Agenda item

To conduct pre-decision scrutiny on the proposals under consultation. 

Cabinet Member Martyn Groucott introduced the report, explaining that the purpose of the consultation and the report brought to the committee was to consider whether to adopt the statutory distance eligibility criteria for the provision of free home to school transport. He answered the members’ questions with Debra Hill-Howells. 

Key points made by Members: 

• Members asked for clarity on the two options for changing the statutory distance over which free transport is provided and queried how much savings each of these options would generate. The member commented that the consultation didn’t offer alternatives to changing the statutory distance for the public to consider, for example, an increase in council tax. Councillor Groucutt confirmed that increasing the council tax by approximately one percentage point, would generate about £700,000 per year, but that this needed to be considered as part of the wider budgetary process as there are other budgetary pressures that will need to be considered. 

• A member highlighted that the time of year is not particularly good for achieving responses from the public to consultations, as many people would be on holidays. It was confirmed that the consultation commencement date had been delayed by the general election, however, all emails had been sent to existing users of transport, schools, stakeholders and operators to make them aware of the consultation. Officers confirmed that there will be sessions in hubs and there is documentation online explaining the purpose of the consultation as well as a survey that invites people to provide their feedback on the proposals. 

• A member shared their concerns about increasing the in-house service, and staffing implications. The officer confirmed that the cost of in-house provision is compared to external tenders and the in-house service only undertakes the service if they are the best financial option. 

• A member asked how the council would monitor the environmental impact of increasing personal transport budgets and car use and officers responded that the council has a carbon reduction plan in place and has made a climate emergency declaration, and that they will assess the carbon footprint of the different transport options and work with schools and parents to promote sustainable travel choices whilst considering the environmental impact as part of the decision-making process, to mitigate any adverse effects. 

• A member asked how the council would support working parents who may face difficulties due to the changes and what mitigations would be offered. Cllr Groucutt responded that there is already discretionary support to help families and that the details would be shared.  

• Members asked how the available walking routes are assessed for safety and suitability and heard that there is a standard Road Safety GB assessment process which is normally undertaken by Highways officers. Where an assessment is challenged, officers will walk the route with parents and members. 

• A member asked why the draft policy wording wasn’t included in the consultation document and was advised it’s because it hasn’t changed, except for the three options that are being considered and that if any of these were to be adopted, the distance eligibility criteria will be amended accordingly. The member asked for clarity that the policy wording would stay the same, apart from the three options. officers confirmed the policy wording will stay the same apart from the three options, and the proposed amendments will be included in the Cabinet report.  

• The committee asked how the proposals would affect the faith transport, and the faith schools and officers confirmed the proposals will not change the eligibility criteria for accessing faith transport but any changes to the distance eligibility criteria will apply to all learners, including faith. They advised that the consultation document includes a question about the impact of the proposals on religion and belief, and parents are also able to provide comments or suggestions on this issue. 

• A member asked if transport that had been provided as there wasn’t an available walking route would be ended at the end of the academic year and the answer given was that it wouldn’t, unless works had been completed to make the route safe, such as a crossing point or changes to the speed limit.  

• A member asked if there would still be dedicated school transport from Goytre to King Henry for the new academic year and heard that the intention was to reinstate the public bus service for home to school transport from Goytre for the forthcoming academic year, as the bus service route had been altered, so that learners do not need to cross the A4042.  

• A member highlighted that it was important that council attempts to reduce its carbon footprint by using its own transport as opposed to that of sub-contracted supply.  

• Members expressed doubt that in adverse weather, children in rural areas would be walking 2 miles and a member asked for clarity on the process where applicants had not been successful in the first choice of school and had been awarded transport to an alternative school. He asked if they would continue to receive free transport in the subsequent year, the rules around siblings, extended family and separated families. Officers confirmed that where a learner had been granted free transport as they were attending their nearest school as allocated by CYP then they would continue to free transport, unless there were changes in their personal circumstances, such as moving house and they would be re-assessed. Siblings would not be entitled to free transport where a parent had exercised parental preference. 

• A member asked what would be considered if the consultation response is very negative and commented that in their view, question 1 not asking if the person answering will be affected may skew the answer. It was confirmed that the survey responses would form part of a Cabinet report to enable Members to decide whether or not to proceed with all or any of the options. 

• A member queried whether the findings of the consultation would be reported back to the People Scrutiny Committee ahead of Cabinet decision and it was confirmed that statutory timescales for implementation meant that the item was not scheduled to return to scrutiny ahead of Cabinet decision and that this meeting constituted pre-decision scrutiny during the consultation period.  

• Members requested that the link to the consultation be kept on the Council’s front page of the website until the end of the consultation period.  Action: Deb Hill-Howells to request this via Communications Team.  

Chair’s summary: 

The chair sought the committee’s views on whether the policy could be supported and there were no stated views expressed to the contrary, however a member expressed their concern about how the data arising from the consultation would be interpreted.