Minutes:
The Strategic Lead Education Support Service
introduced the report and stated that it provided an overview of
home to school transport. She explained that Thurrock Council had a
statutory duty to ensure children between the ages of 5 and 16, and
in some cases young people up to age 25 with an Education, Health
and Care Plan (EHCP), could get to school. She stated that
currently Thurrock Council assisted 1161 pupils get to school,
either through contracted bus routes, train ticket reimbursement,
or payments to parents for fuel. She stated that the Council were
committed to ensuring sustainable home to school travel for
children, and the team were currently undertaking a review of
school routes, including those that had previously been deemed
unsafe.
The Strategic Lead Education Support Service explained that the
team were considering introducing travel training for young people
in education that had complex SEND needs. She felt that this would
help some young people with SEND become more independent as they
would have someone accompanying them on their route to and from
school for a minimum of three months, with a view to them
completing an assessment and becoming able to travel on their own.
She stated that for those children with highly complex needs, for
example children attending Beacon Hill Academy, all passenger
transport would be retained. She added that the team were also
introducing a new IT module that would help support transport
providers and contracted route drivers.
The Strategic Lead Education Support Service moved on and explained
that although the team were considering all routes to school, no
decision had been taken yet, in particular no decision regarding
the route from East Tilbury to St Cleres. She explained that the
team regularly reviewed and investigated routes to schools and
would continue to consider potential alternative options for
travel, for example pupils utilising the train service. She stated
that no conclusions or decisions had been agreed, but legal advice
was being sought to determine which routes had the potential to be
made safe. She stated that the team would be talking to parents,
Councillors and the school before any decision was made. She
explained that currently six buses took children from East Tilbury
to St Cleres, and the team would be looking at all safety and
capacity aspects, and had undertaken a professional risk
assessment. She explained that the eligibility criteria for free
home to school transport would remain the same and therefore any
child with a low income family, or who lived more than three miles
away from their school, would be eligible to apply for free
travel.
The Strategic Lead Education Support Service explained that for
some post-16 students who would not be able to utilise contracted
travel anymore, the travel training programme would be offered,
which would help improve their independence. She added that the
team were currently working with year 11 students regarding travel
training, but this would be lowered so year 9 students would also
be able to access the programme. She added that the team were also
focussing on sustainable travel, for example pupils utilising bus
and train services, which would reduce carbon emissions. She added
that the team were also considering introducing personal travel
budgets which would be given directly to parents and would allow
parents to choose the most suitable transport for their child and
would give parents more freedom. She stated that the personal
travel budgets would be given directly to parents before the start
of term, which would ensure that no parent would be in financial
difficulty waiting for reimbursements. She stated that this work
would be completed in four to six weeks, and would be ready for
introduction by September 2022.
The Strategic Lead Education Support Service added that the team
were also recruiting a behaviour support specialist who would
support children who had behavioural issues and needed support
travelling to and from school. She stated that the specialist would
travel with them to school and ensure that their journey was
comfortable and not stressful. She summarised and stated that a
travel survey had been given to St Cleres in December 2021 to
provide an insight into pupils and parents travel patterns and
safety, and emphasised that as there would be no change in policy,
the Council did not need to undertake a more formal
consultation.
The Chair opened the debate and stated that there were some good
proposals contained within the report, such as the travel training
programme, but felt concerned regarding other proposals. She
questioned the overspend of the home to school transport budget.
The Corporate Director Children’s Services replied that the
service was overspent by approximately £800,000 and the
proposal to remove school buses from East Tilbury to St Cleres
would save approximately £200,000. She stated that the
decision to consider all available routes was to ensure that
children travelled to school in the best way, and that currently no
routes were being stopped. She added that the team had to be
mindful of budget pressures, but the overspend would not be solely
saved through travel training or the removal of contracted bus
services. She stated that the team would support SEND children to
travel differently.
Councillor Kent queried the total budget of the home to school
transport team. The Corporate Director Children’s Services
replied that the approximate budget was in excess of
£1million. Councillor Kent felt that £800,000 was a
large overspend and queried if a £150,000 savings projection
had already been agreed for next years’ budget. He also
queried what specific COP26 sustainability goals would be met
through the home to school transport proposals. He asked how many
tonnes of carbon emissions would be saved through the planned
removal of the school buses. He felt that a baseline level of
carbon emissions data needed to be collected before the team could
decide if the removal of the school buses would be environmentally
beneficial. The Strategic Lead Education Support Service replied
that the team were currently looking into sustainable travel and
overall COP26 goals, but that sustainable travel had been an
important part of the summit. She stated that the team could look
into the baseline air quality figures to determine the impact of
the school buses. Councillor Kent moved on and asked if a mode of
transport could be deemed as a safe route to school, rather than a
physical route. He questioned if the current school bus from East
Tilbury to St Cleres had been deemed unsafe. The Strategic Lead
Education Support Service stated that a mode of transport, for
example buses or trains, could be deemed as a safe route to school.
She added that the current contracted bus route had been deemed to
be a safe route to school, but other forms of transport such as the
walking route, were in the process of being determined safe or
unsafe. She added that currently 376 pupils utilised the current
bus service between East Tilbury and St Cleres. Councillor Kent
asked if children eligible for free transport would be reassessed
after the introduction of the new personal transport budget. The
Strategic Lead Education and Support Service responded that parents
had to reapply for home to school transport on a yearly basis, but
applicants would be offered a personal transport budget if
appropriate. She emphasised that the same eligibility criteria for
free home to school transport would remain. Councillor Kent felt
that the travel training programme was a good idea, but questioned
why nineteen children had been identified as eligible, eleven had
started the programme and only one child had successfully completed
it. The Strategic Lead Education Support Service replied that some
children could take longer to complete the programme and the three
children listed in the report were still in the process of
completing their training. She stated that it could take up to six
months for some children to become fully confident travelling
independently. Councillor Kent asked if the results from the survey
with St Cleres could be shared with the Committee. The Strategic
Lead Education and Support Service replied that she would share the
results to the Committee, but stated that the main outcomes had
been that children did not know their options for safe travel to
school. She highlighted that the response rate had been low, and it
had mostly been completed by parents rather than children.
Councillor Anderson queried what the benchmark was for eligibility
for free travel. The Strategic Lead Education Support Service
replied that any parent on income support or whose child attended a
school more than three miles away could apply for free home to
school transport. Councillor Sammons stated that the majority of
children who utilised the bus service from East Tilbury to St
Cleres lived more than three miles from the school, so would remain
eligible for free transport. She felt that therefore the bus
service would need to continue running to ensure children eligible
for free transport could get to school. She felt that by removing
the contracted buses, emissions would increase as parents would be
more likely to drive their children to school, which could equate
to an additional three hundred cars on the road. She felt that it
would also increase safety concerns near St Cleres as parents would
struggle to park. She added that the platform at East Tilbury train
station was small, and was often full with children travelling to
or from other schools or commuters, and an additional 300 students
would increase safety concerns on the platform. The Strategic Lead
Education Support Service replied that the team were considering
all routes and all options, and were thinking about all potential
alternatives.
Councillor Snell echoed comments from Councillor Sammons and felt
that the proposed removal of the bus service would increase the
number of parents driving their children to school. He asked if the
team had considered keeping the bus service but asking children
ineligible for free transport to pay. The Strategic Lead Education
Support Service replied that every option was being considered and
the team would communicate any decisions or proposed decisions to
the Committee. Councillor Massey stated that as Ward Councillor for
East Tilbury he had concerns regarding the removal of the bus
service. He confirmed that no officers had walked the route between
East Tilbury and St Cleres and felt that the route in its current
state could not be declared safe. He asked if the legal advice
being sought from the team was from the Council’s internal
lawyers or an external law group. The Strategic Lead Education
Support Service replied that the team were consulting with the
Council’s internal legal team and external counsel.
Councillor Massey highlighted the government requirements for a
safe walking route, and stated that a route needed to have a kerb
to be declared safe, and the route between East Tilbury and St
Cleres did not have a kerb. The Chair sought clarification that
there was only one road from East Tilbury to St Cleres and this
road would need to be declared as a safe walking route before the
bus service could be cancelled, and the Strategic Lead Education
Support Service agreed that this was the case. She added that the
decision for a walking route to be declared safe had to be based in
law and the team would look at all options before a decision was
made.
The Parent Governor Representative added that by removing
contracted transport, attendance and attainment at St Cleres could
fall as some parents would not drive their children to school, and
some children would not have the motivation to find other
alternative routes. She asked if the Council would ensure that the
direct travel payment to parents was only used for the intended
purpose. The Strategic Lead Education Support Service replied that
the team would be working to ensure that the payments would only be
used for travel, and were developing a system for this
purpose.
Councillor Snell echoed Councillor Massey’s comments and
stated that the government had outlined the necessary amenities
along a road before it could be declared safe. He felt that
currently the road did not meet this criteria, for example there
were no kerbs, and therefore did not feel that it could be declared
safe by the legal team. The Chair agreed with this comment as the
road did not have a grass verge or kerb, which meant children would
have to travel through farmer’s fields, and there was no
street lighting or drainage systems. Councillor Sammons added that
when the road was being litter picked by the Cleaner and Greener
team, traffic management systems had to be implemented and one lane
of the road closed to ensure their safety. The Strategic Lead
Education Support Service agreed that the current road between East
Tilbury and St Cleres could not be declared a safe route in its
current state as there was no verge or pathway. She emphasised that
the Council would not put children at risk travelling to or from
school, and were simply considering all options and
alternatives.
Councillor Akinbohun asked if there was any way the route could be
made safe as some children and young people preferred walking.
Councillor Massey felt that if the route was improved with adequate
kerbing and lighting, it could be made safe for children to walk,
but it was not safe in its current state. The Strategic Lead
Education Support Service replied if there was investment into
kerbs or cycle paths along the route that it could be made safe.
She explained that this could come in future with the proposed
developments in East Tilbury, which would increase the number of
houses in the area and improve local infrastructure.
The Chair asked why only one young people had completed the travel
training programme. The Assistant Director Education and Skills
replied that it had been a challenge to get young people enthused
about the scheme. She stated that young people had been excited
about the prospect of the scheme, but the team had struggled to get
young people to engage once the scheme had been developed and
rolled out. She explained that this was why the team had decided to
roll the scheme out to younger children, starting in year nine. She
added that the Council had also been working closely with parents
to better understand how they worked with their child on travel
training to build partnership working. She stated that the pandemic
had also unsettled parents whose child travelled via public
transport to school, and this had made it more difficult to engage.
The Chair felt pleased that the scheme was being rolled out to
younger pupils with complex needs. She highlighted that some
children with very complex needs would be unable to travel
independently even with the scheme in place. Councillor Kent added
that the Council had a statutory duty to ensure that children could
get to school safely, particularly those children with SEND and
complex needs. He felt that any proposed changes should be centred
on the child and minimising disruption to young people’s
educations, by ensuring that SEND children could travel to school
in a stress-free environment. The Assistant Director Education and
Skills stated that the team worked in partnership with schools and
parents to ensure that the child remained at the centre of the
service.
The Chair proposed an additional recommendation reading “The
Committee agree that the route between East Tilbury and St Cleres
School is an unsafe walking route for children.” This
additional recommendation was agreed unanimously.
RESOLVED: That the Committee:
1. Reviewed and commented upon the work undertaken related to Home
to School Transport and Post 16 SEND Transport in relation to the
areas outlined within this report.
2. Agreed that the route between East Tilbury and St Cleres School
is an unsafe walking route for children.
The Strategic Lead Education Support
Service, and Councillors Massey and Sammons left the meeting at
8.31pm.
Supporting documents: