To seek comments on the conclusions of the review of the discretionary policies for provision of home to school transport.

Councillor R. M. Manning and Mr A. Marson declared personal interests in this item.

Comments of the Committee were sought on the conclusions of the review of the discretionary policies for provision of home to school transport.

The Head of Policy and Resources reminded the Committee that as part of the cross-service Best Value review of transport, the Committee had established a working party to review the discretionary policies, detailed in appendix 1 the report, for the provision of school transport.  

He reported that following initial consultation the Working Party felt that no change should be made to the policies covering: Boarding points; Year 10/11 whose home address changes; Travelling times; Vacant seats for all age groups and Public Service route subsidy.  Further consultation had been undertaken on: Denominational transport; Post-16 transport; Transport for under 5s and Transport for children with SEN, the results of which were detailed in the report. 

In relation to denominational transport he reported that the Working Party had identified the following four options for consultation: 1. Maintain the status quo; 2. Remove any form of subsidy; 3. Seek parental contributions and 4. Free transport with mileage limits.  These were further defined in the report.  The Working Party had concluded that options for the future should be between 1, 2, and 3.  However, due to the limited number of responses and no clear pattern the Working Party were reluctant to make a particular recommendation and proposed that the Scrutiny Committee consider options 1, 2 and 3.

The Committee debated the options.  Particular consideration was given to the low response to the questionnaire; the nature of the questions asked; the range of consultees involved; the government’s support for distinct and specialist schools into which category denominational schools might fall; the potential effect on poorer families in rural areas; the high degree of inter-school support between all schools in the County and the fact that many LEAs did not support denominational transport.  Concern was expressed that the bigger picture needed to be considered when weighing up the potential financial savings, particularly when any changes could only be implemented over a number of years.

The Head of Policy and Resources briefly reported upon the options considered concerning Post-16 transport; Transport for under 5s and Transport for children with Special Educational Needs (SEN), further detailed in the report.

RESOLVED: That the report and recommendations of the Working Party be noted and the following recommendations be submitted to the Cabinet Member (Education) for consideration:

a)                  Denominational Transport.

That the status quo be maintained.

b)                 Post 16 Transport

That the current charging levels be maintained (subject to annual review) but no additional subsidy be offered on the basis that Education Maintenance Allowances (EMAs) were available to cover costs.

c)                  Transport for Under 5s

No change to existing policy.

d)                 Transport for Children with Special Educational Needs

That the existing policy be amended to benefit only those students who have not reached their nineteenth birthday, and those students not in receipt of a mobility allowance.