School children should receive free bus travel before pensioners?

[Itchthescratch]

My child is starting a school where it will cost around £2k for bus travel. This school is local and one of the closest schools to us. The other schools close to us are much worse in terms of opportunities and academic outcomes. I can afford the bus fare easily but I worry that some poorer families will really struggle to send their children to the higher achieving school because of the cost.

I understand that there isn't an endless pot of money but surely it would make sense to give school children free travel ahead of other groups like pensioners? School children are statistically much more likely to suffer from poverty (child poverty is almost double pensioner poverty)and it seems crazy that we aren't supporting social mobility whilst we let all pensioners travel for free on buses.

Our council offers free school bus for those who can't afford before the fare paying students. Ours is over 1k for 3 school terms. Are you sure it's 2k a year at child fare rate?

Nope

For the millionth time, the cap doesn't apply to school-only buses.

Yep, positive.

Whats with the pensioner bashing? You are comparing apples against oranges.
I think you’re comparing two completely different issues here, and that’s why the argument doesn’t really land.

Free bus travel for pensioners isn’t given instead of free travel for school children. It’s not a case of “if one group gets help, the other must go without.” They’re funded from different pots, justified by different needs, and aimed at solving different problems.

Many pensioners simply can’t walk long distances, can’t drive anymore, and rely on buses for basic independence - medical appointments, shopping, social contact. For some, free travel is the difference between living a life and being housebound.

School children, on the other hand, are generally mobile and physically able to get to school by multiple routes. The issue you’re describing isn’t about poverty vs pensioners, it’s about the local authority’s transport policy and how they fund school routes. That’s a separate debate entirely.

Child poverty is absolutely a serious concern, but using pensioners as the comparison point muddies the water. Supporting one vulnerable group doesn’t mean another group must lose support. It’s not a zero‑sum game.

If the bus fare is genuinely £2k for a local school, that’s a problem with how school transport is organised in your area, not with pensioners having free bus passes.

If it had been invested when we paid it might have been enough but it was all spent. Not our fault.

I'd be interested to see that broken down by where people live. I'm sure there's a more nuanced interpretation taking into account that in earlier generations many people didn't survive long enough to get the diseases of middle and old age, or if they did get them died younger instead of living on for many years as they might do now.

And how much does the taxpayer contribute to your children's free schooling, free dentists, free eye checks, school meals, subsidised nurseries, statutory mat leave, etc etc

Quite a significant amount I imagine.

The free bus travel has caused some problems in Scotland.

Kids who would normally walk to school are jumping on the bus for a couple of stops so less exercise than they would normally get. They also take up space on the bus that would normally be used by people trying to get to work who are staying on for a much longer time so that has caused a lot of frustration.

there have been many problems with anti social behaviour where kids just ride the buses all evening causing trouble or using the buses to travel to fight people in other areas.

My opinion is that everyone should pay something. Say for children and those of pensionable age no more than £1 a journey. That way there would be the incentive for those able to walk to do so on shorter journeys (improving health) and there would probably be more bus services provided.

Whenever government has added the provision a service free at the point of use, it never seems to bring more of that service, as the providers are underfunded. Look at the struggles many nurseries are having with the increased free provision.

Hence a small fare as I suggest.

It should be means tested. My children wouldn’t have needed help to pay for school transport, my parents didn’t and we won’t need free travel as pensioners.
There was a time when it was said it was cheaper to give to all (eg child benefit back then) than to means test. But that was pre the massive computerisation that has happened since then, surely it would be more cost effective?

They are all funded ultimately out of the same pot. To pretend otherwise is completely disingenuous. Without infinite public money then it comes down to competing priorities and this will need us to evaluate what matters most. When defence needs more money for example then other departments see cuts. This is how it works.

The government could subsidise school children's transport through exactly the same mechanism they currently fund it for old people. They could and I believe should prioritise the group that needs it most. It isn't realistic to suggest that we simply fund school children as well as pensioners. That's a completely unfunded proposal at a time when public finances are already in deficit.

So actually we need some honestly in debates like this. If one group gets something funding it means less funding for everyone else. In this context, who do we prioritise? I believe it should be school kids. You might favour funding the wealthiest group in society. We have a difference of opinion.

There are ways to solve the imbalance of oversubscribed schools and under capacity ones. You don’t magic more pupils, you just have a fairer split of the ones we already have, or change the way schools are funded.

It's free after the morning peak, so we get free travel in the evening peak. All days at weekends and on Bank Holidays.

Did these taxpayers not have these things when they were children? Weren't they the direct beneficiaries of other people funding them? Why now do people think they have no obligation to refund society for the investment it made in them when they were too young to pay tax themselves?

What a bizarre retort because a pensioner would have had most of this plus free dentistry as an adult…

And why would you compare education costs to a free bus bus?!

Perhaps some people didn’t get an education judging by some of these posts.

problem is, my kid can't walk that far by himself and his needs aren't adequate to get a council taxi. £120 a term so cheaper than op, I'm curious what's costing over £600 a term if it's local enough to not need trains etc.

Does it occur to you that many pensioners just can't walk so they would have to pay. It wouldn't be a choice for them for even quite short distances as it is for most younger people.

Can't he get a disabled bus pass?

This is such a rubbish argument. Roads were busy 30 / 40 years ago. It wasn't the 1940s with the occasional car . People work from home now so the rise has probably slowed.
The OP has not said why her children can't cycle. Many still do around here.

is that an annual student bus pass or is that train travel too?

You’re still treating this as a single pot of money with one tap, and that’s not how public finance actually works. Yes, everything ultimately comes from taxation, but the idea that “if pensioners get £X then children must lose £X” is a very oversimplified way of looking at budgets.

Different schemes exist for different policy reasons, with different eligibility rules, different funding mechanisms, and different social outcomes. They aren’t interchangeable, and they aren’t in direct competition in the way you’re suggesting.

The free bus pass for pensioners isn’t about wealth - it’s about mobility. A large proportion of older people physically cannot walk long distances, cannot drive, and rely on buses for basic independence. Removing that support doesn’t magically create a school transport budget. It just creates a different social problem.

School transport, meanwhile, is a local authority issue. The £2k cost you’re talking about is a result of how your council organises routes, contracts, and eligibility. That’s where the pressure point is - not pensioners’ bus passes.
You’re trying to frame this as “choose the poorest group”, but that’s not the actual trade‑off. It’s not a binary. You don’t improve child poverty by making older people housebound.

If you want to argue for subsidised school transport, that’s a perfectly valid discussion - but it sits within education and local transport policy, not within a moral contest between children and pensioners.

Exactly, I don’t understand why pensioners with an appointment can’t use their bus pass to encourage them to not drive to the hospital

they could show their appointment letter