SCHOOL TRANSPORT BILL
WRITTEN EVIDENCE TO THE EDUCATION AND
SKILLS SELECT COMMITTEE FROM THE NATIONAL UNION OF TEACHERS
The NUT welcomes the opportunity to provide initial
comments to the Education and Skills Select Committee on the draft
School Transport Bill and would wish the following points to be
given careful consideration. Further, more detailed, comments
will be submitted during the public consultation period.
1. The NUT accepts that there is a pressing need
to reduce the congestion and pollution caused by the school run.
The NUT accepts that it is sensible to open a debate into the
relevance of existing school transport legislation, which assumes
that it is reasonable to for pupils to walk three miles to school
(two miles for under 8s), accompanied if necessary by their parents.
Because of work commitments, very few parents, including of course
NUT members, can spend up to two hours per day walking their children
to and from school.
2. The NUT also accepts that any new school scheme
should be based on an assessment of the travel needs of all
pupils in a scheme area, from nursery to 18. The NUT accepts that
it is worth examining whether there is scope for making joint
arrangements with independent schools which will benefit both
sets of pupils but only on the basis that the LEA does
not effectively provide a state travel subsidy to the independent
sector.
3. The NUT believes that LEAs must be given additional
funds to pilot travel schemes. LEAs will need to spend money on
planning and on new infrastructure and equipment. They may be
able to raise revenue by selling spare capacity on school buses
but many initiatives which LEAs may wish to encourage, such as
'walking buses' or more cycling, will not generate income and
will cost money. The fact that LEAs will have to produce an annual
report for the DfES, analysing the effect that schemes have had
in reducing car use on the school run, also needs to be taken
into account. Whilst such reports are essential in terms of evaluating
the success of school travel schemes, they also represent a financial
burden on LEAs. The NUT would, therefore, urge that additional
funding for approved schemes be provided.
4. The NUT is concerned that, whilst LEAs are
instructed to consult school governors, parents, prospective parents
and transport operators before making a formal application, no
mention is made of consultation with teaching staff or teaching
unions. It is stated in paragraph 12 of the draft Prospectus that
schools must be committed to local travel schemes and able to
provide practical help in scheme design and in communicating scheme
strategies to pupils and parents. The most effective way to ensure
that schools are committed to their local scheme is to involve
the school workforce in its design.
5. The NUT has concerns about the wider use of
staggered school opening hours advocated as a way of making better
use of school buses. It is of paramount importance that teaching
and other school staff, as well as parents, are consulted on any
such proposals. Imposing even a slightly different start or finish
time could cause major problems in schools. It is essential that
the working day of teachers is not increased as a result of any
proposals to stagger school opening times, or to extend the school
day. Extending the school day could also have safety implications
for pupils if they end up having to walk to school, or walk home,
in the dark.
6. The NUT notes that one of the priorities on
which school travel schemes are invited to focus is improved provision
for pupils travelling to denominational schools. Denominational
schools tend to admit children from a wide area and lead to local
children of a different faith being denied places and having to
travel further, often by car, to obtain a school place. It is
important to recognise, therefore, that Government policies on
choice and diversity in the education system cause parents to
send their children to voluntary aided schools, grammar schools,
specialist schools or academies rather than their local school.
Such policies contribute to the very congestion that the Government
is seeking to tackle through these proposals as well as leading
to inequalities for children whose parents cannot afford to send
them large distances to school. In addition, the draft bill was
published before the recent out of court settlement by Lancashire
County Council to refund a parent for his atheist daughter's travel
costs to a non-denominational school which was further away than
the local faith school. This settlement therefore places non-believers
on the same basis as believers, in terms of access to schools,
and may threaten the Government's proposals to support improved
provision for pupils travelling to faith schools only.
7. The NUT would wish to see an enhanced focus
on transport safety issues on the part of any scheme. This would
include focusing on issues such as escorts on buses, seatbelts,
age of vehicles, regular safety checks, anti-bullying measures,
etc. Parents will only move their children from car to bus if
it is safe, as well as convenient and affordable.
8. The NUT opposes the proposal to remove automatic
free transport for pupils travelling more than three miles (or
two for those under eight) and introduce a means-tested scheme.
The removal of free transport and an introduction of means-tested
subsidies is likely to increase car use. The NUT would
wish to extend free school travel in some cases where the
journey is less than 3/2 miles. For example, where there is little
or no local public transport or particularly treacherous road
conditions which might force parents/carers to resort to using
the car for the school run. The introduction of some form of means
testing could also prove to be costly to administer in terms of
time and money.
9. The NUT shares the Government's concerns about
the position of low income families, with incomes that fall just
above the free school meal eligibility level, who live just under
three miles (or two miles for under 8s) from their 'nearest suitable
school'. Bus fares undoubtedly cause financial strain for such
families, particularly where there are several children.
| 
