Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Original poster

Cuts to free school transport.

29 replies

LynetteScavo · 19/11/2010 21:29

Why is free transport to faith schools being cut, but not free transport to grammar schools?

I don't want this to get into the rights and wrongs of different types of education, just wondering why grammar schools are escaping the cuts.

OP posts:
Jareth · 19/11/2010 21:29

link please :)

darleneconnor · 19/11/2010 21:36

I think all schol transport should be means tested.

Original poster
LynetteScavo · 19/11/2010 21:39

I'm going by a letter I received from the County Council today. (It didn't come as a surprise.)

It basically says children who start a faith school after 2012 will probably won't be entitled to travel to faith schools.

I can find links regarding lots of other counties cutting transport to faith schools, but I've no idea if they also have grammar schools.

OP posts:
Jareth · 19/11/2010 21:40

School buses should be subsidised for everybody - the roads would be clearer, people would have to drive less miles, children (secondary) would learn a bit more independence than if being dropped at the door, win win win

means tested my arse.

My school was within 2 miles of the mid point of our village. The boys school was just over the 2 mile point from the middle of the village... so the boys got a free bus to school and the girls didn't (the difference was a 5 min walk between them)

MissAnneElk · 19/11/2010 21:54

I suppose it depends if there are closer schools and that it is parental choice to use the faith school. But, yes, I'd agree the same rules should also apply to grammar schools.

Darlene, do please expand on why you think all school transport should be means tested.

darleneconnor · 20/11/2010 11:22

It would encourage people to send their children to their local school.

Children could walk or cycle, thereby get some much needed exercise. Or if they have to use public transport, that would teach them some independence.

Why should poorer people subsidise the choices of the rich?

Original poster
LynetteScavo · 20/11/2010 16:41

I was looking for a definitive answer, I suppose, such as a some law which was passed in 1952 stating all in county children living more than 3 miles from school shall have free transport to grammar schools. Basically, I'm wondering if it's statutory.

In the case of most of the children on my sons bus, they travel to the faith school in the next town because the faith school in our town was closed, and they needed to be transferred somewhere. Quite a few children ended up being bused out to this school, despite their parents not wanting them to have a faith education, because the schools in our town were full. This happened to people who moved into the town when their children were already of secondary school age. So I really don't think it's a case of the poor subsidising the rich.

I've calculated we will be able to afford the bus fare, so it would be easy to sit back and not say anything.

But DH thinks that if children stop travelling to DS's school, it may well end up closing and the schools in our town and the next town will expand further. Which financially would be great for the county council, but I don't think it would benefit high school students. (I don't think bigger schools and smaller playing fields are the way to go)

For what it's worth, I think the church should be paying the bus fares, on a means tested basis.

OP posts:
janeyjampot · 20/11/2010 18:24

We've also had a letter and in fact I went to a consultation meeting arranged by the county council.

The thing that concerned me was not the removal of free transport in itself (although it puts people with siblings in a rather difficult position, or those with children in faith primaries who want them to move to faith secondaries) but the realisation that many of the bus services would simply cease to exist. Thus parents would not have the choice of whether or not it was affordable - it would be take them to school or move them. It appears to be the case here that once the final 'paid for' pupils have finished, the bus will stop running, as the council actually pays for the bus, not the pupils' fares.

sarah293 · 20/11/2010 18:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster
LynetteScavo · 20/11/2010 19:17

Interesting, janeyjampot! I shall have to look into that! So that leaves us with moving, paying for a taxi,me not working, or of course sending them to the nearest school. DH won't entertain independent, even if we could afford it.

Luckily my youngest two DC are the type who could cope anywhere. If we hadn't got DS1 into this school, he probably wouldn't be at school at all.

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 20/11/2010 20:12

The law is that you cannot be convicted for failing to send your child to school if you live more than the statutory walking distance away from the school (2 miles for children under 8, 3 miles for older children) and the LA has failed to provide free transport. However, if there is a place available at a school within the statutory walking distance and you choose to send your child to a school that is further away, the LA's failure to provide free transport does not give you a defence.

What this means for faith schools is that the LA is not under any obligation to provide transport if there is a place available at a non-faith school within the statutory walking distance. However, if the faith school is the nearest available school then transport must be provided.

Original poster
LynetteScavo · 20/11/2010 20:18

Indeed!

Have just read the prosed changes again, and yes, there may well be no transport at all!

I bet a taxi twice a day will cost more than I earn. It would be insane for me to give up work to do nothing but drive 3 DC to and from school, wouldn't it? Confused

OP posts:
janeyjampot · 20/11/2010 20:42

Even more scarily, at the consultation the representative from the council said that they intended to appeal against the (currently) statutory entitlement to free transport if you live 2 miles (primary) or 3 miles (secondary) from school. We live in a very rural county and I think this would have an enormous impact on rural communities - basically families would have to live in towns unless they could afford to drive their children to school...

prh47bridge · 20/11/2010 22:07

I don't know how they intend to appeal against it or to whom.. Unless the relevant section of the Education Act is repealed by parliament the requirement will remain. They could, of course, make representations to the government asking them to change the law but I would be surprised if they were successful.

mummytime · 20/11/2010 22:23

Just to add. In our area one village has a school bus to school X for various historical reasons. However it has at least two schools closer, but no transport to either of them. The ombudsman has just said that pupils from that village should have priority admission to school X, over pupils who live within walking distance. Which will in turn have a huge impact on the other schools in the same town as school X, and of course stops the local schools to the village gaining children from there (socially more affluent than the rest of their catchments).

Bramshott · 20/11/2010 22:43

I love school transport! No sign of cuts to it here yet (Hampshire). We are more than 3 miles from our catchment school.

MissAnneElk · 21/11/2010 08:41

Darlene, my children do go to the local school. It's a 25 mile round trip. There is no public transport from our town to the town with the school.
I don't think children should be transported past other schools if the reason for that is parental
choice but a blanket ban on free school transport is not the answer.

darleneconnor · 21/11/2010 09:52

But it's your choice to live so far from a school. Why should poor people subsidise your choices if you can afford to pay for it yourself?

Why should school transport be exempted from means-testing?

Tikitikitembo · 21/11/2010 09:59

We don't get free transport to grammar schools here. People pay nearly a grand a year.

Bramshott · 21/11/2010 10:01

If you make that argument Darlene, then why should anything be exempted from means testing? Why should the kids of the middle classes be entitled to take books out of the library for free if they can afford to pay for it? Why should people get their bins collected for free if they could afford to pay etc?

The school transport has grown up because so many village schools have been closed over the past 50 years. The old school in our village is right next door to my house. I would LOVE it if it was still open and my kids could go there, but the fact is that it's closed, so the children are bussed somewhere else. I'm sure when they closed it, they did the calculation that it would be cheaper to tranport the children than keep the school open.

Remotew · 21/11/2010 10:04

We don't get free school transport as it's less than 3 miles away, just, but many children do who live over 3 miles from the only catchment school. Lot's of children are from farming communities so it's not a choice to live there but a necessity. I don't agree that free transport should be means tested. The current system makes sense.

If a child is sent to a school outside the catchment there is no free transport.

Original poster
LynetteScavo · 21/11/2010 12:42

Tikitikitembo, even if they live more than 3 miles away? Shock

It's definitely a postcode lottery at the moment.

OP posts:
ArentFanny · 21/11/2010 12:46

Our nearest non faith school is 6.5 miles away, there are 3 other closer schools all faith ones.

MissAnneElk · 21/11/2010 15:54

Darlene, it's just not practical for everyone to live within walking distance of a secondary school. Bigger schools are cheaper to run than several smaller schools and in my experience are able to offer better facilities to students. Happily, there are no plans here to stop subsidised transport. In rural areas you tend to get fewer facilities but income tax is the same and council tax is often higher, so I certainly don't feel guilty about not paying directly for school transport (until 6th form of course).
I'd love to know what else you think should be means tested.

ArentFanny · 21/11/2010 17:11

Darlene, our nearest secondary school is 7 miles away regardless of whether you are poor or rich that is where it is.

Swipe left for the next trending thread