Charities Bill [HL]

When this issue has been   discussed over the years there has been a misunderstanding on the opposition Benches about the position taken by many on this side of the House. The issue is not so much that one is opposed to the taxpayer making a contribution to children in private education. The problem is the use of charity law. It is not credible to tell the general public that Eton is a charity, because everyone in Britain knows that it is not. However much the noble Earl may dress up the contribution made by individual schools such as the grammar school that he has just referred to, that does not deal with the central problem of the credibility of charity law which provides that schools that ring-fence provision for young people who have been brought up in conditions of privilege can be described as charities. My solution is simple—private schools should be taken out of charity law all together. Subsidies should be paid, but out of provisions in the Finance Bill. Parliament should be required to decide the level of subsidy that it wishes to pay into private education. It is clear that people who put their children into private education save the taxpayer money, so there can be no question but that some element of subsidy should be paid through the tax system. But it should not be done under charity law, because that brings the whole system and principle of charity into gross disrepute.