School transport in Central Bedfordshire branded 'an absolute mess' by councillor

Costs to provide the educational travel service have risen from £9m annually to £20m in three years, Central Bedfordshire Council’s executive was told.

“It’s one of the biggest areas of spend in any budget or in any department within the council,” explained Independent Aspley and Woburn councillor John Baker.

“The obvious growth in our educational transport budget needs to be controlled. We shouldn’t ask officers to stop working on this. I can come up with a list of savings, although it’s purely anecdotal evidence.”

A report to the committee recommended approval for five proposals set out in CBC’s home to school transport policy. But its childen’s services scrutiny committee was unhappy with the second option for a change of a pupil’s qualifying school from catchment area to the nearest one.

Describing it as “a complex piece of work”, executive member for finance councillor Baker suggested what was lacking is information about how the nearest school would impact other areas of Central Bedfordshire.

“The system is an absolute mess,” he warned. “The current bus routes are a mess and need reviewing. There’s a significant piece of work that has to happen to underpin this paper.”

Presenting the report, Independent Leighton Linslade West councillor Steve Owen said: “Scrutiny raised substantial concern around clause two, the nearest school clause, which remains the really controversial part of this proposal.

“The effect of academisation is to weaken the concept of catchment areas over which this council is having steadily less control.

“A limited trial or exceptions was suggested at scrutiny, but both were ruled out on the basis they breached equalities legislation. While this policy is expected to produce worthwhile savings, these cannot be accurately forecast.

“It’s acknowledged that a concern of the (Harlington-based) Pyramid Schools Trust about a disadvantageous effect on the rolls of its schools and others cannot be discounted, although officer expectation is that the negative effect will be limited.

“Officers and I decided to stick to the original recommendations as current travel arrangements will be honoured, because of government guidance supporting this approach, the report’s ambition to reduce transport costs, and the accompanying benefits to officers planning school places.”

The recommendations would bring Central Bedfordshire into line with a number of surrounding authorities, added executive member for children’s services councillor Owen.

“We won’t be able to bury this issue. Each year, we need to let parents know what the admissions and transport arrangements are for the following academic year.

“Money spent on transporting children can’t be spent educating them. School transport isn’t a minor issue with those substantial (£20m) cost figures hanging off it.

“I would like greater certainty about the expenditure forecasts. The motivation for the paper wasn’t only to reduce costs, but the need to inform parents of their choices. The doubts may prevail. The debate and the problem won’t go away.”

The executive agreed four options, but the switch from catchment area to the nearest school option was shelved.