No free transport to mandatory education to 18 years!

[aryhian]

If you contact the National Union of Students you will find out that when
mandatory education goes up to 18 next year there is no free transport to
that education. Though this is a national policy decisions on funding
transport are being done on a County basis, only a few County Councils are funding this transport.I live in Somerset and Somerset County Council have not only slashed bus services but put student bus passes for 16 - 18 year olds up to £600. They point to the 16 - 19 bursary which is a small pot post 16 colleges/sixth forms were given to help offset the loss of EMA to the poorest students but local colleges say this is no were near enough to
provide transport in this rural county and they are not legally responsible
for providing access to education. I have had letters from the CEO of our County Council and Tim Loughton MP, Under Secretary Of State for Education confirming that they will not be funding this transport when the mandatory age for leaving education goes up to 18, academic year 2013.This is a train crash waiting to happen and parents need to be aware to start campaigning before the next academic year.Parents could potentially be prosecuted for thir children not attending education when they cannot afford to get them there! Please contact your MP, support the NUS Campaign and write to the media.

I've just had a look at the 2008 Act, and for transport it refers back to the 1996 Act, which (though only partially amended on the online version I found) does have a difference between compulsory and non compulsory school age. There is a duty on LAs to provide free transport to those of compulsory school age, and it seems that duty remains unchanged, so rises as the compulsory school age rises. Or do any MNetters read this differently or have other authoritative statements on it?

Councils have had over four years to plan their response to this, and central government is right in saying that it is not their problem. I suppose that if NUS is indeed correct in saying LAs are not going to fulfil their duty, then there is a major problem for families in those areas. It is right to highlight this issue, to make every effort to ensure it is headed off before ROSLA takes effect.

Has NUS published a master list of non-compliant LAs? For pressure directly on them seems the best thing to do now.

Just to be clear the school leaving age is NOT going up. Young people will have three choices:

• full time education or training
• apprenticeship
• full time work (at least 20 hours per week) coupled with at least 280 hours per year relevant training

Personally I think the change is going to be very difficult to police given the range of options available.

If the last government had simply raised the school leaving age there would be no question that the young people affected would still be potentially eligible for free school transport. As they did not do so the position is less clear. Having reviewed the relevant legislation I have changed my view. I now think the way the last government implemented this change means the young people affected will not be eligible for free school transport.

Given the way the legislation is worded and the fact there is no programme in place to significantly expand sixth form capacity, I suspect there will be little change in the numbers at school. There may be a few more staying at school but I think the likely outcome is that most of those affected will go into apprenticeships or full time work with relevant training.

Thanks prh47bridge - I wasn't sure whether my reading would be right. It is something that should have been more explicitly drafted back in 2008, and will probably take a test case to sort out authoritatively now. (Something for NUS to find?)

The Ombudsman has confirmed that the Council has no legal obligation to provide transport when the mandatory age to stay in education goes up to 18. I went to the Ombudsman about lack of concessions from Somerset County Council for their £600 bus pass this year and this information came out via that process, I had argued that after losing EMA in 2010 children were at a disadvantage for academic years 2011/12 as we had to find funding for over £1000 in buss pass funding when as mandatory education was going up to 18 academic year 2013 families of children going then would not. The Local Government Ombudsman then stated the Council is under no legal obligation to provide transport for those having to stay in further education from 2013. The problem of affording transport will apply in rural areas (my village has no bus) whichever option children take, education, voluntary work, or apprenticeship will be the same. I suspect a Judicial Review will be necessary. I worked with Public Interest Lawyers from Birmingham in a successful campaign to stop Library closures in Somerset and would recommend them for advice. If any parents do want to take this on who are on an extremely low income they may be able to get legal aid to do so.

Just to emphasise, the mandatory school leaving age is not changing. There is no massive expansion of sixth forms in progress so the numbers staying in school to 18 probably won't change much. What is changing is that young people who have reached the school leaving age but are not yet 18 must, if they are not in school, be undertaking full time training or receive training as part of an apprenticeship or receive at least 280 hours relevant training per year whilst in a full time job. Strictly speaking, the mandatory age to stay in education is not changing but a new mandatory age to stay in education or training is being introduced.

The law passed by the last government does not clarify how all these extra training places will be provided or who meets the cost, although it does say that an LA must provide "such services as it considers appropriate to encourage, enable or assist the effective participation of those persons in education or training". It leaves policing attendance of young people in education or training to LAs. Given the range of options available to young people it would not surprise me if a significant number slip through the cracks.

It appears the intention of the legislation is that non-compliance should be mainly dealt with by taking action against the young person concerned, although there is also provision for parenting orders to be used where the court thinks that will be effective in getting the young person to comply.

The view of the LGO on interpretation of the law is not final. It can be challenged in the courts. The relevant legislation clearly requires the LA to have a transport policy for young people of sixth form age which, amongst other things, must specify "the arrangements that the authority consider it necessary to make for the provision of financial assistance in respect of the reasonable travelling expenses" for children attending sixth form. That falls short of a requirement to provide free transport.

I originally thought that free transport would extend to those staying on in school but that was due to being taken in by the publicity stating the last government were raising the school leaving age. I should have checked the legislation properly. Now that I have done so I am increasingly of the view that the LGO is correct that LAs are not required to provide free transport. However, as LAs increasingly withdraw free transport from sixth form pupils there remains the question as to whether or not it is valid for LAs to decide that little or no financial assistance is necessary for reasonable travelling expenses.

I think many areas will resist offering free transport to those in school, because it could mean a challenge from those in other education or training places to have access to the same resources. To me, it is more difficult to justify why some 16-18 years get it and some don't, then to say none of the do.

But if some people are living in an area with no realistic transport options , it could be argued that to not provide services, the LA could possible be held in breech of their facilitation role.

Personally, I don't think this change will make much difference to the majority if young people. It will, however, covert 16 and 17 year old NEETS into truants and thus change the framework of enforcement and sanctions without improving their lives significantly.