Memorandum submitted by the Special Educational
Consortium a response to School Travel Schemes: Draft Bill and
Prospectus (ST 13)
The Special Educational Consortium is convened
under the auspices of the Council for Disabled Children to protect
and promote the interests of children and young people with special
educational needs and disabilities. The Consortium provides a
policy forum on issues affecting children and young people with
special educational needs and disabilities. The Consortium works
more intensively during the passage of legislation, most recently
during the passage of the SEN and Disability Act 2001 and the
Education Act 2002.
SEC is a broad consortium consisting mainly
of voluntary organisations but including professional associations
and local government organisations as well. SEC defines its policies
by identifying areas of consensus that exist among the wide range
of groups represented within it.
A WELCOME
SEC welcomes the support for flexible and innovative
approaches to the provision of schools transport, and the intention
to minimise the impact of transport on the environment. SEC is
concerned however, that the particular issues for disabled children
and children with special educational needs have been overlooked.
There is real concern that the current difficulties in accessing
appropriate transport for disabled children and children with
special educational needs will be further exacerbated by the proposals
as they stand.
DISABLED PUPILS
AND PUPILS
WITH SEN
SEC is most concerned that there is no mention
of disabled pupils in the papers, and that the references to pupils
with special educational needs are weak and outdated.
The Disability Discrimination Act places significant
duties on LEAs:
— not to treat disabled pupils less
favourably;
— to ensure that disabled pupils are
not placed at a substantial disadvantage;
— to plan to increase access to education
and associated services at schools in the area.
This, and the role that transport plays in this,
is not mentioned at all.
In terms of SEN, there is reference to provision
for pupils with a statement, but no recognition that local policies
to reduce statements may impact adversely on pupils whose transport
needs have not changed even though they may no longer have a statement.
Local policies to reduce statements are recognised as relying
heavily on building the trust of parents that their child's needs
can be met without a statement. The papers do not reflect this.
SOME BASICS
SEC recognises parents' responsibilities in
getting their children to school. With increasing age and increasing
independence it is appropriate for children to make their own
way to school, where this is possible. SEC also believes that,
in certain circumstances the LEA should provide transport at no
cost to the parents. Specifically LEAs:
— should take into account the distance
of a child's home from the school, which they currently do;
— should also take into account the
child's ability to develop independence in travelling to school,
supporting those children who, despite their desire to develop
such independence continue to need support in getting there, for
example: children with a physical impairment, dual sensory impairment
or challenging behaviour. Currently such children are entitled
to free transport where transport is provided in Part 3 of their
statement, and at the discretion of the LEA if transport is identified
in Part 5 of the statement.
SEC is concerned that without stating explicitly
the responsibilities towards disabled pupils and pupils with special
educational needs, the Bill will risk undermining what is currently
provided.
SOME SPECIFIC
ISSUES ON
SHARING
Those who can share
Many disabled pupils and pupils with special
educational needs would be happy to share transport to and from
school, indeed they are most enthusiastic to do so. However, without
fully accessible buses the dream of travelling to schools with
their friends remains just that. SEC is clear that all buses should
be fully accessible in order to accommodate all pupils who are
able to share transport. Access to transport should be built in
to LEAs' Accessibility Strategies and into Schools' Accessibility
Plans and should reflect the necessary flexibilities to allow
pupils to stay for after school activities so that they are not
placed at a disadvantage in comparison with their peers, particularly
in the light of the extended schools proposals, which the papers
acknowledge.
Those who can't share
Some pupils, in particular those with autistic
spectrum disorders, would not be able to access shared transport.
For them it is equally important that appropriate arrangements
are made without having to share.
IMPACT ON
JOURNEY TIMES
A further factor to be taken into account is
the journey time incurred by pupils who may be asked to share
transport. Many disabled pupils and pupils with special educational
needs currently have long journey times. In developing new arrangements
it is important that this is addressed and journey times reduced
not increased. There is a risk that, otherwise, disabled pupils
could be placed at a substantial disadvantage. This would be unacceptable
and potentially discriminatory.
SOME SPECIFIC
ISSUES ABOUT
QUALITY
There are some further specific issues about
the training and police-checking of drivers and escorts who accompany
a small minority of children to and from school. The need for
training and police-checking must be built in to the schemes proposed
in the Bill. In addition the nation's most vulnerable children:
children with life-threatening conditions need health care protocols
to be in place to cover emergency procedures. Drivers and escorts
need to be fully trained in such procedures.
IN CONCLUSION
SEC urges the Select Committee to recognise
the concerns raised and ensure that the features of the proposed
schemes adequately recognise the more complex transport needs
of disabled pupils and pupils with special educational needs.
Philippa Stobbs
Policy Officer to the Special Educational Consortium
April 2004
| 
