Agenda item

A combined paper and electronic petition has been received by North Yorkshire Council and contains 2129 signatures of people who live, work or study in the county.

As the petition contains 500 or more signatures (but less than 30,130 signatories), it has been scheduled for debate at this meeting of the Area Committee.

The process for debating and responding to the petition is set out in the report.

Details of the petition and its aims were set out in the published report, together with a response from representatives of Children and Young Peoples Services.

The key features of the Council’s arrangements for receiving and debating petitions, as published on the Council’s website, are as follows:

·       Receipt of the petition is published on the Council’s website (which has been done in this case).

·       If a petition contains 500 or more signatures (but less than 30,130 signatories), it will be scheduled for debate at a meeting of the appropriate Area Committee which is the case for this petition.

·       The petition organiser is offered the opportunity to speak for five minutes at the Area Committee meeting to present their petition. Subsequently, at the meeting, the petition will be discussed by Councillors for a maximum of 15 minutes and a decision will be made on how to respond to the petition. 

The possible responses by the Council to petitions, as shown on the website, are:

a)    to take the action requested by the petition;

b)    not to take the action requested for reasons put forward in the debate;

c)     to commission further investigation into the matter, for example by a relevant committee; or

d)    where the issue is one on which the council Executive is required to make the final decision, the council will decide whether to make recommendations to inform that decision.

e)    The petition organiser will receive written confirmation of this decision. This confirmation will also be published on the website.

In accordance with the arrangements described above, the petition organiser was invited to join the meeting to present their petition.

The statement by the petitioner, Ian Dawson, was as follows:

In 2023, when this council was formed as a unitary authority, the concern was that local voices would not be heard. Critics claimed that we would end up with decision-making that was disconnected from the communities that you are here to serve. Those who championed the change, many of whom are in this room today, promised residents that this would not be the case.  Now is your chance to prove it.

The roots of this petition come from the consultation that was held last Spring. 1299 responses and 147 pages of comments expressing concerns – almost all of them stemming from one single change – your decision as a Council to restrict free school transport to ‘nearest school only’. 

The warnings of the negative impact that this would have on families, schools and communities were all there 10 months ago. As was the evidence that it would result in more vehicles covering more routes, so more costs. But nobody listened. The consultation changed nothing and made us wonder why you even bothered.

In the Executive and Full Council meetings that followed, questions went unanswered, and concerns fell on deaf ears. You ploughed on relentlessly and rushed it through.

You weren't even listening to each other. Conservative Councillor David Ayrton who voted against this proposal, summed it up neatly when he said:

·       ‘Any savings that exist will be undermined by the costs.’

·       ‘The impact is too great on the communities we represent.’

·       ‘Guidance is exactly that, guidance not the rule.’

He nailed it.

To be clear, there are no savings here. The £4.2m figure has been acknowledged as a pipe dream, that’s why it’s not in your budget. The extra costs involved are obvious. And that’s before you factor in the waste of officer time and endless appeals.

It took us just a few weeks to gather over 2000 signatures, such was the level of public concern. More people from across the county have come forward since then, many sharing firsthand stories of the damage your decision is already starting to do. Those voices are going to get louder. Our community action group is already 240 people strong and growing daily.

You have pledged to be ‘the most local, large council’.  Well here, right now is a chance to prove you mean it. How you react to this petition today and your willingness to amend this policy in the light of what you now know, is the biggest single test that this council has faced yet. Do not let us down.

Changing eligibility to ‘catchment school or nearest in county’ mirrors what other rural areas with similar geographies as ours, such as Devon and the Conservative-led Cornwall Council have done. And reinstating catchment bring us in line with our strategic partners at York City Council. It puts children’s education first and supports hardworking families. It protects our North Yorkshire schools and avoids this council spending another ten months wasting time and money on appeals, assessments and managing public protests.

This amendment is needed urgently. It is clear this cannot and should not wait. We have heard today the disruption to lives that is already happening and the risks that schools are facing. The longer this mess goes on the more children it will harm and the harder it will be to repair the damage done.

Return this policy back to the Executive today with a recommendation to make one single amendment - scrap ‘nearest school only’ and bring catchment back. 

It is the only workable solution for North Yorkshire. And the only way to prove to us that at last, you are listening.

Prior to the response by Officers, Members raised the following issues:

·       Concern was raised that appropriate information including requests through the Freedom of Information Act, that had been requested in advance of this meeting, had not been provided to allow Members to undertake an informed debate.

·       A Member stated that he had requested that the following information be provided to the Committee prior to this meeting, but it had not been received:

1.   What is the expected financial impact on our each of our area’s schools, due to the implementation of the new Home to School Policy?

2.   Has a Social Impact Assessment been undertaken on the consequences of the new policy on our local communities?

a)      If so, what are the results of this assessment?

b)      If not when will this assessment be undertaken?

In response it was stated that the financial details had been provided for the Councillor, however that had been no requirement for a Social Impact assessment, therefore this had not been undertaken. Details were provided in relation to the financial impact and it was stated that these had been provided to the Councillor. In response he stated that he had not received these details and he had asked for these to be provided to the whole Committee, not just him.

In view of the lack of information provided a Member proposed that the issue be deferred for consideration at a subsequent meeting to allow all the requested information to be provided. It was suggested that prior to voting on a deferral an opportunity should be provided to allow officers to explain the impact a deferral would have on the implementation of the policy.

Resolved

That it be agreed that officers be provided with an opportunity to explain the impact a deferral would have on the implementation of the policy.

In response to this officers referred to the report provided for this meeting and highlighted sections 4.8 to 4.12 as containing the specific details on the effect of a deferral.

In noting this information Members still had concerns that there was insufficient information available for them to proceed on this matter. Clarification was provided as to the meaning of Statutory Guidance and how this should be interpreted in terms of the adoption of the policy.

Resolved

That the item submitted under North Yorkshire Council's Petition Scheme, 'Rethink North Yorkshire School Transport Cuts', be deferred for consideration at a subsequent meeting of this Area Committee, enabling officers to provide the detailed information requested by Councillors, by the various Freedom of Information requests and details of the additional highways budget required in a timely manner, so that it may be taken into account when determining the petition.