§
Lords Amendment: In page 9, line 41, at end, insert new Clause "A":
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section. a local education authority shall have power, for the purpose of facilitating the attendance at any school or county college or at any course or class provided in pursuance of a scheme of further education in force for their area of pupils for whose transport free of charge no arrangements are made by the authority under subsection (1) of section fifty-five of the principal Act, to permit such pupils, in consideration of the payment to the authority of fares of such amounts as appear to them to be reasonable, to be carried in a motor vehicle used for providing transport in pursuance of arrangements made under that subsection:
Provided that—
(2) A motor vehicle used for providing transport in pursuance of arrangements made under the said subsection (1) shall not, for the purposes of Part IV of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, be deemed, in the case of a vehicle belonging to a local education authority, to be a public service vehicle, or, in any other case, to be a stage carriage or express carriage, by reason only of the carriage therein of a person who is charged a fare by virtue of the foregoing subsection.
(3) In this section the expression "special area" has the meaning assigned to it by subsection (1) of section one hundred and seven of the London Passenger Transport Act, 1933.
§ 9.0 p.m.
§ The Minister of Education (Miss Florence Horsbrugh)I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
The House will remember that in Committee my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Ashton) moved new Clauses which were designed to enable local education authorities to fill up vacant places in their school buses by pupils who would pay fares. I had representations on this subject from hon. Members on both sides of the House, and the right hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede), at the end of the Committee stage, said that he, too, had had representations from many of his right hon. and hon. Friends.
I had at that time to suggest that the Clauses should be withdrawn so that we might see how they could be better drafted. If the House will remember, an Amendment was put on the Order Paper in my name on the Report stage, but, unfortunately, even then the drafting was not correct and did not cover further technical points. The Amendment had to be withdrawn. A change was made and the Amendment was moved and accepted in another place.
The purpose of the new Clause is simple although I must say that, as it stands, it is an extremely long and complex Clause. That seems to be necessary even in dealing with such a small change as that which we suggest. The purpose is to empower a local education authority to fill any vacant places in a bus provided for the free transport of pupils under Section 55 (1) of the Education Act, 1944, by taking other pupils and charging a reasonable fare.
I want to make it absolutely clear that the Clause neither removes from nor adds to the duties and powers in regard to the provision of free transport which authorities already have under Section 55 (1) of the 1944 Act. It gives authorities a new power in relation to fare paying pupils which they can use or not use at their discretion. It is merely an enabling Clause.
For the authorities who wish to use this power, the licensing provisions of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, are considerably simplified. The authorities have only to get the written consent of the licensing authority for public service vehicles, and 1831 in the area within which the London Transport Executive have special rights, that of the British Transport Commission. The Clause provides that the licensing authority shall not give their consent unless they are satisfied that there are no other transport facilities which meet the reasonable needs of the pupils concerned. The licensing authorities will, of course, have an opportunity to consult the operators of any public transport vehicles.
If a licensing authority wish to refuse their consent on these grounds, they will be expected to satisfy themselves that the existing facilities will, in practice, meet the needs of the pupils concerned in all respects. I will see that this is made clear if the Bill is passed and this Clause is included, because I will send out a circular making these facts absolutely clear.
The last point which I want to draw to the attention of hon. Members is that, as they will see in the Clause, the fare to be charged has to be such amount as the local education authority consider reasonable. I think that from this short explanation it will be seen that the Clause gives a permissive power to the local education authority, who can use the power or not at their discretion; and that it is left to that authority to decide what fare, if any, they shall charge.
§ Mr. Ede (South Shields)As the right hon. Lady said, we had a discussion in Committee on an Amendment which had been put down by the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Ashton), and I think that the hon. Member for Ealing, South (Mr. Maude) was also associated with it in the short discussion which we had. I gave my general support to the idea and I shall not this evening venture into the more intricate parts of the new Clause which deal with the arrangements with the various transport authorities who may be concerned. I know that it represents the result of considerable negotiation, and I can only hope that it complies with all the technical requirements of that somewhat complicated section of our law.
I welcome the idea behind this Lords Amendment. Representations have been made by certain right hon. and hon. Friends of mine sitting on this side of the House as to the need for this. It seems to me to be quite a commonsense arrangement, but I am concerned that it should 1832 not relieve a local education authority of any duty that now rests upon it, and I wonder whether the words that occur in the first few lines of subsection (1) of the proposed new Clause,
no arrangements are made by the authority,mean the same as if they were, "no duty rests on the authority to make arrangements."I can see an ingenious authority—and I have been amazed at the ingenuity displayed by some authorities in trying to avoid their duties under the Act—providing for one pupil a free ride and charging others whom it is their duty to convey. They would still be not making the arrangements for those pupils for whom, in my view, they have a duty to provide.
As I understand the position it is this. It is an answer to a school attendance order if a parent says, "My child, being under eight, lives more than two miles from the school," or "My child, being over eight, lives more than three miles from the school." If the child is to be educated it is then regarded, under Section 55 (1), as I understand it, as the duty of the local education authority to provide transport for such a child. There are certain other cases where a child cannot get to a school of its own denomination within the limits of distance which I have just described, and where a local education authority has, in some cases, I know, been called on by the Minister for the time being to provide the necessary transport facilities. The cases I know occurred under the present Minister's predecessor.
I am really surprised that more Nonconformist parents in single school areas have not exercised their rights under Section 68 of the Act in this particular matter. It is not to be thought that this is a privilege that attaches merely to parents of the Roman Catholic or Church of England persuasion. It is in certain circumstances available to children of Nonconformist parents.
§ Sir Sidney Marshall (Sutton and Cheam)There are only a few.
§ Mr. EdeI do not want to get into an argument with the hon. Gentleman about how many Church of England parents send their children to Church of England schools and how many Nonconformist 1833 parents do so, because, after all, Nonconformity covers a very wide range of religious opinion and lack of opinion.
§ Sir S. MarshallThey have so few schools.
§ Mr. EdeI know the difficulties that exist in certain cases on this point, and I want to be assured by the right hon. Lady that the words she has included will not enable a local education authority to apply a means test to pupils whom they are under a duty, if the law is as I have explained it, to convey free; because I quite see certain local education authorities—no names, no pack drill—who might seize on this, and we might get back to the days when there was differentiation of that kind.
For instance, when I first attended an elementary school it was before the days of the Act abolishing school fees—before free education. The fees we paid were graduated, according to what was believed to be the income of the parent, up to 9d. For some reason which showed a very poor lack of understanding of comparative incomes, I was assessed at 9d., and my father, after discovering that I was to be taught by a boy some few years older than myself who was the son of a tradesman who lived not far away said, "Ninepence for him, oh no." That dispute was not resolved until the free education Act had been passed.
I hope that the right hon. Lady, in her circular, will make it quite clear that, where a child lives outside the distance, and the local authority requires that child's attendance at school, he or she does not come within the arrangement whereby they can charge a fee.
§ Miss HorsbrughI give the right hon. Gentleman that assurance now. I was very careful to state, in what I said, that it neither removes nor adds anything to their duty. The duty of the local education authority remains, and in these particular words "no arrangements are made." It is the duty of the local authority to make arrangements to convey children who live more than two or three miles from the school. This takes away no statutory duty that exists now, and it also applies to the arrangements that are being carried out now in the denominational schools. Nothing of that is taken away whatever, and I shall see 1834 that that is absolutely clear in the circular.
§ Mr. EdeI am much obliged to the right hon. Lady for making that so emphatically clear, and I can only hope that the local education authorities will pay attention to the circular and see that nothing contrary to it goes on.
Apart from that, this seems to me to be a very sensible arrangement, indeed. Here is a bus proceeding along the road. It overtakes at some point within the two or three-mile limit, as the case may be, certain children who have to walk some distance within these limits to school. If it picks them up and a reasonable fare is charged it is probably better for the children, certainly in wet weather, than their having to trudge that distance. I hope that the right hon. Lady will see that the fares to be charged are reasonable, having regard to the standard of fares charged in the district.
This entails no additional expense on the local education authority, as I understand it. The bus or other vehicle is running and the charge is generally not on the number of passengers it conveys but is a lump sum for the type of vehicle that is provided. I think this is a reasonable way of dealing with the difficulty that occurs to some parents, especially where there are roads where there are no footpaths at the side, it is highly to be desired that as few children as possible in these days should be on those roads. If this vehicle picks them up and conveys them I think that is all to the good in every way.
I thank the right hon. Lady for including the new Clause, and I take it that what she has said in regard to the ordinary pupil also covers the case of the pupil, who has some physical disability, whom the local authority is under a duty to convey even if the distance is less than the two miles—that he cannot be charged even if he lives within the prescribed distance. If that is so, I think that this is a welcome addition to the education law of the country, and I certainly hope that local education authorities who have an opportunity to use it will do so to the full.
§ 9.15 p.m.
§ Major Sir Frank Markham (Buckingham)I wish to give a very warm welcome to the Clause. It is something which has been needed in our educational 1835 legislation for some time. I take perhaps a little vicarious pride in the fact that some of the inspiration behind this Clause came from Buckinghamshire, where we have, in practice, been carrying out schemes of this kind, wondering whether they would be approved. I am very glad to see now that we are absolved by this Clause which, I hope, will pass the House this evening.
I should like to make two short points on the Bill as it now stands. The first relates to fares, to which the right hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) has referred. Instead of leaving fares to the discretion of the education authority, would it not be better to say that the fare charged for the schoolchildren should be the normal fare for children for that particular mileage in that neighbourhood, so that the education authorities know exactly what the fare should be and it should not be left to the discretion of the education committee?
I come now to my second point. The school bus has now become quite a feature of the rural areas. Very often it is the only bus that connects villages with market towns on several days of the week. Very often, even under this new scheme, all the seats in these buses will not be taken up. Therefore, I suggest that my right hon. Friend might go just that little step further.
When the seats are not all required by pupils under the Education Act or by pupils attending denominational or other schools, will my right hon. Friend seek ways and means of allowing the general public to use these seats as fare paying passengers, and so improve the amenities in villages such as those in North Buckinghamshire?
§ Mr. Leslie Hale (Oldham, West)I am sure that all those who heard the remarks of my right hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) will think that his parents got a very good ninepenny worth.
§ Mr. HaleThen they got even better value for money than I had anticipated.
I join in tendering to the Minister from what, perhaps, appears to be a somewhat unexpected source, a humble tribute on this matter. I hope that the 1836 right hon. Lady will take it as an earnest of possible encomiums to come. I share, however, the fears of my right hon. Friend on the wording of the Clause. I entirely agree that it does not necessarily cover any possible loophole; but, of course, we accept, and with gratitude, the clear and unequivocal undertaking that the right hon. Lady has given, and we appreciate that, whether the Bill covers it or not, the matter can be dealt with administratively.
I have no objection to any part of the Clause except the last part in the middle, about which I want to make a few observations. Perhaps the House will look for a moment at the two paragraphs which commence, "Provided that—" Anyone who knows anything about the traffic law will know that both paragraphs are wholly unnecessary unless it is wished to make special provision for the protection of some limited private enterprise. They have no relevance, of course, to this proposal at all.
When I recall what we did upstairs in Committee, I am astonished to find that four or five other people made the suggestion and, apparently, I did not, because I rather thought that I was the one who did it. I am probably wrong, however, in my recollection, because I have spent a lot of time in mentally thinking of speeches which I would have made but which I am never called upon to make. On reading the report of the proceedings in Committee, I recall that I had those things in mind, and to that extent I am, perhaps, entitled to claim the credit for having it in mind at the time, even if I did not make the speech.
The implication is quite serious. We made a perfectly simple proposal—nothing could be more simple. The bus may be running along the road with children in it, coming from two or three miles away and going direct to the schools. Other children may be walking, rather unhappily sometimes, in snow or sludge, along the same road, and the children in the bus are apt to cock a contemptuous snook at them as they pass, which adds to the misery of those who are walking. We say that they should be allowed to come in. If it is necessary, let them pay. Why not do that? All that the right hon. Lady agreed to and we were grateful; on Report stage she made an effort to do it. Then, at some stage—whether it was 1837 a high civil servant or a Parliamentary draftsman we do not know—said that there might be a bus run by private enterprise which might do the journey.
Let us look at what the proposal means. It means that there might be going along that road, through two or three villages in Buckinghamshire, a stage carriage bus which may not have seats available, but it might be possible to prove that, on the whole, there is usually a seat at that time. It is not going to the school, but is going near the school. There arises the question whether the nearness to the school is suitable to a lad of 14, or a lad of five. All sorts of complications and questions of whether there are reasonable transport facilities available or not will come up for consideration.
Then the whole thing starts. A department in the town hall is opened and someone is appointed to deal with the problem. There must be someone to deal with it and no doubt he will get a title before long. [Laughter.] I do not mean in the Honours List, but a formal designation. He will be "Schoolchildren's Transport Registrar of Voluntary Fee Payers," or something like that. He will start with a ledger, an inkpot, and a few pens with a slight extension of office and hopes that things will develop.
Then there has to be a form for parents to fill in making application for leave to be entered on the fee payers' panel and stating the circumstances which justify that. They may be the distance from the school, disability, or even a mental inhibition to walking which might require psychiatric investigation. Then we start off with form "1/2/3/4/5/6/7/Z/3 Local Transport, School, Education." The form starts with, "Name in full, surname in capital letters," "Sex f. or m.," and so on through the whole gamut of the information that the Civil Service require.
That would not be satisfactory. One knows perfectly well what happens because we have nearly all been on local government bodies. Three months later the finance committee get a little memorandum to say that the officer in charge of a section of education has now taken on the additional job of registrar of voluntary fee payers and they recommend an addition to his salary of about £50 a year to cover the cost. Then we have started it in nearly every town hall in England. That is not the end, because we have to consider the licensing authority.
1838 The right hon. Lady was rather coy about this, but the licensing authority, under the Road Traffic Act, is a quasi-judicial authority and have to act judicially. If they give a decision they have to hear representations from the owner of the bus concerned. Surely they cannot act in a quasi-judicial manner and not hear the people declared to have an interest. The owner of the bus is declared to have an interest. The normal procedure is to publish the whole thing in notes and proceedings, and so on.
Then there may be an adjournment because no one will know at first how many pupils are to use this service. An experimental period may be wanted in order to find out how many places there are on the bus and how many pupils can go on it. There has to be a form for the licensing authority and the registrar will have to nominate his form of application and transfer it to a form for the licensing authority, who will instruct someone to find out how many are travelling on the routes concerned. In Buckinghamshire, 70 or 80 routes are concerned—
§ Sir F. MarkhamThere are more.
§ Mr. HaleThat is an example of my modesty.
For every single one someone has to get out a map and work out with micrometers the distance to the school—or not to the school because the bus would not go to the school, but nearly—and the distance the pupil has to walk from the house to get to the bus. The bus may not start from that spot nor end at the spot required and the licensing authority has to say whether it goes near enough, whether it is worth while the children using it or using ordinary transport, even if they used it before. So we have another department going.
I do not know, I only venture to guess whether the bus proprietor will be entitled to be represented by counsel or a solicitor or will be allowed to submit his own form of representation as to what he will charge, what it is likely to cost the local authority for transport and how it will affect his finances and his living. And all this to make sure that a couple of infantile buttocks sit on a seat on which they were entitled to travel in the first place in a bus which is already there. This is bureaucracy gone mad. This is 1839 from the apostles of private enterprise dealing with private enterprise.
I expressed my sense of gratitude for the Clause. I said that my gratitude was modest and I have qualified it to some extent in the observations I have felt called on to make. But I would say that the matter is not without its good side and I ought to pay attention to that. In a few years the "National Association of Registrars for Fee Paying Transport for School Pupils" will call the attention of Her Majesty's advisers to the fact that they have men who are an asset to the service and who may well be rewarded.
Through the usual channels, and following appropriate advice, some recognition will ultimately be awarded to them; it may be a K.B.E. or an M.B.E. The Road Haulage Association and the Transport Association will continue their normal contribution to the Tory funds or may possibly increase them, and this honourable House will be able to make the proud boast that government of the people, by the trade associations, for the trade associations, shall not perish from the earth.
§ Mr. Hubert Ashton (Chelmsford)It is a matter of great gratification to me to see the accord of my right hon. Friend and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede). We have listened to a most interesting speech from the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Hale). I do not know what is his experience of local government, but if it fell to his lot to administer this Clause, which is intended to help local authorities, I suggest that he might receive certain honours and titles which would surprise even him.
I wish to thank my right hon. Friend for the trouble she has taken over this Clause, the object of which is to help people to get their children to school. I believe that local authorities will interpret it sensibly and correctly. My small Clause has apparently not only travelled hopefully, but has arrived.
§ Question put, and agreed to.