Those who go to private school will earn an average of £472,143 more by the age of 65. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

£472,143: the value of a private education

Those who go to private school will earn an average of £472,143 more than state-educated pupils by the age of 65.

Private education: what a con. A new report from the Social Market Foundation finds that private education is worth an average of £57,653 to a person’s income later in life. Given that average annual fee for private day schools is £12,582, the temptation is to ask: why bother going private?

But hang on. The figure of £57,653 only takes into account the difference in earnings between private and state school pupils (discounting family background and social circumstances) between the ages of 26 and 42. For two people working to the age of 65, the benefit of private education would be worth £140,529 at a conservative estimate; and that’s before other benefits – higher pension plans; and the benefits of better paying jobs that they can they pass onto their children – are taken into account. That remains a good rate of return on the £85,000 it costs to send a child to an independent day school for seven years.

Most of the attention on the SMF’s report has focused on the value, or otherwise, of private education. But a more significant finding has been ignored.

In total, between the ages of 26 and 42, someone who attended an independent school will earn £193,700 more than someone who attended a state school. Strip away the benefits attributed to private education, and that still amounts to £136,047. Assume that the average benefits will continue to 65 (which amounts to a conservative estimate, as pay differentials increase later in life) and there is a £331,614 “dividend” for those attending private school that is attributable to family background and social circumstance.

Add it to the direct benefits of going to independent school, and those who go to private school will earn an average of £472,143 more than the state educated by the age of 65. This is what the New Statesman called the 7 per cent problem earlier this year.

Blaming it all on private schools is expedient, of course. But almost two-thirds of the earnings gap is down to wider advantages not related to what school you went to – wider social capital that is far more entrenched. The relationship between what parents and children earn is higher in Britain than anywhere else in the OECD. The reasons for this lack of social mobility go far deeper than where you went to school.

Tim Wigmore is a contributing writer to the New Statesman and the author of Second XI: Cricket In Its Outposts.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Jeremy Corbyn's Labour conference speech shows how he's grown

The leader's confident address will have impressed even his fiercest foes. 

It is not just Jeremy Corbyn’s mandate that has been improved by his re-election. The Labour leader’s conference speech was, by some distance, the best he has delivered. He spoke with far greater confidence, clarity and energy than previously. From its self-deprecating opening onwards ("Virgin Trains assure me there are 800 empty seats") we saw a leader improved in almost every respect. 

Even Corbyn’s firecest foes will have found less to take issue with than they may have anticipated. He avoided picking a fight on Trident (unlike last year), delivered his most forceful condemnation of anti-Semitism (“an evil”) and, with the exception of the Iraq war, avoided attacks on New Labour’s record. The video which preceded his arrival, and highlighted achievements from the Blair-Brown years, was another olive branch. But deselection, which Corbyn again refused to denounce, will remain a running sore (MPs alleged that Hillsborough campaigner Sheila Coleman, who introduced Corbyn, is seeking to deselect Louise Ellman and backed the rival TUSC last May).

Corbyn is frequently charged with lacking policies. But his lengthy address contained several new ones: the removal of the cap on council borrowing (allowing an extra 60,000 houses to be built), a ban on arms sales to abusive regimes and an arts pupil premium in every primary school.

On policy, Corbyn frequently resembles Ed Miliband in his more radical moments, unrestrained by Ed Balls and other shadow cabinet members. He promised £500bn of infrastructure investment (spread over a decade with £150bn from the private sector), “a real living wage”, the renationalisation of the railways, rent controls and a ban on zero-hours contracts.

Labour’s greatest divisions are not over policy but rules, strategy and culture. Corbyn’s opponents will charge him with doing far too little to appeal to the unconverted - Conservative voters most of all. But he spoke with greater conviction than before of preparing for a general election (acknowledging that Labour faced an arithmetical “mountain”) and successfully delivered the attack lines he has often shunned.

“Even Theresa May gets it, that people want change,” he said. “That’s why she stood on the steps of Downing Street and talked about the inequalities and burning injustices in today’s Britain. She promised a country: ‘that works not for a privileged few but for every one of us’. But even if she manages to talk the talk, she can’t walk the walk. This isn’t a new government, it’s David Cameron’s government repackaged with progressive slogans but with a new harsh right-wing edge, taking the country backwards and dithering before the historic challenges of Brexit.”

After a second landslide victory, Corbyn is, for now, unassailable. Many MPs, having voted no confidence in him, will never serve on the frontbench. But an increasing number, recognising Corbyn’s immovability, speak once again of seeking to “make it work”. For all the ructions of this summer, Corbyn’s speech will have helped to persuade them that they can.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.