Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

To think if you choose to send your kids to a school in another town you can't expect the tax payer to fund their travel

50 replies

sashh · 11/10/2012 09:10

It's another picture with a sad face (well three).

Mum asked the county council for bus passes before they started. CC rejected it, she appealed and they rejected it again.

So knowing they were not eligable for bus passes she still sends them to school in another town and then complains because she can't get the passes she was told she couldn't get before they started school.

www.burnleyexpress.net/news/local-news/padiham-mum-keeps-her-twins-off-school-in-bus-passes-protest-1-4975587

OP posts:

Pendeen · 11/10/2012 09:58

Depends on the LEA's assessment of the girl's disability.

GrimmaTheNome · 11/10/2012 09:59

Well if the CofE want her children to go to a CofE school, they can pay their bus fares then can't they? Why should it be the LEA's problem?

Exactly. If the churches - CofE or Catholic really think that its important that kids be indoctrinated able to attend a faith school, they should pay for the transport.

All our nearest schools are faith - we not only had to pay transport to avoid them, we had to pay school fees too. (obviously for many they just have to lump it).

Disabled children should of course have transport paid for if facilities at nearby schools are inadequate. That's an entirely different issue.

GoSakuramachi · 11/10/2012 10:02

If the rules say you are entitled to passes to get to the nearest faith school, which it appears they do in this case, she is right and should get them.

cantspel · 11/10/2012 10:06

You dont always get free transport to a special needs school.

My oldest is in a sen school. You only get free transport if you are over 3.5 miles away. We are just under this so no transport but the journey to get there includes a mile or so down a dual carriage way without paths in part of it. Even if he was capable of getting there on his own i wouldn't want him walking down the side of a dual carriage way therefore i take him and collect him.

Original poster

sashh · 11/10/2012 10:10

YABU. If baptised catholics are eligible for free home to school transport, then so should those who have converted to catholicism.

Cathlics aren't.

They are not Catholic, they were but became C of E.

OP posts:

littlepiggie · 11/10/2012 10:14

I have sent my children to a school thats 3-4 miles away, there are lots af schools closer, but felt that this one was the best for my children. Why should I expect the tax payer to pay for it, our choice, we pay.

WongaDotMom · 11/10/2012 10:26

YANBU.

I sent my DD's to an excellent RC school out of town. As it is oversubscribed each year I was delighted that they got places.

I would have been prepared to make any sacrifice necessary to get them there and back each day despite being a single parent and full time nursing student at the time.

It turned out I didn't have to make any sacrifices as we were entitled to free transport as were all children who lived more than 3 miles from the school.
I never really understood why.

Sparklingbrook · 11/10/2012 10:29

It didn't work out for DS1 at the local High School so we transferred him to one 12 miles away. Our choice so we pay for the bus.

RaspberryLemonPavlova · 11/10/2012 10:36

My older 2 DC go 10 miles away. Our choice. It costs well over a thousand pounds a year, but is worth every penny to my DC. But it was our choice and I wouldn't expect tax payers to stump up for it.

And yes, I fully appreciate that we are lucky to be able to manage it. So do the DC, who appreciate that we sacrifice holidays etc inorder to afford it.

Sparklingbrook · 11/10/2012 10:38

I agree Rapsberry. £547.50 a year is a lot but to have a smiley, happy DS1 who isn't in tears every morning we do it.

mutny · 11/10/2012 10:43

I feel sorry for her. Its sad that faith schools are become the preserve of the rich

I don't get where this assumption comes from. Dd went to a faith school for 2 years. Its was not preserve of the rich, it was the opposite. Not Sato g that's a bad thing. But the faith schools around here are not over run with rich people.

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 11/10/2012 10:54

Being c of e or catholic doesn't mean they absolutely had to pick a faith school there were others nearer. My dd goes to school out of town and as the lea gave me a local school which I turned down as was / is a shit school. My choice to do that not much of a choice I have to foot the bill which will be £180 a month when dd2 goes. Free travel would be great though!!! But how it works. If she had been given a school out of town over three miles away as that was only space available then she would have got the travel.

Sneezecakesmama · 11/10/2012 10:55

I feel sure the new information involves the Human Rights Act.

Article 10 freedom of expression - which includes freedom to follow your religion.

By denying the bus passes the LC are denying the children's right to follow their religious education.

No doubt the legal advisors on the council have predicted massive legal bills and a precedent. The mum would get legal aid so money no object for her.

Hence they will give in and issue bus passes. Simply not worth the effort and expense.

Yet another triumph for the misuse of the HRC to suit VU people!

x2boys · 11/10/2012 10:59

my six yr old goes to a catholic school both my children are baptised catholic so my youngest will be starting nursery there in september it is not the nearest school by about three miles or even the nearest catholic school but it is the better catholic school its my choice to send my children there so i pay for the travel.

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 11/10/2012 11:06

Tbh if she gets FSM that must save her nearly enough a week to pay for the bus pass. Do her children starve in the holidays??? Doubt it. She's very lucky to have got given a good school and have peace of mind that her children r being fed.

seeker · 11/10/2012 11:37

Presumably she gets FSM because she can't afford lunches for her children?

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 11/10/2012 11:42

My point is that if the kids didn't get the meals then she would have to feed them herself. She wouldn't let them starve would she. Now she gets free meals which from what I understand is a god send to many struggling parent , and that must save her nearly enough money to pay for the bus pass. I stead of being thankful for what she's been lucky enough to receive ie the school she wanted and free meals she still wants more!

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 11/10/2012 11:51

Am I the only one who sees the irony that having the kids home must be costing her more in electric food drink gas and activities than it would cost to send them to school?

GrimmaTheNome · 11/10/2012 12:07

Article 10 freedom of expression - which includes freedom to follow your religion.

By denying the bus passes the LC are denying the children's right to follow their religious education.

That's a fallacious argument. 'Freedom to follow your religion' does not equate to 'right to a faith school'. The total lack of faith schools in countries with a secular state education system such as the US does not appear to have damaged their religious freedom.

At the age at which children start secondary, very few will have the maturity and insight to have decided what their religion (if any) is anyway. Children should be free not to follow their parent's religion - the existence of faith schools works against this.

Sneezecakesmama · 11/10/2012 16:10

Grumman. I don't advocate the argument but think that's what the council will think and cough up cos frankly its not worth the risk. The Freedom of expression is open to interpretation and does not mention faith schools specifically so who knows what the argument would be?

After all Abdul hamza used the HRA with great effect even though there are qualifications there which over ride the grounds he used.

What the US do is irrelevant as they are not signatories to the act.

DoIDare · 11/10/2012 21:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster

sashh · 11/10/2012 22:21

Maybe if she got a job, she could afford bus fare?

Don't be ridiculous, a job. What an absurd idea. She obviously can't work and do the sad face for the paper.

OP posts:

manicinsomniac · 11/10/2012 22:50

Does every child get a free bus pass to their nearest school or just those on income support/out of walking distance of a school?

If it's every child then I think that's a waste of money right there.

And I agree, this mum should have to pay if she's choosing to send her kids out of catchment. I really sympathise with her. But I don't think it's the LEA's responsibility.

Wheresmycaffeinedrip · 11/10/2012 23:07

Gotta laugh at the stupidity of some people. She could get jailed for keeping her kids off school ( assuming she hasn't de registered from the education system) and she's willing to risk her family over a bloody bus pass???

Glitterknickaz · 11/10/2012 23:19

Two of my three kids go to school 7 miles away and get free transport.
That's only because it's the nearest school that can meet their needs. I don't believe in those circs that I should have to pay.

DS1 is still at his mainstream primary that was a couple of minutes' walk from our old house but is now 2 miles away. Obviously we supply transport there, as there are nearer schools but we'd prefer he didn't have the upheaval.

Flip

1 2