The Rt Revd Peter Doyle, Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Northampton and the Rt Revd Richard Inwood, Bishop of Bedford have called for the free travel to continue for “pupils already in a school or who have already made an application to a school of their denomination until they leave that school.”

The Bishops say that unless this happens, “While we understand that low income families will rightly be protected, parents just above the threshold whose children have recently started at a church school will be faced with a bill from September 2010 or compelled to withdraw their child from a school in which he or she has already settled academically and socially.”

The Local Authority’s initial response on 2nd February, following the Central Bedfordshire Children, Families and Learning Overview and Scrutiny Committee is to extend the consultation period by a week until 19 February and hold an extra scrutiny meeting. Both bishops have welcomed this, but they say “We urge parents, teachers and governors to make this concession of value by responding to the consultation.” The consultation is online at http://www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/consultations/transport-consultation.aspx

The letter from the bishops also compliments the good relationships with the LA, but then appears all the more surprised that there was no consultation with the two dioceses which are statutory partners with the LEA in providing education.

The letter also cites six other arguments why the provision of school transport should not be withdrawn:

1. School transport has been a fundamental part of the partnership between the Local Authority and the dioceses and this partnership has benefitted the Local Authority financially.
2. A DFE circular states that well-established arrangements of this kind should not be disturbed
3. Parents with children at faith schools already contribute financially to their children’s’ education through the provision of 10% contributions towards capital works
4. Parents have contributed to their children’s’ education through taxation
5. The Human Rights Act acknowledges the right of parents to educate their children in their faith
6. There are environmental consequences to the potential making of many more car journeys to school.

The full text of the Bishops’ letter appears below.

Bishop’s House, Marriott Street, Northampton NN2 6AW Board of Education

Tel: 01604 715635; Fax: 01604 792186 Tel: 01727 818170; Fax: 01727 844469

1 February 2010

From: the Rt Revd Richard Inwood, Bishop of Bedford

and the Rt Revd Peter Doyle, Bishop of Northampton

To: Members of Central Bedfordshire Council

Proposal to stop providing free transport for children attending Church Schools

We write as leaders of the Catholic and Anglican communities in Central Bedfordshire to make strong representations against the proposal to abolish free home to school transport for children who are attending Church of England and Catholic Schools.

The views that we express in this letter are those of the representative and statutory bodies which are responsible for education in those communities.

We wish to draw your attention to a number of important facts and principles.

1 Since the 1944 Education Act, free home to school transport has been a fundamental part of the partnership between faith groups and local authorities. The initial provision of schools (and any subsequent rationalisation) has been based on the various key elements of this partnership.

All of this development of schools has taken place in partnership with the local authority, and, as we show in section (3) below, has been very much in the financial interest of the local authority. The Authority’s annual expenditure would have been significantly greater if all these church schools had been community schools rather than voluntary aided schools.

2 We recognise that the provision of transport lies within the discretion of the LA. There is however a clear expression on the part of government that LAs should not disturb well-established transport arrangements of this kind. A DFE Circular Letter makes this explicit:

“The Secretary of State hopes that LEAs will continue to think it right not to disturb well-established arrangements of the kind referred to in paragraph 29 (sc. the provision of free transport to denominational schools), some of which have been associated with a local agreement or understanding about the siting of denominational schools. He continues to attach importance to the preservation of the opportunity to choose a school or college in accordance with religious convictions” (Source: DFE Circular letter 21.1.94, paragraph 31)

There can be no doubt that the present policy is a long established understanding, in the terms of this circular letter. Yet at a meeting with a senior officer of the LA our representatives were told that whatever the predecessor LA had done, the new LA did not consider itself bound by any such arrangement or any understanding that parents had of the transport arrangements which were a part of the options they had exercised in choosing a church school. One of the justifications for the reorganisation of the former county was that better services could be provided.

3 Parents and faith groups already contribute financially to the cost of education in VA church schools and the governors of the schools receive direct grants (presently amounting to 90% of the cost of approved capital projects) from Central Government. Without these contributions and grants, the LA would have to find very significant additional sums of money for repairs, improvements and for new building.

When a Community or Voluntary Controlled school is built, extended, remodelled or has capital monies spent on it in any way for major repairs, the LA must find that money either by borrowing or by realising assets which it then reinvests. The size of the annual building programme for schools is often claimed by Central Government as “making money available for school building”. This claim is not strictly true: what Central Government is doing is giving approval for the Local Authority to raise loans and to spend its own money, servicing the loan charges annually until the loan is paid off, and at a direct cost to the revenue budget of the LA.

In contrast, when a voluntary aided school is built, extended, remodelled or needs external repairs, the cost is shared between Central Government and the governors. Central Government does not give approval to borrow, it pays over real money from central funds, to the tune of 90% grant, and then the governors (supported by parents and by the dioceses or similar bodies) find the remainder. Each year this is a significant contribution, which otherwise would fall directly on the County Council’s budget.

By way of example, for Catholic schools in Bedfordshire, capital grants in the 2005-6 financial year amounted to a total of just over £528,629, and the contribution from governors, parents or the parish amounted to £52,862 respectively.

Parents of pupils in church schools are already contributing to the cost of education through national and local taxes. They then pay over and above this because of the choice they have exercised: they contribute to the 10% which must be paid towards all capital projects and major repairs in VA church schools, which has been explained above.

Parents will now find themselves meeting the cost of transport as well as these costs, and many of them who opted for church schools in good faith are likely to feel they been let down by their elected representatives.

4 The Human Rights Act acknowledges the right of parents to ensure that education for their children is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions. This is reflected in the LA’s duty under the Education Acts to have regard to parents’ wishes to have their children educated in their faith.

This proposal fails to take full account of parental preference for denominational education: if parents cannot afford to take advantage of the provision, they are effectively excluded from it.

5 There are important environmental considerations which the proposal completely ignores. Does the Council seriously wish to engineer a situation where parents, deprived of free transport on buses, decide instead to drive their children to school?

The effects of driving up the number of cars using the roads around schools are everywhere to be seen. There is no indication in the consultation document that any assessment has been made of this possible increase in car traffic. There has been no consultation with those who live near to the schools.

6 The consultation process is flawed. The two dioceses, which are statutory partners in the provision of education were not informed of the proposal, when parents were informed; they and church schools only learned of it second-hand. It is not suffcient to put a consultation document on a website without informing schools and Diocesan Authorities by e-mail or letter. Several schools in other LA areas to which children from Central Bedfordshire go, some with free transport, have not been informed of the proposal, which directly affects them. All this may well give grounds for legal challenge.

7 Much anxiety is being caused in Central Bedfordshire as a result of these proposals and we would ask you to give serious consideration to withdrawing them immediately.

We would regard such action as confirmation of Central Bedfordshire’s determination to work in partnership with the faith groups to ensure that all pupils in the Authority have access to a suitable education. The faith groups value the good relationships which they have continued to enjoy with the LA.

Members may be assured that the faith groups in Central Bedfordshire often contrast these relationships with the quality of those which prevail in some parts of the country between other LAs and dioceses: the comparisons that are made are very much in this LA’s favour.

As a final point, we do not want to see these schools become the preserve of those parents who can afford to pay. This, surely, is not what the Local Authority wants to happen. While we understand that low income families will rightly be protected, parents just above the threshold, whose children have recently started at a church school, will be faced with a bill from September 2010 or compelled to withdraw their child from a school in which he or she has already settled academically and socially. We believe that pupils already in a school, or who have already made an application to a school, should receive free travel to the nearest church school of their denomination until they leave that school.

Yours sincerely

The Rt Revd Richard Inwood The Rt Revd Peter Doyle

Chair, Diocesan Board of Education Bishop of Northampton

Diocese of St Albans Catholic Diocese of Northampton

Bishop of Bedford