Parents that send their children to public schools have also, via taxes, paid for a place at state schools. They choose not to take up this place, ergo the government can spend the money saved on so-called 'poor" children. It is therefore to the advantage of the government to encourage public schools. If they force them to close, they will have to provide more funds for their own schools, so they will lose money.
Makes no sense at all to me.

Wilma Prince, Vossemeer, The Netherlands

Like Peter of Cambridge, I went without holidays, a car, a television, restaurant meals, central heating at any time, and I worked as a police officer for all but three days every four weeks, while his taxes, and mine of course, were being used to educate my children. I was called to my son's comprehensive to be told that he was an exceptional child and we should consider some form of additional education. Some hopes. Perhaps some of that £100m of my taxes that was given to private schools could have been dedicated to gifted children like my son.

Still, he's done very well. Despite having to start at the bottom of his chosen career, unlike a number of direct entrants from public school, seemingly just to rub it in, he has broken records for age related promotion. And by a considerable margin.

Those boasting of their sacrifices I would point out that it is much, much harder for the poor.

Derek Smith, Brighton, UK

It was a great struggle to afford the school fees for my children to be educated at independent schools, and was achieved by having no holiday for 10 years, no night away from home for 10 years, no meal in a restaurant for 10 years, no heating except a couple of hours a day for 10 years, and so on, whilst all the time I was conscious of my taxes being used to educate the children of others to allow them to have their weekend breaks and holidays all over the world. My children received their primary education in Japan where a tax refund was given for those paying independent school fees. Why not the same here. The very concept of the state being a monopoly provider of education is absurd except in some Stalinist system.

Peter, Cambridge,

The "charitable" status of public schools simply means that , for tax purposes, they are non-profit making. There are no share-holders who cash in on the operation of these schools. However, since the public understanding of the word "charity" is at odds with the image of institutions for the well-off, a different classification is needed to define tax relief in this particular type of non-profit making institution. And yes, it is perfectly fair, as far as tax is concerned, since in addition to paying school fees, the parents in question also pay taxes for the funding of state schools.

One point also needs to be made about "charitable status". Private schools sometimes provide islands of traditional common sense in educational methodology, when lunatic revolutionaries set up totally idiotic teaching projects in the state education system. The meaning of the word "privilege", in the private sector, then assumes a special significance which demands public examination.

Edmund Burke, Kingston upon Thames, England

Why is it that the party of Blair, Harman, Straw,Balls "literally", Quentin Davies are all failures of Private Schools with enormous chips on their shoulders. I reckon with a liitle foresight the capitalist system can destroy the lot of them. eg keep clear of Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan at any price and make certain the system knows why on every occasion! Hope for Branson to take over Northern Rock and it to fail loosing taxpayer at least £30 billion within 6 months and the shareholders to sue HMG for another £30 billion.

Nick Irvine, Yorkshire , England

I have to agree with Julia.

Abioye A Oyetunji - £25,000 per year, for the majority of Britains, is their annual income, or more - not just what they may save on a new car or holidays. People who pay that, by us mere mortals standards, ARE rich. I have three very intelligent children, even forgoing a new car (something we have never had) or a holiday (£2,000 max) we could not afford to privately;y educate them. Luckily, they are doing quite well without. I find it quite disgusting that these schools have charitable status. It should stop, or they should REALLY earn it.

Nicki, Southampton, Hampshire

I am 14 years of age and attend a private school after a year at a Comprehensive and I can tell you that it is an absolute myth that all children who attend independent schools are from wealthy backgrounds.

My parents make immense sacrifices to pay my school fees and the differences between the two sectors are vast:

A more challenging environment

A feeling of security

Friendlier pupils

But above all it is seen as (dare I say) "cool" to study. This proves that it is not the school which creates the pupils it is the pupils which create the school.

Unless the disruptive children are separated from those that want to learn, nothing will change in the state sector.

Britain used to have this system; they were called Grammar Schools.

Adaeze, London, England

Gordon's really teed off that Independent schools make his politicians look like useless incompetents.

They're therefore trying to destroy them so they won't look so bad.

Do I really want to vote for a team that's so bad, they have to destroy the opposition to hide the fact?

That's Quality Gordon, you're really impressing me. Your whole cabinet are just so top notch, that I'm just going to have to witness another 5 years of such er, superlative management. You've created some seminal moments in politics since you took over. I'm really impressed. My wife's really impressed too, but not as much as my in laws. They think you're so brilliant they've contemplated taking out a full page ad to this fact in the spectator, and the torygraph.

I'm so overwhelmed with your brilliance, that words fail me.

I'm going to vote for you next time round, really; sooner if possible.

Charles, London,

Tom from Portland - you have it exactly right

(and we have Stalin running the rest of the country - this will be my last transmission before I am disappeared....)

Peter, London, Peoples Republic of New Labour

Julia from London, try doing the maths. With 7% of British kids being educated privately, getting rid of these schools would cause either an increase of 7.5% in the national educational tax burden or, worse, a decrease of 7% in the average spend per child in the State system. Hitting public schools would be worse for everyone, including state school pupils. This commission is professional enough to know that but they don't care. They are abiding by that age-old mantra that everyone in the gutter is better than everyone being at different levels.

And fyi, the kids of "the rich" (that silly, unjustified assumption that all parents who educate their children privately are rich - no, many just forgo a new car or a holiday out of love for their offspring) are still children and educating any child is a commendable thing to do.

Abioye A Oyetunji, London, UK

Julia
It is simple but not in the way you suggest. The point is that the state schools do not get taxed on their operation, they get the money from people who've been taxed once.. The charity tax break puts schools on a fair footing by ensuring that they also get money that has only been taxed once, not twice.
Also many people scrimp and save and go into debt to send their children to the best schools: not The Rich but The Concerned. Concerned about their children and the parlous state of state education under succesive governments enough find some way of begging and borrowing to get their children educated.

Fed Up, London, UK

The politics of envy are the reason for these proposed regulations. The majority of parents who choose independent schools do so because State schools in many areas are 'bog standard comprehensives' ( pace Alastair Campbell ). Despite the best efforts of staff in many of these schools, they have not improved during Labour's time in office and therefore people vote with their feet.
Brown sees this as a potential vote winner and, as usual, another easy stealth tax.

Richard, London, England

The fact that after seven electoral victories since the war, Labour has yet to finish off these bastions of entrenched privilege is a savage indictment of the parties egalitarian principles. By syphoning off middle class children private schools inflict incalculable harm on the education of all state sector pupils.

Arnold Ward, Weybridge, Surrey, UK

If this government survives the next election, i.e. such that the Cameroons have no opportuntiy to unwind at least the worst of the ridiculous legislation that Labour have tied us in knots with, then I think it's increasingly the case that those who are economically strong and internationally oriented will leave the country. That the talk in the groups in which I mix. Why should we stay to pay huge taxes so that Labour can spend the money badly on muddled or even offensively wrong initiatives that are poorly executed, leaving us having to pay again for education, health and other services. I already pay a lot of tax, Brown wants me to pay more and get less... time to go somewhere else.

Fed Up, London, UK

Its very simpe. To benefit from charitable tax breaks, you have to be charitable. Selling first class services to the rich does not, funnily enogh, count as charity .

julia, london,

Considering these schools create, on average, a higher standard of school leaver than state operated schools I would think that the 100 million in tax breaks is money well spent. Over a lifetime the higher earnings and therefore higher tax paid by these pupils will cover any benefit received now. Unfortunately the short-sighted nature of this government means their irresponsible spending of the public purse leads to a hunt for cash today regardless of the consequences for tomorrow. Considering Labour have promised 600 million for the search for athletes in 2012, Brown sold over half the nations gold reserves for a 3000 million loss and other financial misdemeanors, I would have thought that education would be valued more highly. Or can we assume this is just a witch hunt of parents who want the best for their children and not subscribe to the Brown vision for Britain and are now scheduled for punishment.

Edward, London,

"If everybody is somebody, then nobody is anybody"! Sounds like Lenin is running British Education.

tom, Portland, Oregon USA