Parents To Pay For School Transport In Future

[suedonim]

How's this going to work then?? School Transport Bill

The govt is proposing to remove the right to free school transport, except for those entitled to free school meals. Apparently, it will reduce road congestion. Like 50 people driving their children to school takes up less space than one bus???? Methinks this govt has lost the plot!

[tabitha]

I agree with you on this one - think the government has lost the plot here. From a personal point of view, I would never let my 12 yo dd walk/cycle the 3 miles to school (she currently gets free transport) along a fast and dangerous road in all weathers - and in the dark in winter. I would probably end up driving her there myself as would many parents, so how would that reduce road congestion? It seems to me that this government's (and I'll hold my hands up and say I voted for them)idea of 'social inclusion' is to only provide services, such as free university tuition and now free school transport, to the very poorest in society when once they were available to everyone. I'll be thinking long and hard about who to vote for next election....although I still don't think I could bring myself to vote Tory!
By the way, I also think free and good quality school meals should be available to every child.

[WideWebWitch]

I posted this article a while back and I think it's relevant - exactly suedonim, 20% of transport at peak time is the school run so blame the mothers! Err, what about the other 80%? I agree, this government has lost the plot, on this and many, many other issues.

[Davros]

Surely free transport means there's less congestion? Don't have experience of this yet but this doesn't seem to make any sense.

[M2T]

At our school the buses from certain areas were free, but from where I lived we had to pay normal busfare! It wasn't even a concession.
How unfair is that?? So I suppose at my school they already do that and have been for quite a while.

[suedonim]

Good article, WWW. (btw, my dd is tickled pink by your nickname!!) There was a letter in a paper this (last?) week from someone in a village, complaining about a school bus that travels three times a day along their lanes. So he'd rather have a convoy of cars down his lanes, would he?? Of course, if LEA's hadn't shut so many village schools and councils hadn't decimated rural transport, people could send their children to school locally or use transport that was already available. Maybe we should just stop educating children? Yes! That's the answer! Shove 'em all in a cupboard and don't let 'em out until they're 18, when we can charge them a fortune to go to uni!

Tabitha, we're in the country (Scotland) too, about 4 miles to secondary school and no footpaths. I've been told by my adult ds that this idea won't apply to Scotland anyway but I'm still seething about it!

I'm surprised there hasn't been more reaction on Mumnset to this - maybe I'll post it elsewhere?

[M2T]

Suedonim - It certainly applies already to the secondary schools around me in Central Scotland.

[suedonim]

Oh, there's more reaction now, lol!

M2T, transport is always free if a child under 8 has to walk more than 2 miles or 3 miles for a child of 8+. I can only imagine that your council subsidised some areas with children who lived closer than that - maybe to encourage attnedance? Not fair, I agree.

[suedonim]

That's weird, M2T, as councils are currently obliged by law to offer free transport to a child's nearst school. They don't have to give it if a parent chooses an alternative school, though. Stirling (is that Central?) Council's policy is more generous than it needs to be as they offer free transport if an under 8 lives more than one mile and an 8+, two miles. Stirling/Clackmannan Council . There must be some other factor involved in your area or the council is breaking the law. Someone ought to challenge them!

[GeorginaA]

Of course, if all the rural schools hadn't have been closed down (and still in the process of being closed down) in favour of bigger schools in the towns then there'd be less transport issues too... sigh.

They'll be complaining about kids not getting as much exercise as they used to next...

[M2T]

Suedonim - It was a Stirling School I went to! I assure we didn't even get a school bus in the morning. We just had to use normal scheduled public transport. Buses were provided to take us home but we had to pay. That was 10 yrs ago.

[tamum]

It couldn't be that you were just within the two mile limit or anything, could it M2T?

[suedonim]

Quite so, Georgina. We fought a battle and WON, to keep our village school open. I can walk there in three minutes - far better than having to put tiny tots on a bus at 8.15 on cold winter mornings.

[suedonim]

Sue them, M2T!! I suppose the law could have been different then but by today's standards they were acting illegally and that's disgraceful. How far did you have to travel?

My own ds's were at school in Perth 10yrs ago and they had free transport as it was 5 miles away. They had to pay if they missed the school bus and caught a service bus, an incentive to get out of bed on time, tee hee!

[codswallop]

I would say if you choose a school that is not the nearsest(unless Sn) and you are not on benefits you should pay

Is that not how it works?

[M2T]

Perhaps we were just within the limit, but it seemed that all the areas classed as 'underprivelidged' were given free transport no matter how close they were to the school. Dunblane for example is about 8 to 10 miles from the school and they definitely didn't get a free bus.

[tabitha]

Hi M2T,
I think that things have changed in Central Region in the last 10 years, thankfully, although we live in Falkirk councils area rather than Stirling so it may be that they are more generous. When I moved here, I phoned up and was told that not only did they base whether the child got free travel on the distance from the school (over 2 miles for older children as suedonim says) but that they based it on the shortest 'safe' route to school. For example the most direct route for my dd to take to school was deemed not to be 'safe' - I think because part of it had v narrow pavements beside a fast strech of road - and so they based her need for free transport on the most direct safe slternative.

[fio2]

It is not free round here anyway unless you go to special school

[tabitha]

where do you live fio2?

[tallulah]

Not sure how I feel about free school transport anyway. We don't qualify because we are supposedly within 3 miles (though I don't know how they measure it because I make it over 3). DS's best friend gets free transport yet he lives closer to the school in a much nicer house than we've got.

Here all the village kids get free transport because of being over 3 miles, yet in order to afford to live in the village you've got to be earning a fair whack.. why should my council tax be subsidising someone who earns twice as much as I do, while I'm also paying for my kids to travel? (DH drives ours because we can't afford 2 lots of bus fares- FULL fare as it's peak time- plus DS2 can't be trusted on a bus without supervision)

Having said that, we're rapidly becoming a 2-tier society in that the only people who can afford to do things are those on benefits who get it for free (thinking Uni fees here )

[suedonim]

But from what you say, M2T, presumably those parents chose to send their children 8 or 10 miles to another school rather than use their local school in Dunblane? I don't have a problem with paying for transport in those circs.

How does your ds's bf get free transport and you don't, Tallulah, if he lives closer than you? Have you challenged the LEA over it? Wrt to the village dwellers, I guess your LEA is applying the rules rigidly and is saying as you're within 3miles (I do think that distance needs to be changed downwards, in this day and age) you are able to walk to school but choose not to.

For me, it isn't really about who pays for what (as a country dweller, I could ask why my council tax should subsidise facilities in town that my children can't access). Apart from the weird concept that this idea will reduce congestion, having a free education system is completely useless if it can't be accessed. Many rural and village areas are far from wealthy; there are plenty of poorer people working and living in the countryside.

[miriamw]

OK I know that I'm giving away the fact that I am and have always been a Londoner, but is the school run such a great issue in rural areas? I know that it must result in greater traffic, but I thought that a lot of the problems were still in the cities where parents drove the mile or so down the road to school and back. And that it was this sort of behaviour that they were trying to stop - not the cases of much longer journeys between villages etc. Locally, choosing to travel between 8:30 and 9:30 will at least double if not triple your total journey time. Would have to admit to guessing at the percentage of school runs, but would assume a large proportion as the main commercial areas are well served by public transport (but not the primary schools!).

Agree with Suedonim's original point - totally fail to see how the bill achieves the aim of reducing school run... Don't see any deterent to my antisocial short car journeys (traffic and parking already horrible).

[Demented]

I was going to ask that question too, why were children from Dunblane being sent 8-10 miles to school on a bus when there are schools in Dunblane? I used a bus service for high school and I think it is wrong to make parents pay for the transport, my parents were not rich, we lived in a Council house, my catchment High School was 8 miles away, why should people like my parents be penalised because there was no high school in the village. My mum did not drive and even if she did a second car would have been far from their reach.

[Demented]

Oh and I agree that it wouldn't cut down the congestion problem as parents with access to cars would just take their kids to school instead.

[tallulah]

suedonim- I've no idea how DS's friend gets free transport. Doesn't seem fair. Not worth us making a fuss because DS isn't safe to travel without supervision & if DH has got to take him he might as well take the other one.

In this area, ONLY the well off live in the villages! May be different elsewhere.

I really feel that school transport should either be free to all, or to no-one. (This is secondary school). Our supposed public transport system decrees that as schoolkids are travelling at PEAK times they should pay full fare. Why? You can't even get a Saturday job here until you are over 16 so why should you pay full fare? Once you've got more than one child at school it isn't economic to pay for the bus.

[Jimjams]

Actually I'm kind of pissed off with transport policy as well. Because of inclusion ds1 has to got to a mainstream school (before inclusion he woudl have definitely been at special school). If he went to special school, or a unit then he would get a taxi plus excort. Our local mainstream school is completely unable to cope with him (its a good school, good SATS results, oversubscribed, but doesn't really "do" SN except dyslexia). Therefore we have had to send him to a mainstream school 8 miles away. It's deemed to be parental choice- therefore no transport. It's OK at the moment but I will be stuffed if ds2 doesn't get a place there becuase I will then have to be in 2 places at once.