Issue - meetings

At their meeting on 5 July 2018, the Performance Scrutiny Committee considered the decision of Cabinet made on 19 June 2018 following proper notice of a call in. The Committee agreed to refer the decision back to Cabinet for it to consider in the light of material concerns: 

The following documents are attached (CA6)

(a)       a note of the material concerns of the Performance Scrutiny Committee

(b)       a report setting out the names of the Councillors who have required the call in and the reasons given for the Call in.

(c)        the report considered by Cabinet on 19 June 2018together with a note of the recommendation of the Education Scrutiny Committee who considered the Cabinet report at their meeting on 18 June 2018. The minute of the Cabinet meeting can be found elsewhere on this agenda.

(d)       additional information provided to the Performance Scrutiny Committee in response to the call in

Cabinet agreed:

1.    The decision on transport for Special Educational Needs as originally set out at Minute 68/18, resolution 1(a) and (b) be deferred until late Autumn school term to allow discussion;

2.    To agree the following proposals for all students:

(a)          To agree the ending of the current arrangements giving subsidised travel to Post 16 students to Henley College and to implement this change from September 2018.

(b)          To agree that from September 2018 free travel should be provided for those students who have been placed at an alternative education provider if the places have been paid for by Oxfordshire County Council and the distance from home to the placement is over the statutory walking distance or the route is unsafe to walk even if accompanied, as necessary, by a responsible adult.

(c)          To confirm the increased charges for the Spare Seat Scheme for 2018/19 and 2019/20 and agree an increase in the charges for the Spare Seat Scheme of 2% in 2020/21, 2% in 2021/2022 and a further 2% in 2022/23. 

(d)          To agree to the continuation of free travel for children of secondary school age who live at RAF Benson to Icknield Community College and to agree to annually review this arrangement.

(e)          To introduce the new Home to School Travel and Transport Policy for those aged 5 to 16.

3.    A Cabinet Advisory Group be set up to consider the issues raised.

At their meeting on 5 July 2018, the Performance Scrutiny Committee considered the decision of Cabinet made on 19 June 2018 following proper notice of a call in. The Committee referred the decision back to Cabinet for it to consider in the light of material concerns.

Councillor Emma Turnbull, Shadow Cabinet Member, Public Health & Education, referred to the recent debate of the Council motion with 51 councillors voting against the proposals following a well informed and insightful debate. Councillor Turnbull stated that the policy had been rushed through and the eligibility criteria unclear. The Strategy was misguided and misjudged and should be part of the wider review. The alternative funding had been shown not to be realistic as it was already being fully used and would affect parent’s child benefit. Councillor Turnbull drew attention to problems with the criteria and suggested that consultation had been lacking. The suggestions from Special School Heads had not been reflected in report. Given the voting at Council and the decision at the Performance Scrutiny Committee there was no mandate for this policy. Asked if it was fair that parents, in the circumstances where they were affluent, should contribute Councillor Turnbull replied that no they should not.

Councillor Brighouse, spoke both as the Chairman of the Performance Scrutiny Committee and as the person who had moved the motion at Council. Councillor Brighouse stated that the call in was particularly around post 16 SEND transport and the motion to Council had been about the whole budget for SEND. Councillor Brighouse further outlined the concerns of the Performance Scrutiny Committee around the lack of information in the original report and the lack of reasoning by Cabinet. The Scrutiny Committee discussed at length the impact of the use of the bursary scheme but remained unclear how many children would be affected,how many would be able to get a bursary and the impact on savings. The Committee found insufficient information on costings and the business case.

Responding to a comments Lucy Butler stated that the charge being suggested was for post 16 SEND transport only and it would be means tested so that if parents could not afford it they would not be charged.

On the suggestion of Councillor Hudspeth, Leader of the Council, Cabinet:

RESOLVED:that:

1.    The decision on transport for Special Educational Needs as originally set out at Minute 68/18, resolution 1(a) and (b) be deferred until late Autumn school term to allow discussion;

2.    To agree the following proposals for all students:

(a)  agree the ending of the current arrangements giving subsidised travel to Post 16 students to Henley College and to implement this change from September 2018;

(b)  agree that from September 2018 free travel should be provided for those students who have been placed at an alternative education provider if the places have been paid for by Oxfordshire County Council and the distance from home to the placement is over the statutory walking distance or the route is unsafe to walk  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72

Cabinet Member: Public Health & Education

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/050

Contact: Neil Darlington, Admission & Transport Service Manager Tel: 07393 001242

Report by Director for Children’s Services (CA7).

The Council has proposed and consulted upon a number of changes to its home to school transport policies applying to Post 16 students and to those of statutory school age and these are outlined in the Cabinet report.

Oxfordshire County Council’s current Home to School Transport Policy is more generous than the law requires for Post 16 students who have an Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP) and for Post 16 mainstream students who attend Henley College. Unfortunately, given the continuing pressure on public finances, the Council now needs to critically consider whether it should continue to maintain spending on this non-statutory assistance for these groups of post-16 students. The main proposals include ending automatic free travel for most Post 16 SEND students attending their nearest suitable placement if that placement is over 3 miles away, ending Post 16 subsidised transport to Henley College, clearly specifying when free travel will be provided to alternative education providers and specifying charges for the “Spare Seat” Scheme (formerly known as the Concessionary Travel Scheme) for the years 2018/19 to 2022/23. In addition, as part of Oxfordshire County Council’s commitment to the Military Covenant we also consulted on whether to continue for a further year the current time limited free travel arrangements for those students who are resident at RAF Benson (the need for which is linked to the lack of sufficient places the nearest school, Wallingford School) the nearest school to RAF Benson.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to agree the following proposals for SEND students:

(a)         assistance to all Post-16 students who would otherwise be unable to access education and to encouraging low income parents of Post 16 students to apply to their school or college for a 16–19 bursary to defray the costs of transport.

(b)         To agree to the setting of a specific cash limited budget for supporting access to after school clubs for those who have the most complex needs or are identified as being from vulnerable families who do not have access to transport. The eligibility criteria should be similar to those for supporting access to holiday activities for this group of children and young people who are aged 5 to 17.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to agree the following proposals for all students:

(a)         To agree the ending of the current arrangements giving free travel to Post 16 students to Henley College and to implement this change from September 2018.

(b)         To agree that from September 2018 free travel should be provided for those students who have been placed at an alternative education provider if the places have been paid for by Oxfordshire County Council and the distance from home to the placement is over the statutory walking distance or the route is unsafe to walk even if accompanied, as necessary, by a responsible adult.

(c)         To confirm the increased  ...  view the full agenda text for item 61

Please note that the decision below has been called in for review by Performance Scrutiny Committee

Recommendations agreed subject to the substitution shown in strikethrough and italics below:

(a)          To agree the ending of the current arrangements giving free subsidised travel to Post 16 students to Henley College and to implement this change from September 2018.

The Council had proposed and consulted upon a number of changes to its home to school transport policies applying to Post 16 students and to those of statutory school age. Cabinet considered a report seeking approval of the changes and revised Home to School Transport and Travel Policy. Cabinet also had before them the comments and recommendations of the Education Scrutiny Committee, which had considered the Cabinet report at its meeting held on 18 June 2018.

Damian Haywood, a parent of a child with special educational needs (SEN) and Chair of the governing body at Mabel Prichard School spoke against the recommended changes relating to SEN students. Mr Haywood spoke of the importance of respite care for parents of vulnerable children and the impact that loss of transport to or from respite care would have on his and other families. If transport was curtailed it would affect his and others working lives. Families were really scared of the implications for their family circumstances. Mr Haywood also referred to the implications for the Education and Health Care Plan process, that was already under pressure and the changes would mean a need to review plans. Mr Haywood feared that the changes would restrict the life opportunities of young people and would lead to increased pressure on adult social care in future. Mr Haywood submitted a petition against the changes signed by 2,500 people, picking out the comment of one signatory that young people with SEN were entitled to live a full life despite their disabilities.

Phillip Middlewood, as a parent with two children with learning difficulties spoke against the changes relating to SEN students, Mr Middlewood explained the difficulties his family would face if transport to specialist out of school provision was removed. He indicated that as a family with a car they were unlikely to qualify for a spare seat under the policy and even if they did it was guaranteed only for one term at a time. Financially it was unlikely they would receive support if they did not get a seat on the bus and it was likely that either he or his wife would need to give up working.

David Mytton, speaking as a parent of a son with severe learning disabilities, spoke against the proposals as they affected SEN pupils. He outlined his son’s difficulties and stressed that the local college was not suitable and he was unable to travel alone to the suitable provision. He detailed the impact if transport was withdrawn and that although happy to pay a contribution he and others like him would not qualify for any help. His family was part of the special needs community and they stood together. Many families were intensely anxious about the proposals.

Keith Strangwood, in speaking against the recommendations supported earlier speakers in everything they said. He detailed the effect on families with children with SEN by reference to the circumstances of his daughter. She was in employment but if she lost transport for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61