Opponents of Rachel Reeves have been gloating over the news that a boarding school in the chancellor’s constituency is closing its doors, blaming it on Labour’s decision to impose VAT on private schools.
“Labour’s politics of envy strikes again,” fulminated Tory MP turned Reform candidate for mayor of Greater Lincolnshire Andrea Jenkyns on X over the news that the £40,000-a-year Fulneck School in Pudsey, West Yorkshire, was shutting.
“The wonderful private school Fulneck near Rachel Reeves [sic] constituency, closes its doors in July after 250 years. This will just push more into state schools that will cost the taxpayer anyway. They can look at plans to build houses for migrants, but attack parents who work hard and try to do the best for their children.”
Tories were inevitably angry too. “As widely-predicted [sic], Labour’s VAT attack on independent schools is already costing taxpayers more,” fumed Jonathan Rich, a Conservative barrister and parliamentary candidate, on the same platform.
In the mainstream media, the Daily Mail weighed in, reporting that “heartbroken” parents were pinning the blame on “Labour’s decision earlier this year to hike VAT on private schools”, although those parents ran to one, Daniel Barnett, who questioned: “Do we have the immensely incompetent ideologically driven Labour government taxation on private school fees to thank for this?”.
At least the Mail found someone who was prepared to be quoted, though. The Daily Express, under the headline ‘Private school in Rachel Reeves’ constituency to shut as furious parents slam Chancellor’ was reduced to one anonymous “furious parent” who happily furnished them with a quote that “this sudden closure is on Rachel Reeves’ head”.
And what of the school itself? Awkwardly, it didn’t mention VAT at all in its statement explaining the reasons for its closure, instead saying the “difficult decision” came following an “unsustainable decline in students” as a result of the Covid pandemic.
“Fulneck has been impacted by a constant decline in the number of students for several years, which was compounded by the pandemic resulting in an unsustainable decline in students,” the school’s spokesperson said. “This decision was not taken lightly, with trustees considering all available and viable options to ensure the school could continue. However, after careful consideration and no offers materialising, the difficult decision to plan to close the school was taken.”
The Mail, Express and Andrea Jenkyns on one side, or the actual school itself on the other – who knows who to believe?