Agenda item

Members of the public may ask questions or make statements at this meeting if they have given notice to Stephen Loach of Democratic Services by midday on Wednesday 13 November 2024, three working days before the day of the meeting. Each speaker should limit themselves to 3 minutes on any item. Members of the public who have given notice will be invited to speak:

 

-        at this point in the meeting if their questions/statements relate to matters which are not otherwise on the agenda (subject to an overall time limit of 30 minutes); when the relevant agenda item is being considered if they wish to speak on a matter which is on the agenda for this meeting.

 

If you are exercising your right to speak at this meeting, but do not wish to be recorded, please inform the Chair who will instruct anyone who may be taking a recording to cease while you speak.

The following questions or statements, as detailed below, were submitted by members of the public:

 

Cllr Philip Holder - Member of Leyburn Town Council

 

(A diagram of the proposed route was circulated at the meeting)

 

Go-Ahead have bought Proctors, in May, and their depot at Leeming Bar which is en- route.  They have a network to Ripon and Helmsley from York with North Riding under East Yorkshire Bus Services.  Also they have just ordered 1200 buses from WrightBus in NI for £500M so they may be interested in linking up with their North East interests.  The headline this week was "Go-Ahead to reap benefits of mayoral public transport schemes" by Graham Whitfield in Business Live 23 October 2024. I call the route " The North Riding Superloop" after TfL's round London new routes.

 

Response from North Yorkshire Passenger Transport Services – Andy Clarke

 

Much of the area included is already covered by existing commercial bus routes so NYC would not be able to commission it even if there was a budget.

 

Any bus company is free to register a bus service if they wish but that would be a decision for them rather than NYC. Proctors / Go-Ahead are unlikely to start a parallel service to Arriva between Catterick, Richmond and Darlington.

 

Alexandra Robson – Clerk to Northallerton Town Council

 

It is now 14 months since we asked why the North Northallerton site, allotments, could not be formally opened. No progress appears to have been made in resolving the legal issues highlighted in NYCs response to that question. The completed allotment site now requires significant remedial work before it could be used. What are the specific legal issues causing this continued delay, who are the parties involved, how will NYC ensure that these issues are resolved quickly and who will be responsible for the costs to remediate the allotment site before it can be used?

 

Response from Legal Services

 

The transfer from the developers to NYC was recently completed. 

 

Negotiations are now underway with Northallerton Town Council with a view to completing shortly on the allotment headlease as well as the transfer of the Ramsden ransom strip.

 

Home to School Transport Policy

 

1.Stephen and Christine Clarkson

 

I am emailing to give notice to speak at the Richmond & Northallerton Area Committee meeting at County Hall 10 am Monday 18 November. I understand a discussion about school transport is to be allowed.

My statement is as follows

 

The new home to school transport policy will severely affect our area both in the short and long term.The proposal will take our children over mountainous ungritted routes.

As an example, the Kirkby Stephen route goes over Tailbrigg a notorious road that is often impassable. If you don’t believe me, please take notice of these statements, both from people who have no skin in the game. Simon Alderson, the owner of the garage at the foot of Tailbrigg. He states "We are well aware of this issue as the road is closed regularly in winter due to snow and also from ice on the upper sections. We call the council to come and clear it, but we are told it's not a priority road and after a gritter crashed through the barrier and rolled over one year, a gritter will not attempt to clear it without a digger alongside now" Or Doris Harker a lady who in the 1960's went to Kirkby School whilst living in Upper Swaledale She states "l had to board during the week and could not get home at weekends for snow many feet deep. Please think about the safety of the Children and the time they will be unable to attend school"

 

I sent both these compelling statements as part of the consultation but still no one from the Council has investigated the route. The digital mapping tool correctly considers Kirkby Stephen as the nearest secondary school to the children of Upper Swaledale. I would hope that it would be considered an unsuitable option once the route is assessed, but parents of 11 year olds need to choose now, but how can they make an informed choice when no risk assessments have been completed.

 

Long term it will affect families desire to move to the area, if your only options were to either send your child to school on unsafe roads or to drive them yourself to a school over 20 miles away, you would choose somewhere else to live.

 

The Yorkshire Dales National Parks Vision Statement includes that the area by 2040 will be

 

"Home to strong, self-reliant and balanced communities with good access to the services they need"

 

This policy goes directly against that and in the long term will deter working families from moving in. And we desperately need more working families in our area not less.

To create that balanced community and help realise the vision of the Yorkshire Dales National Park, please look at this again.

 

2. Charlotte Fowler

 

Last week we handed a petition to the government with the help of Tom Gordon MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough. We want to be listened to, we live in North Yorkshire too and you have forgotten us. You say that you understand the importance of the local communities that we live in, yet you have not considered the negative impact that this policy will have for generations to come. There are many implications that have not been considered for Swaledale and Arkengarthdale and other rural areas in North Yorkshire.

 

The department for Education guidelines states(point) 39. Where the schools are beyond walking distance, local authorities may consider it more appropriate to measure the shortest road route or the straight-line distance. The shortest route to Wensleydale school from Swaledale is over Grinton Moor, which has a 7.5 ton weight limit, a school coach will not be able to drive this way, instead they will have to take a route that is a longer journey than the existing journey to Richmond school. We invite you to please come and see these journeys for yourself, then you will see why we are in disbelief that we are being told our children should travel on routes to their nearest school if we want to have transport provided. A risk assessment is not good enough to put our minds at rest, we don’t use these roads when the weather turns, we will not risk putting our children on them when there is a safer route available. A consultation is ongoing with the closure of Wensleydale sixth form, does this not mean that transport will have to be available for post 16 students to access in Upper Swaledale, this would be Richmond school. Does it not make sense to make this the nearest road journey to school to make education accessible to all.

 

The policy does not work for rural communities. We have no public transport to use, we can live and adapt without having things on our doorstep, what we will not accept is that our children will not have a safe journey to school.I ask you to reconsider the policy, to change it so that ungritted routes will not be considered for school transport and that the safest road route will be adopted that is the B6270 to Richmond.

 

3. Rob Macdonald

 

Thank you for allowing me to speak. Given the Council’s circumstances, you may feel that you bear the burden of having to make difficult decisions.

 

I am here to make your life easier. You voted for substantial savings. But you voted for a fantasy. When I spoke directly with Amada Newbold, the architect of this policy, she was unwilling to attach an above zero probability to any of the published range of savings figures. Worse than a fantasy councillors, you were presented with a smokescreen.

 

There are credible savings to be had from applying the ‘nearest school’ algorithm. More households will be drawn within statutory walking distance and require no transport.

 

But the blanket application of this algorithm to geographies it was never intended for will incur additional costs. Add to this the duplication of a lengthy transition, and the knock-on cost to other council budgets and you will wipe out these small savings. This is a net zero policy councillors. Net zero savings. It is argued that this policy will ensure equality because every child’s eligibility will be considered on the basis of exactly one school. Right around North Yorkshire, the new algorithm has selected schools to which no buses currently run.

 

But here’s the rub. Cllr Wilkinson is on record as saying that no new routes are expected. The Council has no intention of bussing children to the only eligible school some parents can choose. So some parents get exactly one choice while others get exactly no real choice at all. Where is the equality in that? It’s not equal, and it’s not compliant with government guidelines. No savings. No equality. No compliance with government guidelines. You need to pause and rethink this policy councillors. Now that all its justifications have evaporated, that shouldn’t be hard at all.

 

4. Jo Foster

 

Thank you for permitting me the time to speak this morning. I want to draw attention back to the petition handed in to County Hall and to the Department of Education in Westminster last week.2122 signatures so far, gathered in just a few weeks. I would urge you to think about them as 2122 very, very good reasons why you need to rethink your decision to restrict free school transport to the nearest school only. Quite simply, that policy does not work for a huge number of families across North Yorkshire. Councillor Sanderson said at Full Council, “This decision only impacts 13% of NorthYorkshire children.” Well, that's 10,000 children, and you don’t need me to remind you that you are councillors for every child in our county. Not just the ones who live in towns and cities, but for every single child, wherever they live. This policy ignores that fact.

 

You might be taking some reassurance from the fact that this petition is being driven by a group of parents and residents from a distant corner of Swaledale. That you’re dealing with a fairly parochial issue and that energy will soon fizzle out. Well, think again. Check the postcodes on those signatures and what you will see immediately is that there are people signing this from across all divisions. This may have started here in our patch, but believe me, the anger around this decision is growing and it’s rolling out across North Yorkshire. Most residents are not yet aware of what you've done. But every single day, more and more parents, and grandparents, are finding out. And right now, as applications are being made for school places for next September, the pace is quickening. When families do find out the facts, they're furious. They are furious at you, because you've just made their life more difficult.

 

For example, there’s a working Mum who lives in Croft-on Tees. She has three children attending Richmond School. She has just learned that in September her fourth child will have to travel to Hurworth School in Darlington. That means in an instant, no sibling support, no chance to save money with hand-me-down of school uniforms, logistical nightmares when it comes to extra-curricular activities, and, possibly most frustratingly of all, different term times to manage. The whole family have a headache that you've created and it’s making people really angry. And angry parents do not forget. They won’t forget this and they will not forgive you for this. So, please, let's get this mess sorted out.

 

It is time for you to say in public what I think most of you now realise in private – this policy in its current form just does not work here. It needs sorting. Please rethink it and do it quickly, before any more damage is done.

 

5. Gordon Stainsby, Headteacher, Reeth and Gunnerside Schools

 

This statement represents the views of the Governing Body of Reeth and Gunnerside Schools. Under the new transport policy, none of the pupils on roll at our schools are eligible for funded transport to Richmond School, ending a service that has been provided for 60 years, since the catchment was established. Working with their parents as they have tried to navigate the secondary school application process has given us an insight that we think is useful to share with you.

 

We asked you to give consideration to the topography of Swaledale, pointed out issues regarding safety and suitability of roads, and asked for action prior to the 31st October. Inaction prevailed. Encouraged to use the Council’s digital tool, families from Upper Swaledale have found that their nearest school is in Kirby Stephen. We know that road is unsuitable for school transport on too many days during the winter for the route to be used – children would miss too many days of education. There is no alternative route.

 

The journey via Richmond and the A66 is a 120 mile round trip. Telling those families that a risk assessment will be completed in the future, was not sufficient. They needed information earlier this year so that they could make an informed decision by the application deadline. Other parents have questioned why the digital tool uses the nearest available walked route for journeys that will be completed by bus, on roads. The digital tool uses footpaths, and even crosses fords and military training facilities. When was the last time you planned a journey by car using footpaths? Why has the council decided to do so? In a region where there are very few roads, and with many of them being unsuitable for a school bus in winter, relying on the footpath network is particularly unhelpful, even stupid. A more practical solution is needed.

 

Pupils that live in the same village have different lists of schools. That could mean that pupils from the same community are transported down the same road on several buses, to be taken to different schools. The transport policy states: ‘The transport will be the most efficient, environmental, and economical method and route suitable for the child’s needs.’ We are struggling to see how that will be achieved given the information provided by the Council’s Geographical Information System.

 

The digital tool has failed to provide clarity for parents and there seems to be a complete absence of strategic planning. The information that is provided doesn’t make sense, leaving parents to make an unfair and unreasonable decision – to send their child to the nearest school via a dangerous route, or pay for them to be transported to their catchment school.

 

Response from Assistant Director Inclusion, Amanda Newbold

 

The Council understands that the new Home to School Travel Policy has resulted in uncertainty and concerns for residents in some parts of the county, including Swaledale.

 

The Committee will be aware that the revised policy was adopted at the meeting of the Full Council on 24 July after a consideration of the outcome of an extensive consultation exercise, including representations made at the meeting.

 

Senior officers have provided information to the media about the policy and the concerns being raised. This is likely to have been reported in the media advance of the meeting, some of the same information is included in the next part of my statement:

 

The policy aligns with the Department for Education’s Statutory Guidance for Home to School Travel, including in respect of the main eligibility criteria for home to school travel which is that transport will be provided to the nearest suitable school with available places. The council is expecting to see a savings profile over the course of the policy implementation of up to £4.2 million.

 

When considering applications for school places for the 2025/26 academic year parents have been encouraged to visit schools and to speak with them about the options for travel in the event that their child were to secure a place at the school.  Parents have also been encouraged to utilise the Council’s online distance calculator tool for identifying the nearest schools to their home address and we know that several thousand parents have used the tool already.

 

In line with national timelines and a process that is unchanged from previous years, Parents will be informed of their child’s school place on ‘National Offer Day’ which is 3 March 2025 for secondary aged children, and 16 April 2025 for primary aged children.  Children's eligibility for assistance with Home to School Travel will be assessed after each national offer day.

 

Once eligibility for assistance is known, officers will determine whether eligible children can be accommodated within existing contracts or whether new contracts, including new routes, are required.  This is in accordance with the council’s longstanding arrangements for the provision of home to school travel. No new routes have been set up and will not be established until the admissions process is complete.

 

Whenever new contracts are procured, risk assessments are carried out with operators.

 

The contracts that are arranged are not necessarily the shortest routes as they will take account of the home locations of other passengers on the route, local knowledge, vehicle size and time spent travelling.

 

The Home to School Travel Policy provides that ‘it is for the Council to decide how to arrange free travel for an eligible child’ and that transport will be the most efficient, environmental, and economical method and route suitable for the child’s needs.

 

Finally, the council received the petition referred to my Ms Foster last Wednesday and this will follow the council’s Petitions Scheme; therefore, it will be discussed at a future meeting of this committee. Please be assured that a commitment has already been made by the council to undertake a review of the policy in summer 2026 when the policy’s impact can be assessed.