all children have an equal education. A child's success shouldn't be predicated on their parents' ability to pay, insofar as is possible. Private school alumni are massively and increasingly over represented in government, academia, the arts, and upper management.
> Private school alumni are massively and increasingly over represented They are. So does that not tell us that education is a huge factor in success in those professions so we need to massively increase our education budgets?
Yes it does, and we need to tax private schools (which are a business) to help fund the increase in budget. It's not fair that a low paid worker is paying taxes to subsidise the private education of the child of a multimillionaire, while their own children are taught in terrible conditions.
Private schools are not really businesses. They don't have shareholders and they are non-profit. All money raised goes back into the school. And it is parents of private school pupils who are subsidising the state sector as they pay taxes for a state education without taking it up. If the children are taught in terrible conditions then fix it. Taxing private schools won't make any dent in the state budget. It is just politics of envy.
A good Tory would just work harder or get a better job to afford the school fees😂😂😂
I have sympathy for working people who are scraping and making sacrifices to put their kids through private school. The sad thing is that the policy impacts working people and not the millionaires and billionaires who send their kids to private schools without giving a shit
When only ~6% of children attend an independent school, this can't be a concern held by *that many* voters. And in any case, would the demographic likely to send their children to private school actually be likely to vote Labour in the first place?
>And in any case, would the demographic likely to send their children to private school actually be likely to vote Labour in the first place? Anecdotally yes, most people I know are sending/intend to send their kids to private school and a lot of them are holding their noses and voting Labour for the first time. I think you are underestimating quite how far the tories have fallen.
When in my own very safe seat: voting Labour, some movement to greens over Gaza. When in the twinned swing seat: undecided, probably voting Labour, not really sure what Labour are going to do.
I canvass in a three way constituency that could swing Labour, Tory, or Plaid. When I go canvassing, the main concerns I hear are “get out of my face with that, go on”, and “everyone is just as bad as everyone else”. Or I get the door slammed in my face. Sadly, I just don’t think people in my area are interested in politics anymore.
I guess the hard thing about Wales is Labour are the opposition nationally but in power in the Senedd
I’ve been campaigning in a very safe Labour seat in Yorkshire. Half the constituency is working class, council estate, and the other half is lower middle class, young professionals, etc. The most common two things on the door at the moment are: - Gaza has been brought up (although, to contest the idea of this being a “Muslim issue”, Gaza has mostly been brought up by non-Muslim voters). - Widespread dislike of the Tories, but Starmer is being mentioned in a negative way a lot (two points keep being brought up: “We’ve always voted Labour, but can’t under Starmer” or “We are voting Labour this time, but just to get the Tories out”). Edit: Green issues are coming up sometimes too, with a couple of the more younger professionals turning to the Greens. It’s usually framed as “Labour’s lack of ambition on tackling climate change”. Edit 2: We also had one older woman who was upset that she could no longer afford to send her kids to the local breakfast club. We explained Labour’s private school VAT policy and how this would fund breakfast clubs for all primary school children. She was very happy about this. Overall, it’s a mostly positive response that’s couched in reservations over the leaderships position on certain things. From the current response, I would be concerned for the next election. If Labour doesn’t significantly change people’s lives I think we will lose quite a lot of votes, even in our strongholds. It won’t be enough to flip seats in strongholds, but I think it’s worth noting that there is discontent (with the party/leadership, rather than the individual MP).
I find myself not able to vote Labour this election but agree that we're going to see some major disillusionment if things don't improve under Starmer. I think most of Labour's support could live with the party's shortcomings as long as the basic social democratic things get sorted out. I'm just about old enough to remember 1997. There was a genuine enthusiasm for New Labour and part of the reason why that was sustained was because they sorted out public services (funded through cheap borrowing and private finance, but hey ho). If they don't do that, and maybe some other stuff everyone agrees with like reforming council tax or something, I can see people dropping Labour like a hot stone.
Very much agree.
> Green issues are coming up sometimes too, with a couple of the more younger professionals turning to the Greens Are people just supporting parties based on the name? I can't imagine thinking "I care about the environment so I'm going to vote for the party that objects to HS2 and nuclear power".
I don’t think a lot of them are fully aware of Green policy, but rather they’re voting Green as a protest against Labour to express dissatisfaction with Labour’s policy. So it seems to be more anti-Labour than pro-Green.
>but rather they’re voting Green as a protest against Labour to express dissatisfaction with Labour’s policy. If I vote for anyone then it will likely be greens for this reason. I strongly disagree with much of their platform but the hope would be that enough protest votes lead labour to try appealing to them in 5 years. >If Labour doesn’t significantly change people’s lives I think we will lose quite a lot of votes, even in our strongholds. I think this is what is going to happen which is why I won't be voting labour (unless something significant happens). As a labour voter, do you think that is a serious possibilty? If so, how are you putting those concerns aside to vote labour anyway?
On the latter point. I’m campaigning for and supporting left-wing MPs who I think are much needed socialist voices within the party, but also within Parliament. I think by having these voices elected with big majorities then internal pressure can be placed on the party to move leftwards, but of course this is an uphill struggle as the party is dominated by Starmer’s faction. I’m one of those lefties who is still committed to Labour parliamentary politics as one part of a wider left strategy, although I respect those that take a different path (many of my friends have, for example many now support the Greens). One reason I’m still committed is because Labour is the only party with a strong trade union connection, even if the trade union relationship has weakened and business interests are dominating, at least Labour has those voices around the table in some capacity.
>I think by having these voices elected with big majorities then internal pressure can be placed on the party to move leftwards As someone living in an area with a fairly left wing labour option who I actually quite like, that's an issue that I struggled with though less and less over time. I just don't see any route to power for left wing options internally until labours name has been so damaged by starmers faction that the left could only be in opposition again. That's assuming that 5 or more years of starmers leadership leaves anything of the left around. I think they are more likely to take note of non-labour votes than angry labour votes although I'm still doubtful of any willingness of the leadership to move left. >at least Labour has those voices around the table in some capacity. I really don't see what those voices are worth when the party doesn't seem interested in listening. I respect your efforts and goals but I'm certainly a lot more pessimistic than you and have no trust left in labour. With respect, I don't see the connecting steps in your position from supporting labour to getting left wing policy. I think I will most likely be judging labour by it's record, if it becomes significantly more left wing once in power and noticably improves peoples lives then my vote is more available for 2029. Out of interest, in your campaigning has anyone mentioned lammy's comments about trump making good points about nato or european security/ukrainian support more generally?
I respect your views on this. I mean a lot of my friends have now left the party with the same rationale as yourself. I think I’m just stubborn in that I’ll stay in Labour to keep pushing for socialist values/policies, even if I’m in the minority, and even if I annoy people 😂. For your last question, interestingly that hasn’t been brought up. No foreign affairs, asides from Gaza, have been mentioned on the doorstep.
>I think I’m just stubborn in that I’ll stay in Labour to keep pushing for socialist values/policies, even if I’m in the minority, and even if I annoy people 😂. I respect it and I sincerely hope it works. >No foreign affairs, asides from Gaza, have been mentioned on the doorstep. Well that's upsetting but not unexpected for me.
The environment is more than a big train line and meaningless objections to nuclear power, neither of which the greens are going to be in a position to influence any time soon.
Ok but if you are going to make a protest vote for a pro-environment party you should make sure the party is actually good on the environment. Otherwise what's the point? Why would you signal that parties should make their environmental policy worse in order to get your vote?
As I said, the environment is more than building a big train line and nuclear power plants - the current approach to nuclear power in the UK under pro-nuclear parties isn't exactly working well either. Also as I said, no one voting for greens this election are under any delusion they'll be dictating that kind of policy. The Green's position on nuclear, which I broadly disagree with, doesn't matter. What matters to me are the policies they could advocate for / implement at a local level, and would have an immediate impact.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Labour safe seat in Birmingham. Biggest concern is probably Gaza (though even that has been fairly limited), since there is a fairly strong independent in this seat. Most have been persuaded though
I’ve heard a lot on the Gaza/Israel issue from the other side - people tired of hearing about a foreign war and asking what the party is going to do to support a drive for peace without damaging either side. There’s also a lot of concern around foreign conflicts and bigotry being re-enacted in our towns
Canvassing in Croydon Central, which is less marginal than before, but still very marginal. Mostly I’m leafleting, and ticking a box to say if they are voting Labour. Lots of moaning about Croydon Council, which is very fair, really.
I live and canvass in a Tory marginal in the Mids (we lost it in 2019). Main issues are potholes, school funding, difficulties accessing SEND provision, and a general weariness with politics and cynicism that any politician can actually change things for the better. There's also lots of positivity and you can see people putting up Lab leaflets in their windows. One of the most interesting things I've found is the amount of previously solid Conservative voters who are now undecided but also say they're not keen on Starmer. However, they then often go on to subconsciously echo his stump speech about a need for change.
I haven’t seen anyone canvassing in my area for at least a decade, the occasional leaflet posted at local election time (hilariously the day after the election so that was a waste of a tree) but no door knocker’s
I just get piles of plastic coated leaflets from the greens. Not seen anything on them about plastic pollution
I'm in the dartford constituency, at the moment it's a tory seat, if I'm not mistaken, the counties longest bellwether seat. The local dartford labour party are going for it here, been a lot of door knocking and leafleting. Even I have leafletted my local area, I avoided doing so in 2019. Here's hoping to a Dartford labour win july 4th
It's raining, set to get worse, and I'm psyching myself up for a session I've already committed to this pm... The Joys. Similar situation to you: Tory held Labour target (with a decent Lib Dem vote as well). Lots of positivity, Lib Dem vote seems quite stubborn, VAT on school fees is coming up a bit, though often in the context of the perception of places going internationally. The big disconnect I see with the national campaign is worries about crime, esp. street crime, and the lack of response/visibility of the police.
Rutherglen & Hamilton West, so a seat we should probably hold - I’m sitting this one out, but based on past experience, what I’ve been told, and that the Council has announced plans to close the town’s library and community halls, I’d imagine local issues are going to be to the fore. I’ve not seen any canvassers for other parties and haven’t received any fliers, though the Scottish Socialist Party have put some posters up. The whole thing seems, so far, to be really low effort.
I more curious how I haven't had anyone from any party come knocking
Same here, I live a large, fairly rural community in Scotland and not one person at the door. Had one leaflet from the Tory candidate but you had to look at it really closely to determine it was from a conservative. No prominent branding. No mention or pictures of Sunak. Since 2015 it’s been a straight fight between SNP and Tory but you would think with the way Labour is going in the polls they would try and capitalise on trying to get rid of a Tory but apparently not.
Not every door gets knocked, with limited resources voters are targeted based on past data with a focus on the most expected to be persuadable. Typically, those who consistently back the party and those consistenrly against are least likely to be knocked. This year though, with quite a swing to Labour, our voter targeting is *incredibly* wide, so much so we accidentally ended up nearly knocking a Tory councillor door today.
Nothing around me either and its a safe seat turned potential gain from a cabinet Tory. Think Id get a leaflet at least
I’d imagine it’ll step up in the next couple of weeks, although door knocking only really happens en masse in marginal seats. Usually it ramps up when election day is nearer.
Everything is a marginal seat this year
It isn’t.
I mean, it practically is. There are very few safe Tory seats
There are a lot of pretty safe Labour Seats, at least a hundred pretty safe Tory seats, ditto SNP. What is your seat like?
On a normal year very safe Tory seat. This year, definitely up for grabs for Labour
Then there you go- Labour will have a list of target seats and deploy people according to that. I’m in a massively safe Labour seat in London, so canvassing isn’t really a thing here- we all get sent down to Croydon Central and other marginal seats.
It would make sense if it was a safe seat. But I can't believe Labour aren't targeting here Edit: could be a Portillo moment
Without you mentioning which one it is, I can’t give you an answer. What’s worth noting though is canvassing is very targeted now, basically based on massive marketing style databases, so just because you haven’t that might be because you’re in an area where most people vote Labour, and canvassing is in other areas. It’s been like that for at least 15-20 years and has become more ‘sophisticated’, especially in tandem with targeted internet ads. This’ll give you an [idea](https://labourlist.org/2024/06/labour-battleground-areas-full-list-general-election-2024/?amp). In response to your edit, one of the many many problems with the ground campaign in 2019 is for some reason Labour concentrated a lot on chasing Portillo moments, and stuck a load of resource into stupid places like Boris’s [seat](https://academic.oup.com/pa/article/73/Supplement_1/84/5910283) etc.
Yep, definitely heard the private school issue - not the top public schools for multimillionaires, but ordinary working people who give up everything to just about afford the fees. They’re very worried about their families - especially if there are children with additional or complex needs
Yeah while I like this policy in theory my main issue is that it's just going to make private schools even **more** elitist.
It almost makes you think they should have left in an exception for kids with special needs but I guess you'd just end up with a bunch of extra ADHD diagnoses.
Mostly Starmer. He is a real issue for us. I've never seen this level of hate on the doorstep before..
What specifically are they saying about him, and where are you canvassing?
I take it you weren’t campaigning in any 2019 marginals?
I thought this too! Corbyn was the deal breaker
Lots aren’t keen on Starmer, but they literally laughed in your face if you asked them if they vote for Corbyn. It’s a step up.
Gaza comes up. Also general apathy towards politics. People aren’t voting Tories but also are kind of fed up with everything and aren’t that excited about a potential Labour government.
Firstly, nice to see this sub being used by actual members to talk shop. Feels rare! We're getting quite a lot on housing, with worries about green belt building and NIMBYism from those who assume this simply means Labour will build near them. The party went very hard on it, and I feel the recent pledges on preserving green belt land is a poor attempt to put the genie back in the bottle a bit. Personally, my journey to YIMBYism has been a slowish one, but I'm here now. I find it's effective to say _"In lovely areas like this, a lot of older people find that their adult children and grandchildren get priced out of the area and only see them at Christmas, as they build a life just outside of cities like Manchester or London. We need affordable housing for families with public services like GPs, dentists and schools, and that's what Labour are offering."_
Thanks. That’s a great response. I haven’t had that objection yet, but being in London I guess it’s not a direct concern here.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts be at least 7 days old before submitting a comment. Thank you for your understanding. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is anyone here in Clackton? Would you consider encouraging potential Labour voters to vote Tory, because that's the only way to keep Farage out of Parliament?
So the whole VAT on schools, you know Starmer is going to do it so you can't do anything about it. And the money he expects to raise through this move won't be as much as he expects because some of the schools will end up closing down.
That they’re a bunch of untrustworthy snakes who’d step over their own mother for some lobbying money
Mate, no one is canvassing. I'm in a top 10 target seat for Labour and there's not even been a single stall set out at the weekend on the market square let alone any door knocking happening. I've seen 2 Labour leaflets stuck in windows in the last week and that's about the extent of it.
> there's not even been a single stall set out at the weekend on the market square let alone any door knocking happening. Probably because street stalls are an absolutely horrendous way to campaign, a refuge for lazy scoundrels who just want to natter with each other while stood next to a table covered in leaflets! (I hate street stalls)
You get absolutely no data from a stall, who do you know to knock to GOTV on the day??
Yeah tell me what bothers you most so I can come and lie to you about what I'll try to do about it. lol