• CAMDEN’S cabinet member for schools claimed that Camden has lost money because schools with charitable status – like academies, most religious state schools, and a minority of independent schools – receive business rates relief, (Private schools escape paying £2.5 million in business rates to council, October 18). This is obviously incorrect.

Business rates are paid to central government. While Camden keeps receipts from new developments, existing schools receiving or not receiving charitable status does not affect how much money Camden receives. As a result, schools in Camden qualifying as charities costs central government money, but Camden does not lose out at all.

In any event to qualify as charities those schools must demonstrate benefit to the local community, so it provides an incentive for them to help nearby state schools and community groups, or grant scholarships to broaden entry. It is also peculiar to see Labour rail against this now since the Charities Act 2006, which gave charitable schools this tax break, was passed by the last Labour government.

Since then the Conservatives have granted councils the power to reduce business rates for state schools that don’t hitherto qualify as charities. As just 30 per cent of the cost would be borne by Camden, but 100 per cent of the benefit would go to Camden’s state schools, that would be a cost-effective way of Camden to save local schools money.

Labour has chosen not to adopt this approach, which somewhat demonstrates that theirs are crocodile tears. Instead of political posturing and misrepresenting how business rates work, Camden should be focusing on two pressing concerns.

First, improving school results: last week we found out Camden’s school results were in the bottom fifth of London boroughs. By contrast Conservative-run Barnet’s are the best in the whole country. Second, tackling the school-run issue.

This is a particular issue with the large number of private schools in Frognal & Fitzjohns. Camden should be ensuring as many schools as possible have a travel plan in place; enforcing existing travel plans, in particular against the large number of schools who persistently and flagrantly breach them; and imposing tough new financial penalties so that travel plans do not continue to be meaningless pieces of paper.

CLLR ANDREW PARKINSON
Conservative, Frognal & Fitzjohns ward