PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Home-to-School Transport: Children with SEND - 3 December 2024 (Commons/Westminster Hall)

I remind hon. Members that if they wish to speak, they need to bob during the debate. This is only a one-hour debate and hon. Members can see how many people are present; you do not need to be experts in maths to know that that there are lots. Except for the Front-Bench speakers, I will allow only one minute for the speech of each Member present. When those minutes have been exhausted such that there is sufficient time for only the Front Benchers to speak, obviously any speakers who have not been called will not be called. Members may be tempted to intervene, which will take time away from other speakers, so I ask that you resist the urge to intervene unless you absolutely must.

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the statutory framework for home-to-school transport for children with SEND.

It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. I am delighted to have secured this debate on 3 December, which is the International Day of Persons with Disabilities. I am pleased to see a number of hon. Members present to speak, which truly reflects the importance of the issue.

Disabled children enter the education system with the odds stacked against them. The damage and chaos wrought by 14 years of underfunding and understaffing have left a broken special educational needs and disabilities system. Parents have to fight for the entitlements of their child at every step of the way, simply to ensure that they are given the same life chances as other children. As the parent of a disabled child, I have experienced that at first hand.

We know how vital each stage of the journey through education is for a disabled child. The importance of early intervention cannot be disputed, as it provides crucial support to their development and improves long-term outcomes. Similarly, the transition to adulthood is a key stage of development when disabled young people advance their independence and encounter new challenges. Yet, as it stands, we have a statutory framework for home-to-school transport that, in effect, excludes disabled children from accessing education. Even where the statute necessitates that local authorities provide home-to-school transport, this is often disputed and subject to many shortcomings, leaving parent carers with another fight on their hands. However, I will focus on the framework today.

Under the existing framework, the legal obligation of local authorities to provide free transport to a place of education applies only for eligible children aged five to 16 and young people aged 19 to 25. This is a vital lifeline for disabled children and their families, ensuring that even those with the most complex needs can attend a school that offers specialist provision to help them get on in life, but until they reach the age of five, and after the statutory duty falls at the age of 16, disabled children and their families are failed by the current system.

Before a disabled child turns five, it is at the discretion of local authorities to make suitable arrangements for them to attend early years settings. In reality, that can materialise as a flat refusal to any request for transport. Families who have been fortunate enough to secure a competitive place at a specialist early years setting are then denied support, and are unable to shoulder the burden of time and cost needed to transport their child themselves. One parent told me that the only school suitable for their child’s complex health condition was an 11-mile drive from home. Their transport application was rejected. As they cannot afford petrol for four trips a day, that parent now drives the child to school and stays there, leaving them unable to work.

Families are forced to make the impossible choice between transporting their child themselves or giving up work, and those children who are most in need of early intervention are unable to access it. Some local authorities even refuse to transport a child to primary school until the very day that they turn five, by which time a disabled child may have missed a term of reception and lost out on vital therapies and specialised support. That leaves disabled children playing catch-up from day one.

By the age of 16, many children with SEND will have been receiving free transport for more than a decade, but as the legal obligation for that provision falls, their education can be thrown into turmoil. In the past, many councils continued to provide free transport for children with SEND from the ages of 16 to 19. Funds put into those travel costs are saved further down the line—they allow students with disabilities to achieve qualifications and skills, and to gain confidence, independence and experience. This makes it much less likely that they will fall into unemployment or disengagement, and face challenges with mental and physical health. However, the rising demand—with 576,000 children and young people in England now having an education, health and care plan—coupled with local authorities being under immense financial strain, has led to local authorities across the country, including in my constituency of Thurrock, cutting the service.

My hon. Friend is making some excellent comments. She refers to the transportation being free; for some families it is free, but for local authorities, as we all know, it absolutely is not. My local authority, North East Lincolnshire, spent £1.4 million last year alone on transporting 114 children out of area. It is unsustainable for local authorities. Does she agree that the answer is more specialist provision in area, and combined support in mainstream school for those children?

My hon. Friend makes a good point. The long-term goal must be better inclusion for disabled children in mainstream education—I would have loved to send my child to the outstanding school up the road, but it did not really want us. This is not a choice that parents want to make, and inclusion is the ultimate, long-term solution. However, disabled children should not be penalised for the financial burdens under which councils find themselves.

The transport arrangements that are provided are often unsuitable, such as a bus pass for a vulnerable young person. Parents are asked to make financial contributions or are provided with travel allowances that barely cover the costs. It is hard to overstate the impact that the yearly lottery for school transport can have on disabled children. It disrupts their education, places stress and anxiety on them and their families, reduces their independence, and asks their parents to carry financial costs.

I heard from one mother whose 18-year-old daughter attends a school offering specialist provision. This year, just 24 hours before her daughter was due to start her college course, she was told she would be charged a contribution for her daughter’s transport to school. She spoke of the anxiety inflicted on her daughter through days of uncertainty. Despite that stressful experience, that mother considers herself among the lucky ones. Her vulnerable daughter can continue to get to school safely every day, when others who are asked to contribute to transport costs may not.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. Does she agree that in too many cases the SEND families most in need of support find they are not given it? For many families, it is therefore a question of whether they can afford to support their children. In this country, in 2024, we must end that barrier to opportunity.

My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. It is unacceptable that disabled families are faced with choices about their children’s education that parents of children who are not disabled are not.

During the election campaign, I spoke to another woman, Julia, and had the pleasure of meeting her 18-year-old son Oscar, who has cerebral palsy, which affects his right side, and epilepsy. For 10 years, he had received free home-to-school transport, but now his parents have to make the case every year for why he should continue to receive that support to reach his sixth form. Thanks to the new costs, his mum has had to withdraw Oscar from one of his sessions at his weekend care provision, because she cannot afford both. Despite the new charges, there is still no guarantee that their application will be approved. She said that life is hard enough without this discrimination and pressure.

Another mother, in Thurrock, told me about her ongoing fight to secure transport for her daughter. Twice her daughter was refused passenger transport to the education setting she attended and twice the family successfully appealed. That mother said:

“As parents to children with SEND we have to fight for every single step, for their existence. Fighting for what is right, what our children are entitled to.”

This is the reality for thousands of families across the country. This disruption at such a vital point in education can be devastating, with serious impacts on a young person’s mental health and development. Let us be clear: this places a financial barrier to education in the way of disabled children and their families that other families simply do not have to face.

Does the hon. Member acknowledge that lots of local authorities, and indeed lots of schools, seek to do the right thing? Councils in Cumbria have more than doubled their spending on SEND transport in the last five years, but is it not the worst thing about it, from a local authority perspective, that councils and schools that do the right thing get penalised? Is it not right that we instead support all local authorities and schools to support special educational needs children without disadvantaging them or their families?

As I have said previously, the important thing is to see a long-term goal where disabled children are truly able to receive a mainstream, inclusive education, so that we get out of this cycle of families having to pay to transport their children miles and miles from where they live.

May I just say that the Member who is speaking is not obliged to take interventions? It does take time away from those who have put in to speak.

I will make some headway.

The requirement for free transport returns for 19 to 25-year-olds with complex needs and an education, health and care plan, to support those who need longer in education or training to achieve their outcomes.

The guidance itself says:

“It is critical that, from year 9 at the latest, local authorities help young people start planning for a successful transition to adulthood.”

Given the importance of this transition, why does the statutory obligation for free transport fall between the ages of 16 to 19?

We cannot ignore the rising costs that councils face in carrying out their duty to provide free home-to-school transport. However, those costs are not the fault of disabled children. It is not a choice by families to send their disabled child or young person to a school far from home; it is a necessity, and the only way to receive the specialist provision that meets their needs.

Will the hon. Lady give way on that point?

I would just like to make a little more progress.

When I think about my child’s journey through education, I do not see it in stages. The journey for my daughter and for every disabled child is a lifelong one. We need a statutory framework that reflects that and that provides stability, security and reassurance for disabled children throughout their development and for their families.

In the context of the Government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity for every child, the situation with home-to-school transport is damaging the life chances of disabled pupils. I encourage the Minister to consider a framework that ends the current anomalies in the system, so that local authorities have a legal obligation to ensure that no child is denied an education that will allow them to get on in life.

I look forward to hearing the Minister’s comments about the existing framework, and the contributions of other Members, as we seek to develop a system that ensures that the needs of every child are met.

As I said earlier, you will get only a minute each. I encourage people not to intervene, as it will mean that we have to cut down on the total number of speakers. I call Shockat Adam.

I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this vital debate on a subject that is of concern to many of my constituents. Education is a fundamental right for every child and should not be treated as a favour or privilege. We are witnessing at first hand how the lack of adequate travel provision can prevent children from accessing education.

The consequences of not providing proper travel services extend far beyond the immediate inconvenience to parents. Without transport, children will remain at home, where they are not engaged in education or employment. The social cost of that is immense. Parents will be forced to reduce their working hours or even give to up their jobs. We must ask ourselves whether that is the kind of future we want to create for our children and communities.

Travel arrangements for these children are about more than just convenience; they are about ensuring they can get to school safely and on time. Furthermore, we must ask ourselves about the reality of SEND children travelling for about two hours daily. As the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) mentioned, cost is not the issue; it is the fact that no provision is available locally. That is why parents are forced to send their children so far away. What impact must that have on their wellbeing? We must have more facilities and more schools—

Order. I call Jo Platt.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for raising this important issue, and I briefly want to mention my local authority. Since 2017, the number of children and young people requiring SEND transport has surged by more than 80% in Wigan, while the costs have exploded by 103%. To put that into perspective, this year alone the council is facing a £2 million overspend against a £5.53 million budget.

Over the past five academic years, demand for SEND transport has skyrocketed, and it is on an unsustainable trajectory that cannot be ignored. As my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock rightly pointed out, the statutory framework is no longer fit for purpose.

This issue extends far beyond any one council or region; the pressures we see are a national concern. Local authorities that are already stretched thin are facing mounting financial strain. If we do not act soon, we risk eroding the very support that children with SEND rely on to access their education.

I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for bringing forward this debate. I want to make a point—I will try to keep it brief—about the inconsistency in the implementation of the framework. That inconsistency is exacerbated in rural areas such as North Yorkshire, where my constituency is. We have had horror stories of children in taxis for up to two hours a day. That has a massive impact on their ability to learn when they make their way to school.

Another problem comes from changes to the council’s policy on home-to-school transport and its inability to finance it. It is projecting a spend of £27 million on SEND transport next year. Despite the rural complexities of the North Yorkshire council area, it is only 148th out of 151 local authorities for high needs funding per head of population. Although the framework is important, there needs to be an understanding of rurality, and the funding to go with it.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) on securing this important and oversubscribed debate. Southampton, like many other local authorities, is struggling with the cost of meeting the need. Meeting that need is most important, but costs have trebled in the past few years and council resources are put under immense strain.

I welcome the Education Secretary’s commitment to a whole-system review, with travel a crucial part of that. The Chancellor’s recent investments will have relieved some of the pressure. I would be interested in the Minister’s response on whether the Department for Transport and the Department for Education could speak together and require bus companies to work with local authorities to look at route planning and making public transport more accessible for those for whom independent travel is a possibility. This is about breaking down barriers to opportunity for SEND children; they have to be in school to open those barriers and so that we can meet their needs.

I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this debate. I will focus on the length of time that young people with SEND often spend travelling to their special settings. This weekend, a mother attended my surgery to speak of her son, who was initially offered a taxi ride taking 45 minutes to his special school outside the county. Another child was added to the journey, taking the journey time to one hour and 15 minutes. A third child has now been added, so that boy, who has special needs and struggles with travelling with other children, is now travelling an hour and 45 minutes in each direction for school.

Oxfordshire is not unlike other counties, and my constituents in Bicester and Woodstock often have to send their children outside the county for education. I hope the Government will consider more capital funding for local education authorities so that they can provide more special schools in better settings. I also ask the Minister to consider a commitment that no special educational needs child should have to travel for more than 30 minutes to reach their school each day.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this debate and for her tireless work campaigning of this issue. It is really encouraging to be joined by so many colleagues from across the House to speak about issues relating to SEND.

I rise to highlight some of the shocking stories that families locally have shared with me about the challenges and pressures that special educational needs and home-to-school transport are causing for them in their day-to-day lives. It cannot be right that so many are not getting the support they need, whether they sit in or outside the statutory framework, as my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock highlighted.

In Central Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire, the rural context has been exacerbated by both authorities’ failure to appropriately place-plan at a local level. That has created difficult choices for the authorities and heartbreaking realities for families and young people, who are travelling too far at too great a cost to access the schools they need. Some are being shut out of the transport support that they need due to their age.

I welcome this debate and the possible reforms to the statutory framework. I look forward to working with colleagues right across the House to ensure that we bring about the holistic reform the area desperately needs.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this debate. Wokingham borough council had previously been promised two SEND free schools, yet both are waiting for approval to proceed. I would therefore be grateful if the Minister could do some digging into when the schools will be delivered, and write to me and the council, updating us on progress.

I had prepared more detailed remarks. However, I ask the Minister if she will meet me, the local executive member for children’s services and the director of children’s services at Wokingham borough council to discuss the situation, and to help us understand the Government’s plans for reform and what we can do to deliver the most for our SEND children.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this important debate. Many parents and children in my constituency are deeply frustrated because of the cuts we have seen to school transport. The situation has gone from cuts to the over-16s now getting nothing. One mother said to me that her son, a boy with Down’s syndrome, was actually forced to stay at home because he could no longer get the support he needed for transport.

Transport should never be a barrier to education. I welcome the Government’s pledge of a £1 billion investment, but I ask that the funding is delivered swiftly and effectively to address the urgent needs of families and those in the community. Those families deserve the dignity, support and access to education that every child has a right to.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark, and I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing the debate. I will give some colour on what is happening in Surrey and my constituency of Esher and Walton. My constituent Polly is 16 years old, and because of her SEND she is unable to travel unaccompanied —something that is not disputed by the council. Until the end of last term she received travel, but now she has a place at a special needs sixth form and has been denied assistance. Her parents appealed the decision and were denied again. 

When it rejected the appeal, Surrey’s stage 2 panel made a financial argument, asserting that it would not be sustainable for the council to provide travel assistance on account of Polly’s parents’ work commitments. Both her parents work full time at Royal Surrey County hospital. In determining what is necessary for a child, the council takes account of their special educational needs but not their parents’ or carers’ work. The current statutory framework leads to absurd economisation under which the jobs of two NHS workers cannot be considered in the allocation of a child’s transport assistance, so the choice is therefore between Polly’s education and her parents’ jobs in the NHS. That is not acceptable.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. My constituent Jessica has raised the case of her son. The London borough of Bexley introduced a charging policy for post-16 children in 2018. Although her son has not changed schools, they now have to pay £400 towards transport to reach his school in the London borough of Bromley, despite the fact that he is on the highest mobility component rate for personal independence payment and Jessica receives universal credit. Bromley children in the same class do not have to pay that charge and contribution.

With the current system, there has been a crisis in school transport. My own local authority had seven local government ombudsman cases against it in 2017, and a further report found failings because the local authority did not remedy those cases. Because of those failings, we have situations such as the one that Jessica has raised, where she or her son must contribute £400 towards transport, and yet children in the same class with identical circumstances do not have to contribute because they live in a different London borough. The system therefore does need some reform.

Thank you, Sir Mark. It is a pleasure to share under your chairship, and I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this important debate.

In Stratford-on-Avon, the current system of SEND home-to-school transport is failing families. Many children were left without home-to-school transport at the beginning of the academic year, meaning that children’s educational needs were not met at a crucial time. Many children are placed in schools outside the county because there simply is not enough suitable provision locally. That has created a complex network of transport issues. We need to ensure and resource sufficient local SEND provision within mainstream education. That must be a priority if we are to create a fairer, more efficient and sustainable system that supports every child’s right to education.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark, and I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock for securing this debate. SEND, and the transport around it, is a massive issue in Derbyshire. A recent Ofsted report found appalling failings in the system—something that, for a very long time, parents could have told us anecdotally.

I suggest that there are two things the council needs to do. First, we need better integration between the council, the public transport providers, the integrated care boards and the schools. Secondly, we need more early planning so that transport can be managed at the earliest possible stage. That will save the council money and be better for children and young people.

The Government made a big investment in this area at the recent Budget. We made some tough choices to do that, but it is the right thing to do. There is £1 billion for SEND, three-year funding settlements for local authorities and further investment in councils. I urge the council to use that investment to give it the time to get this right, because it is local children and young people, and their parents, who are suffering.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark, and I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock for securing this important debate. In my constituency of Dewsbury and Batley, more than 300 pupils of sixth-form age with SEND are eligible to have their costs covered by the local authority. Unfortunately, council budget to cover their costs has just been slashed by £1.6 million. The result is that families will have to cover the shortfall themselves. That picture is repeated up and down the country because, as the National Audit Office warns, the current system of funding is unsustainable as a result of the crisis in local government funding. The situation will only get worse when we consider that the number of children in England with an EHCP has more than doubled over the past decade, and we can expect it to continue to rise.

I welcome plans to improve existing provision and build a more integrated system that includes the NHS, but we also need the funding streams to ensure that SEND children from all socioeconomic backgrounds can access improved services. If the Government listened to the teaching unions, local authorities and families who are calling for extra SEND funding, and for councils’ high-needs deficits to be written off, that would be a good start.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for calling this important debate—[Interruption.] Hopefully I can manage to get through my speech.

I approach this issue from the point of view of a special educational needs co-ordinator. I have been an early years special needs supporter for a number of years, and I understand just how difficult it is under the current provisions to get an EHCP for a child under five. After we manage to secure one, we then have to go from nursery to school applications. If we finally manage to secure a good provision for a child, often we cannot secure the transport arrangements or the child cannot secure a chaperone.

As we are extending our childcare and early years education offer to children as young as two years old, we have to consider their transport and SEND needs. These children, who have reached the threshold for an education, health and care plan so young, are the most vulnerable, and they desperately need to be able to access the best support from the start. We need a strategy to deliver that support locally, and where we cannot, we must ensure that children have access to the best provision so that interventions start in the early years when they will have the most impact.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark.

I will highlight three suggestions that I have heard from my constituents in Aylesbury. First, information about home-to-school transport should be provided to parents in a timely and accurate way. I have heard about so many parents finally securing that school place and then falling at the final hurdle of not being given transport. Councils have to change that. Secondly, Buckinghamshire council is moving towards personal transport budgets, but £20 per day does not come close. I have heard about one case with an £84 return taxi fare to get the child to school. Councils need to allocate sufficient funding. Thirdly, councils must ensure that the transport that is provided is both safe and reliable. Unfortunately, I have heard of instances where that is not the case. Those transport providers need much tighter regulation. No one wants to send their child to school many miles away, but the broken SEND system necessitates it, and that has to change.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this crucial debate.

Home-to-school transport for SEND children requires our urgent attention, and that is why I am planning to create a network in South East Cornwall dedicated to supporting families, parents and carers. South East Cornwall is a rural area with a challenging transport network, and difficulties arise because of longer distances to schools, a lack of good-quality local public transport and increased costs. I pay tribute to the staff at specialist provisions in South East Cornwall, such as Burraton school and Liskeard school and community college. I also want to highlight local organisations such as Cornwall’s SEND Information, Advice and Support Service and the Core, which provide vital support for families navigating these challenges. However, these groups cannot, and should not, be expected to fill gaps.

The statutory framework for home-to-school travel must better account for the unique barriers in rural areas such as mine. Assumptions are often made about transport infrastructure levels, but the reality is that some of that infrastructure just does not exist. The statutory walking distance is often unrealistic for rural children who live far from safe walking routes or bus stops, and who have increased journey times. I urge the Minister to prioritise an in-depth consultation with SEND families, especially in rural areas, to better understand their needs and unique situations and how to tailor services accordingly.

It is an honour to speak under your chairmanship, Sir Mark, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this debate.

As a member of the Public Accounts Committee, I have had to scrutinise the National Audit Office’s report on SEND. According to that report, local authorities spent some £1.4 billion on home-to-school transport in 2022-23—an 80% real-terms increase since 2015-16. I am delighted that this Government have brought forward an additional £1 billion in the recent Budget for SEND funding, which will go some way to covering the high costs faced by local authorities, but we know that we need to change the provision.

In Bradford, the council’s travel assistance service spends £54,000 per day on home-to-school taxis alone. Those numbers are eye-watering. Only through prioritising SEND support in our mainstream local schools will we alleviate those financial pressures on local authorities, and I welcome the priority that the Government have given to that. The main point that has been made in this debate is that it would help all the many families in this situation if their children were in local schools. That would not only reduce expensive transport costs, but improve outcomes for disabled children and their families.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this debate. It is fantastic to see so many hon. Members and hon. Friends sticking up for disabled children and young people and their families. That reflects the focus that we have had on SEND in this new Parliament.

According to Contact, a charity for families with disabled children aged 25 or under, 79% of disabled young people are being denied or charged for school transport when they turn 16. One in 10 of them pays more than £1,000 a year, and nearly half of families experience increased stress and financial difficulties. Although I am pleased that in Fulham, which is part of my constituency, the Labour council has chosen not to charge for transport and to maintain free educational transport for disabled children and young people up to the age of 25, I recognise from all that I have heard today and all that I know that that is far from being the case elsewhere. We need to end that unfairness and change the statutory framework, and we need to make free educational transport available to all up to the age of 25.

Finally, I encourage those who want to know more about the significant additional costs of caring for disabled children and young people to come to an event that I will be chairing in the Thatcher Room tomorrow at 5.30 pm, at which Contact will launch new research into this issue.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing such an important debate. In my casework, I have been inundated with issues around special educational needs, and transport is a major factor. I will make two quick observations that I hope the Minister will reflect on in any review of the framework.

First, the nature of families today often does not reflect the assumptions of previous years. I have had cases where parents who co-parent and share equal custody across different boroughs are caught up in arguments between the two boroughs about who is the lead parent. The parents simply say, “We share custody 50:50, so we need mechanisms to overcome that barrier.”

Secondly, increasing numbers of families are in temporary accommodation outside their traditional borough, and they find it very hard to get continuity in school transport for their children. They still want them to go to their hard-fought-for special educational needs school, but that would require changes in transport, and authorities are slow to make them. I hope that the framework will reflect the increasing numbers of families who are, unfortunately, homeless and in temporary accommodation.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this debate. Home-to-school transport is particularly important for young people living in rural areas such as Derbyshire Dales, with the average pupil in rural areas having to travel 10 miles each way to school, and one in 10 pupils in a special school needing to travel over 23 miles each way. These distances mean that, without home-to-school transport, it is often impossible for young people in rural areas to access education. For example, my constituent, who has autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia and obsessive compulsive disorder, was denied home-to-school transport and was expected to take an almost three-hour bus journey just to get to school. The burden that the current post-16 system places on the time and finances of families is significant, as is the impact on a young person who is not in school.

It is a pleasure to continue to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this important debate. We must consider the reliability of transport for SEND pupils. I had casework at the beginning of term involving parents waiting for transport to turn up that never came. Teachers did not know what was happening, and the parents could not get hold of the helpline because it was closed. During those first few days, it is crucial for students to feel settled in. It is great to see other colleagues from my county of Warwickshire here; I am sure that they also experienced those problems in September.

My constituency is semi-rural. It is made up of towns and villages, and it can take an hour to drive across it. It is difficult for county councils in constituencies such as mine, where pupils are often closer to schools outside the county. Different parts of my constituency border Leicestershire, Staffordshire, Birmingham, Coventry and Solihull. The problem is that the county council may allocate not the school that is nearest to pupils in terms of travel time, but the school that is nearest in Warwickshire. That means that parents have to argue with and challenge the council if they want their children to go to a school that is suitable for their needs and nearer to travel to. Furthermore, the student must be in school year 11 or below, plunging many teenagers and their families into uncertainty.

I commend my hon. Friend for raising this important issue. I remain committed to making sure that pupils in my North Warwickshire and Bedworth constituency have the travel they need to get to the school that they want to go to.

I thank all Back Benchers for being very good with their timekeeping. We now move to the Front-Bench speakers.

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) on securing this debate. Every child, no matter their background, can achieve great things, but sadly there is currently a postcode lottery for SEND provision, which means that a lot of our children are being left behind. The previous Conservative Government failed children with SEND by not planning effectively for the increased demand for SEND school places. One parent from my constituency wrote:

“Please, please help. This is unbelievable. I just can’t cope anymore. It’s looking like you are giving us no choice but to go to tribunal just to get him a school.”

As has been mentioned, this is about a fundamental right to education. The need is rising and the crisis is growing. Ultimately, that means that more children need to have more specific transport. The number of students on EHCPs has doubled from 105,000 eight years ago to 230,000 in 2023. In Hertfordshire, EHCP numbers are expected to continue to grow. The number of children and young people with EHCPs has grown by 223% in Hertfordshire alone. One of my constituents, Charlotte, is a parent to three children, all of whom have EHCPs and complex SEND. She says that being in a constant battle mode has become the norm, and to secure educational support, her eldest child now has to travel almost 100 miles a day just to go to school.

We heard today about children who have to travel one hour and 45 minutes and about Polly and the impact on her parents, and many Members talked about the inconsistency across their constituency and across the country. The growing need and the lack of SEND provision close to home means that getting transport has become increasingly tough. That is exacerbated by cuts to local transport. Many Members have spoken about the impact of this. It is essential that the transport is there to take children to school safely, as it has an impact on their wellbeing.

If there is not a suitable SEND school local to the child, councils are required to provide transport to a school that has capacity but can opt out of the funding, as has been discussed. The number of children travelling to specialist schools has increased by 24% in the last five years. The use of taxis to transport SEND children to and from school increased by 36% between 2019 and 2023. As has been mentioned, even if a child does get transport, they have to be able to rely on it actually being there.

Many Members have talked about cash-strapped councils. Up and down the country, councils were let down by the last Conservative Government and are struggling. Many are filling that financial black hole by charging families of SEND children. A study showed that at least six councils have begun consulting on proposals, with some asking families to pay as much as £933 per year. We heard about Jessica and her son, and other Members highlighted the amount that families are paying.

Ultimately, the rise in transport issues further highlights the issue of SEND provision near to where children live. We were let down by the last Conservative Government, who left SEND provision on its knees, and in Hertfordshire, we were let down by Hertfordshire county council, which had failings identified in a recent report. We are facing a twin crisis in funding special educational needs and local government. Urgent action is needed to ensure that all children can access the tailored learning and support that they need, and as close to home as possible.

That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for local authorities to be given extra funding and for a fairer funding formula on SEND to reduce the amount that schools pay towards EHCPs. We would establish a new national body for SEND to support children with complex and high needs, ending the postcode lottery. At the heart of this issue are our children and their families who want them to reach their full potential. As I said at the beginning, every child can achieve great things, no matter what; we must not let them down.

It is pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. I congratulate the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) on securing this important debate and on her very good speech. This subject impacts families up and down the country every day, and I am glad that we have been able to debate it. We have heard about the need for local provision, more specialist schools and a well-funded system, with access to education a common theme.

As Members have acknowledged, under the Education Act 1996, local authorities are under a duty to provide free school transport to eligible children. That was intended to mean that no child is prevented from accessing education due to a lack of transportation, a view that I believe is shared by everybody here today. However, demand is growing, and as the hon. Members for Leigh and Atherton (Jo Platt) and for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) identified, the ballooning numbers really are a problem.

I will run through the numbers, as they set out the problem we face. Nationally, council spending on SEND transport increased from £728 million in 2019 to £1.4 billion in 2024. It is projected to reach £2.2 billion by 2027-28, an increase of 57%. The average cost per SEND pupil nationally for transport has also risen by 32% between 2018 and 2024, and the number of pupils requiring transport is also growing. Councils transported an average of 1,300 pupils in 2023-24, up from 911 in 2018-19, which is an increase of 43%. I know that the Minister will be thinking about the cause of the demand, as well as what we need to do about it. I hope she can provide an update for us today on Government thinking in this area.

As Members will know, the local government financial settlement for next year is looming. I must correct the Lib Dem spokesperson, the hon. Member for Harpenden and Berkhamsted (Victoria Collins), on this point. She should look at what happened to local government funding when the Lib Dems were in government and then what happened after they left. It is important to emphasise that the Conservative Government increased the high needs budget by over 60% in 2019-20 to £10.5 billion and put in place a statutory override so that SEND-related deficits did not overwhelm council budgets. With that set to expire in 2026, what is the Secretary of State’s message to local authorities, particularly in rural and county areas, where these pressures are most acute?

Will the right hon. Lady give way?

I want to make sure that there is time for a wrap-up, and we are quite close to the end of the debate, so I will continue, if the hon. Lady does not mind.

Is the Secretary of State pushing the Chancellor to extend that protection or for deficits to be written off? How are the Government supporting local authorities to explore innovative solutions, such as shared transport services or alternative models, to help to manage rising SEND transport costs more effectively? Can the Minister also update us on what the total cost will be to local government of the national insurance contributions increase announced in the Budget? What is the cost of the national insurance increase specifically for home-to-school transport? Will local authorities be fully compensated for those costs?

The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) mentioned the need for capital funding. Many Members here will remember the 15 specialist schools pledged in the last Conservative Budget. Can the Minister confirm that those will be going ahead?

I am conscious of the time, so this will be my final word. I pledge that we will be a constructive Opposition. I think everyone here today will be clear that we support local provision, support for parents and more capital funding, and we will support that with the Government if they bring it forward.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) on securing this incredibly important debate—its importance clearly marked by the number of contributions. I know how passionate my hon. Friend is about the need to secure the right support for children with special educational needs and disabilities. Indeed, she and I made a wonderful joint visit in her constituency to a fantastic school that demonstrates what brilliant education delivered inclusively for the whole community can look like. I know she works really hard in her area to make sure that that is available to as many children as possible. That is a vision that the Government very much share with her, because as a Government we are absolutely committed to creating opportunities for all children so that they can achieve and thrive.

I think we all agree that no child should struggle to get to school because of lack of transport. The testimonies that we have heard show the remarkable job that hon. Members have all done in putting forward so powerfully the voices of their constituents in only a minute. To be able to accommodate 30, or just under 30, speakers in a debate of just an hour on this incredibly important issue is quite a feat, so I think everybody should be commended. Their constituents will need to understand the constraints of these debates and that they have done an incredible job in the circumstances. It has come across so strongly how important it is that the transport system supports all young people to access educational opportunity. This is something that I am very keen to look at in the role I now have in the Government. I thank all Members for their contributions today, and you, Sir Mark, for keeping such good order.

I apologise in advance if I am not able to respond to all the individual issues raised. Some of them relate to local authorities and need to be addressed in the correct way to local authorities, where there are the right people to respond to these issues. Others will be for the Department, and we will do our very best to follow up—if we do not, please contact us, because I am really keen and genuinely committed to making sure that all the voices that Members represent here today are heard as we look at how this system is working and how we can fix it.

As has been mentioned, the Department’s home-to-school travel policy is aimed and designed to ensure that no child is prevented from accessing education by a lack of transport, but the challenges in that regard are significant and have been well set out today. There are also particular rights for low-income households to have support in order to exercise choice. Local authorities are obliged to arrange free travel for children of compulsory school age—I appreciate that hon. Members have raised concerns about pre-school-age children and post-16 children, and I will do my very best to address those concerns in the time that we have available—but we know that local authorities are really struggling to fulfil their duty to provide free transport, even for currently eligible children, and the cost of doing so has escalated sharply in recent years.

We thank local authorities for the work they do to try to support children to get to school. We know they provide a valuable service for the children and the families who can access it, particularly if those children have special educational needs and disabilities.

However, there are many reasons for the steep increase in costs in recent years: fuel price inflation and shortages of drivers, passenger assistants and transport operators have all pushed up costs in the market. But we also know that this huge increase is related to challenges within the school system itself, and specifically the way that the school system currently educates children with additional needs.

More children have an educational, health and care plan, and more of those children have to travel long distances to go to a school that can meet their needs. In addition to their journeys being longer, which in itself obviously makes them more expensive, there is a reduction in opportunities for economies of scale. Fewer children are likely to travel on a particular route, which means that more individual journeys need to be made.

Local authorities also try to help young people aged between 16 and 19 to access education or training. That help is extended to the age of 24 if a young person has a special educational need. We recognise that there are similarly significant financial pressures on the transport budgets for post-16 students. The cost and availability of public transport can also be an issue for some young people between 16 and 19 if they are going to travel to sixth form.

Will the Minister give way?

I would like to, but I also want to respond on many of the issues that have been raised, so I apologise that I am not able to take an intervention.

Many local authorities offer subsidised transport and there is also the 16 to 19 bursary, which is intended to provide support to young people in households with the lowest incomes. However, we know that for far too long far too many children have been let down by a special educational needs system that is not working. We are determined to fix it and to restore parents’ trust that their child will get the support to flourish and have their needs met within the education system.

As hon. Members have said today, we urgently need to improve the inclusivity and expertise of our mainstream schools, so that as many children as possible can go to their local community school with their peers. In and of itself, that would reduce some of those transport pressures. However, we must also ensure that support is available for those children who have more complex needs and need special schools. Fixing the system will also help to fix the home-to-school travel challenges that we are seeing. Ensuring that children can be educated locally will reduce that pressure, so it is a key priority for this Government.

However, there are no quick fixes. This issue is absolutely core to our opportunity mission; addressing special educational needs and disabilities must be part of ensuring that every child has the barriers to opportunity broken down for them. We need to work together with parents, schools, councils and the expert staff who we know go above and beyond every day to support these children, but we recognise the challenges in the system.

Home-to-school travel is obviously an absolutely core part of ensuring that children receive the education that they need and that will help them to thrive. However, we know that the eligibility criteria have been unchanged since the 1940s. Clearly, they are meant to ensure that children can access education and that lack of transport is not a barrier to children accessing education, but I am really keen to understand how they are working in the modern context and how we can change the education system to reduce the pressures and ensure that we have a transport system that is fit for the modern age.

Post-16 eligibility has been raised a number of times today. I have mentioned the bursary fund; more than £166 million of bursary funding has been allocated to institutions for the 2024-25 academic year. It is intended to support young people with travel, books, equipment and clothing, if needed. An additional £20 million is also specifically allocated to support vulnerable students: those in care, care leavers and those supporting themselves or in receipt of social security funds. Those funds should be available, but clearly they are not always getting to the children who need them. In addition, local authorities have discretion to make the transport arrangements that they deem necessary for post-16 students in their area, taking into consideration local circumstances, local budgets and local priorities.

I recognise all the challenges that have been identified today and I urge hon. Members to work with their local authorities to try to improve the situation on a local level, just as we are clearly working to do so on a Government level.

We know that children’s earliest years make the biggest difference to their life, which is why we recognise the importance of early years and early education. We know that that is how to deliver the best outcomes for children. Having access to those appropriate childcare settings in the early years is key to meeting those early years development goals and to breaking down any barriers that may arise later on in life. We know that special educational needs access in particular, and identifying needs at the earliest stage possible, is key; many Members have outlined the challenges that transport can pose to making sure that children have access to those opportunities.

We absolutely want children and young people to receive the support they need to thrive. We want local authorities to be able to provide suitable places for children and young people. We know that the capital funding for high-needs places is a key concern for Members, and we will set out plans on that funding shortly. I am out of time to respond, but if I have not addressed a particular issue, I ask hon. Members please to get in touch.

I thank hon. Friends again for bringing this matter forward, for ensuring that everybody had the opportunity to speak, for being so respectful in this debate, and for allowing everyone to put their constituents’ views forward. I know that this is a challenge that far too many face, and that we have to work together in our determination to fix this system to give every child the best start in life.

I thank Members from across the House for their contributions this afternoon, particularly those from rural areas who highlighted the additional complexities of home-to-school travel there. I thank the Minister for her considered response.

I recognise that the challenges to the SEND system are immense and will take a long time to put right. My concern is that, while the ultimate goal of moving inclusive, mainstream education closer to children where they need it is an honourable one and is clearly the direction that we should be travelling in, there are children who cannot access that right now. They cannot wait for a long-term shift in policy and approach; that would have a detrimental impact on the rest of their lives.

The outcomes for children aged 16 to 19, if they do not access education or training, are well documented, which is why education or training is compulsory up to the age of 18. The only people who currently have to face a financial burden to meet their child’s need and make sure that they are accessing that compulsory education or training mandate, on a general, widespread basis, are parents of disabled children. That is something that needs to be looked at.

I welcome the fact that the Minister is keen to look at this issue in more depth in her role in Government and at how it is working in practice. I would very much welcome the opportunity to work with her on that, and indeed to work with the sector and parents of SEND children more widely.

I finish by saying that no one puts their vulnerable, non-verbal child in a car with strangers by choice; it is because that is how they can get them to their education setting. I reflect, with gratitude, on the people who have taken my daughter to school. I believe that their professionalism, their absolute empathy, and the way that they interact with her on a daily basis is something to be commended, as is the role that people play in this system in general.

I thank everybody for their indulgence in keeping their speeches short. We have had 33 speakers in this debate, which I think is the most that anybody has ever crammed into an hour; I hope that Guinness World Records is paying attention.

Question put and agreed to. 

Resolved,

That this House has considered the statutory framework for home-to-school transport for children with SEND.