Free school transport

If you had read the thread you would see that I am not talking about all cases. I specifically say there are exceptions. But many people on this thread opened the discussion up to say that free transport should be provided to all children, or that just because they choose live a certain distance away from a school all other tax payers should pay the cost of getting their children to school.

In my opinion it is part of what this country is coming to. We have far too many people with an 'entitled' attitudes instead of taking responsibility for themselves

Its hardly a whats the country coming to thing, its been the case for decades that transport is provided over a certain distance if its the nearest suitable school.

There are schools in rural areas with less than 5 pupils... are they a "waste" too? The argument fir them its too far for the children to travel to an alternative school.

'too' not 'to' - I hate typos!😂

Schools are provided because it is the law that all children of school age are entitled to a suitable education. It is then the parents' legal responsibility to provide - either by attending school or home schooling.

It isn't the law that government has to provide free transport for all children - only in specific cases.

Where does it stop? Do you think we should pay the cost of travel for parents' getting their children to doctors/dentists appointments (again I know there are specific circumstances where this does, and shouldn't apply).

I just think this country has gone to far towards an 'entitled' attitude.

They have a duty to offer schooling, they don't have a duty to get the children.

And it is every tax taxpayers business

All the kids in our village have free school transport (until 6th form then the seat has to be paid for), which is just as well because there is literally no other way to get them there on time if the other child is in primary school.

Where I live you only get free school transport under 3 miles if the child has a disability which affects their ability to walk to school safely.

You wouldn't want to have to deal with a disability and all the shit that goes with that so no need to be jealous of a child.

It would be better if the UK followed the US practice of big yellow school buses taking children to school/home.

Examples of better practice exist and the UK remains blind/oblivious to them. Is it arrogance or stupidity?

The local authority have a duty to offer a school to all children over compulsory school age.

They're fulfilling their legal obligation to this child by ensuring they can access school because the local authority have also not made the walking route safe.

It's absolutely none of your business to be honest, but if you want, you could petition the local authority to ensure there is a safe, well lit walking route.

I can imagine they won't take much notice though as planning, purchasing land, removing trees and foliage, having a wildlife assessment, hiring and construction are timely and expensive processes which would ultimately cost the tax payer more whereas a school lifetime for a single child would not cost as much.

My kids get a taxi paid for them to and from school every day, so a lot more cost per kid than a bus. I probably make you furious @Sheldonsheher. But we live rural and it isn’t even a safe walking route to a good point for a bus to collect them so they have to be collected from our house in a taxi. As it should be. Unless you want to empty rural areas of children and families?

(My kids did walk when we lived elsewhere, so I haven’t done it their whole school career. Only high school).

Op there has to be a line somewhere that its agreed kids are too far to walk.

You mentioned taxis my secondary had a mini bus that picked up rural and farm kids. Eventually it was changed for two taxis i assume on a numbers of kids and the cost.

Someone else mentioned free public transport. That doesn't always work.
Town A is divided half go to school in town A, the other half were bussed to town B. Council decided the kids should either walk 2.5 miles or use public buses.
The public buses mean they don't all fit on the buses. And they need to get two buses, bus 1 drops them in the town centre right next to the secondary they are out of catchment for and then they need to get a second bus to take them to school.

Bonkers!

And reality is lots of parents will say sod that and start driving kids around

DS gets “free” school transport for this reason, I asked for the risk assessment and the bit they deem dangerous is not, in my opinion, the worst part of the route. I get a daily allowance to drive him (4 journeys, 2 return trips). It’s his catchment school, we live in a village 1.8 miles away. I asked if I could choose to walk him instead and I was told to take legal advice. I honestly didn’t think about schools much when we moved. We didn’t have children at the time, there are schools and I assumed it would be up to us to get him there. ETA there’s no parking at the school, the only place to park is on a street without parking restrictions, to get to the school from there means crossing a main A road with no formal crossing. For safety, taxi would have been better.

Wait until you find out about how many children are provided with 'free' taxis to and from school OP! That'll really wind you up.

For the same reason as they pay to provide the schools? Because it's in everyone's interests for children to be educated?

You don't have to drive your DC to school though. You could walk with them. The other child couldn't safely walk, even with an adult, if there are no pavements.

Even if, say, one child was disabled and in a different school from their siblings, and you couldn't conceivably get them all to school on time if you had take them all?

How do you know it is their choice? There could be all sorts of reasons why they live where they do and why they cannot move.

No, your area will be no different from the rest of the country. If those are the rules your council is operating, it is breaking the law

The criteria should be the same everywhere in England, as the law is the same everywhere. The law says that if a child cannot walk to school then transport must be provided, and that means that if they cannot walk safely to school the duty kicks in.

That sounds a nightmare for you all! And you deserve the help in this scenario. Exceptional circumstances

It's not that exceptional tbh - there's 3 or 4 double deckers full of kids go to that school. Most would either have walked or been dropped off at the local school. It affects a lot of people.

There was always some transport round here as there are a lot of farms and small villages, but nothing like this.

Also school allocations can play a big part as well - I know a child who gets his school bus outside a different school (that he didn't get a place at) 5 minutes walk from his house.

It's a good question.

I suppose I don't see it as any different to providing a free school lunch as an example which happens for primary school children.

Depends on the bus. DD’s school bus costs more than £1k a year. Fun times.

That sounds a nightmare for you all! And you deserve the help in this scenario. Exceptional circumstances

I never said it was a luxury. Where do you draw the line? Why is paying to get your child to school
any different to paying for their uniform?

anyway, this will go round and round. Interesting discussion/exchange of views