Wiltshire Council looks to cut subsidies for school transport

This Is Wiltshire: Wiltshire Council looks to cut subsidies for school transport Wiltshire Council looks to cut subsidies for school transport

A consultation is being launched following government changes to education which has increased the number of young people requiring college and school transport in Wiltshire.

All young people up to 18 are now required to be in some form of education or training increasing the numbers of students needing school and college transport across the county.

Wiltshire Council currently subsidises post-16 students’ transport costs although there is no legal requirement to do so.

The subsidies are made as the council recognises in a mainly rural county affordable transport is important to help students attend school or college. The council subsidises the bill for those students attending a college further than three miles away from their home.

The average cost to provide post-16 transport is £843 per student per year. Under the proposals, students will be asked to pay £625 a year up from the current £446.

Additionally Wiltshire Council funds transport for children aged 11 to 18 attending grammar schools in Salisbury who live more than three miles from the school.

Now a consultation is being launched on proposed changes to make savings on the post-16 and grammar school transport costs.

The council faces significant financial pressures with reduced funding from central government, increased service demand and inflation and these pressures are likely to increase.

Savings need to be made to help deliver the council’s priorities of protecting vulnerable people, boosting the local economy and bringing communities together.

There will be no increase in transport charges for low income families where the cost will remain at £156 a year. The charges will also not increase for those students with special educational needs who pay either £156 or £446 a year currently.

It is also proposed the council will continue to arrange transport for students attending the grammar schools in Salisbury but families will be asked to pay for the transport to bring the city in line with other parts of Wiltshire where families have always paid for children attending schools out of the designated area. Currently there are 555 grammar school pupils who receive this free transport at a cost of £366,000.

The proposals also include ceasing new applications for “continuity transport” where a child moves to a different area but the transport to their previous school is paid for by the council. Those already receiving “continuity transport” will continue.

Wiltshire Council has a £7.8m bill for home to school transport for 10,000 pupils and students. There are 1,800 students aged 16 or over travelling to school sixth form or further education college who live more than three miles from their place of learning whose transport costs are subsidised.

The consultation is now available at http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/council/consultations.htm and people are invited to give their views until 12 noon on October 19.

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:39pm Thu 4 Sep 14

kimcrawley says...

It just gets worse and worse. Perhaps the Consevative PPC Michelle could write a letter to Queen Jane and ask her not to do this. Hard to believe that the tories could find 2 people that make Jacob Rees Mogg look normal. In future could they wear big shoes and red noses so that we can recognise them without a caption on any photograph.
It just gets worse and worse. Perhaps the Consevative PPC Michelle could write a letter to Queen Jane and ask her not to do this. Hard to believe that the tories could find 2 people that make Jacob Rees Mogg look normal. In future could they wear big shoes and red noses so that we can recognise them without a caption on any photograph. kimcrawley
  • Score: 3

6:18pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Room101 says...

Have they not looked at cutting subsadeas
Have they not looked at cutting subsadeas Room101
  • Score: 0

6:22pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Room101 says...

Room101 wrote:
Have they not looked at cutting subsadeas
Please disregard this comment.
[quote][p][bold]Room101[/bold] wrote: Have they not looked at cutting subsadeas[/p][/quote]Please disregard this comment. Room101
  • Score: 1

6:24pm Thu 4 Sep 14

kimcrawley says...

Yes that's all they seem to do, still I hope Balfour Beatty are recognised with an award for their efforts in promoting the natural landscape. They have done a marvellous job allowing weeds and bushes to flourish. The detritus is always carefully arranged.
Yes that's all they seem to do, still I hope Balfour Beatty are recognised with an award for their efforts in promoting the natural landscape. They have done a marvellous job allowing weeds and bushes to flourish. The detritus is always carefully arranged. kimcrawley
  • Score: 10

5:28pm Tue 9 Sep 14

politepanda says...

So - now what will they cut to find the shortfall they'll probably face to fund the free primary school meals - or is this one of them?
The free meals for all pupils is a great idea - no issues in supporting it - but simply instructing the schools to provide the meals without ensuring they can all pay for them is nothing short of stupidity.
(What do you mean - if the mp's kept to a 1% pay rise there may be funds available to go toward the cost??!!)
There will be a list of required books, stationery and furniture sent to the families of all new pupils. The schools can hardly be asked to supply these free of charge for ever, can they.....?
Does ANYONE within Govt. think before acting - or do they simply not give a rats backside?
The question is rhetorical, thank you.
So - now what will they cut to find the shortfall they'll probably face to fund the free primary school meals - or is this one of them? The free meals for all pupils is a great idea - no issues in supporting it - but simply instructing the schools to provide the meals without ensuring they can all pay for them is nothing short of stupidity. (What do you mean - if the mp's kept to a 1% pay rise there may be funds available to go toward the cost??!!) There will be a list of required books, stationery and furniture sent to the families of all new pupils. The schools can hardly be asked to supply these free of charge for ever, can they.....? Does ANYONE within Govt. think before acting - or do they simply not give a rats backside? The question is rhetorical, thank you. politepanda
  • Score: 2

7:00pm Tue 9 Sep 14

kimcrawley says...

You are correct pp, everything this council does is ideologically driven, there is a huge disconnect between ordinary people and the cabinet's drive to shrink public services to nothing. Where was this vicious campaign of cuts in their electioneering? They are destroying local government without any mandate from this electorate.
Just like our useless MP's Perry and Gray they are driven by personal greed and trying to ensure that donors to the tory party receive huge sums of public money via outsourcing of more services. Then they give us the smoke and mirrors of 'improvement'. The only things Scott and her cronies have improved are their own bank balances.
As we did not have a single labour council within the area covered by the unitary authority who is responsible for the financial mess that we are told these cuts address? Or is it that central government has reduced funding for vital services in order to pay for the mess made by the bankers. Punishing the disabled, older people and children to pay for the corrupt practices of Cameron's friends is outrageous. To pretend that they are doing it to improve services insults us all.
You are correct pp, everything this council does is ideologically driven, there is a huge disconnect between ordinary people and the cabinet's drive to shrink public services to nothing. Where was this vicious campaign of cuts in their electioneering? They are destroying local government without any mandate from this electorate. Just like our useless MP's Perry and Gray they are driven by personal greed and trying to ensure that donors to the tory party receive huge sums of public money via outsourcing of more services. Then they give us the smoke and mirrors of 'improvement'. The only things Scott and her cronies have improved are their own bank balances. As we did not have a single labour council within the area covered by the unitary authority who is responsible for the financial mess that we are told these cuts address? Or is it that central government has reduced funding for vital services in order to pay for the mess made by the bankers. Punishing the disabled, older people and children to pay for the corrupt practices of Cameron's friends is outrageous. To pretend that they are doing it to improve services insults us all. kimcrawley
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree