HC Deb 29 April 2004 vol 420 cc994-6
6. Mr. Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD)

What assessment he has made of the impact of the draft School Transport Bill on traffic congestion.[169210]

The Secretary of State for Education and Skills (Mr. Charles Clarke)

The purpose of the draft School Transport Bill is to reduce congestion and to enable pilot authorities to provide improved home-to-school transport. We will expect all pilot authorities to have plans that will cut car use on the school run, which will reduce traffic and congestion.

Mr. Williams

Hon. Members who represent rural areas, as I do, view a number of the proposals with great concern. Does the Secretary of State agree that if the draft Bill were rolled out across the whole of Wales, 80,000 children would lose the right to free school transport, which must result in more private cars being used for the school run? Will he join me in urging the Welsh Assembly not to adopt any proposals that would result in increased congestion and children from rural and remote areas losing the right to free school transport?

Mr. Clarke

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's figures. The whole of local government, which includes all parties, the Churches and schools say that the current school transport arrangements are not sustainable. That is why, in consultation with those bodies, we laid the draft School Transport Bill, which is designed to free local authorities to make decisions—if they want to make them. I will not impose such decisions: local authorities must decide how best to address congestion in their localities, which is an intelligent way to proceed.

In considering a proposal from an authority, the criterion that I, as Secretary of State, would set—the National Assembly for Wales will apply the criterion in Wales—is that it must increase children's ability to travel to school and reduce congestion. I am well aware that it is possible to make a brouhaha about the matter, in which case I admit that the Bill will not be necessary, but it would be a mistake not to seize this opportunity to address a serious problem that concerns local government, Churches and everyone else, and to surrender to the bandying about of misleading and inaccurate figures.

Mr. David Chaytor (Bury, North) (Lab)

In respect of school transport, does my right hon. Friend agree that the preferences of parents who believe passionately that their children should be educated in faith schools should be given equal priority to the preferences of parents who believe passionately that their children should be educated in secular schools?

Mr. Clarke

My hon. Friend, who is a member of the Select Committee, raises an important issue of principle, which lies at the heart of the proposals to permit local education authorities to take those considerations into account. School transport is controversial and involves many difficulties, which is why there has not been legislation on the matter for decades—since 1944. We should not allow the current system to decay, and we should introduce a system that allows local education authorities to address such issues on a regulated basis to try to take us forward.

Mr. Mark Hoban (Fareham) (Con)

In an earlier answer, the Secretary of State gave the impression of urgency, when he said, "we should seize this opportunity." However, the Transport Committee report on school transport states: The Government's leisurely approach is an indulgence … An experiment which does not end until 2011 is not addressing this problem with the urgency it needs. How does he square the Committee's criticism with his own comments about urgency and seizing the initiative?

Mr. Clarke

I gave evidence to the Transport Committee, and think that the report, in which the Committee rightly gives us credit for taking up the issue, is good. I urge the hon. Gentleman to talk to the hon. Member for South Suffolk (Mr. Yeo), who, on the day when the draft Bill was announced in the Queen's Speech, launched a vigorous attack in the media, saying that the draft Bill is wrong and that we should not take this course. As I said at the time, the hon. Member for South Suffolk can stop the argument. In line with the question from the hon. Member for Fareham, the hon. Member for South, Suffolk should work with us on the legislation, which his Conservative friends in local government want, to take the matter forward properly.