AGENDA ITEM NO: 12
REPORT TO:
Executive Board
REPORT NO:
TDG / 19 / 05
DATE:
20 September 2005
LEAD MEMBER:
Councillor Arwel Jones (Children, Young People
And Families)
LEAD OFFICER:
Strategic Director (Children & Young People)
CONTACT OFFICERS:
Mrs Janet Bennett – (ext. 7485)
Mr Alyn Jones – (ext.7160)
SUBJECT:
School Transport Appeals (Hazardous Routes)
Panel
WARD:
All
1.
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
To provide early feedback on the operation of the new School Transport Appeals
procedure and to consider amendment to an apparent anomaly in the Hazardous Routes
criteria.
2.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.1.
The newly constituted School Transport Appeals Panel has met to consider an Appeal from
a group of parents that a route to and from schools was hazardous. During the operation of
the Panel, two subsidiary issues emerged. The Executive Board is being asked to consider
these issues with the aim of bringing greater clarity and consistency to the future working
of such Panels.
2.2.
The Appeals Panel comprises three Members and the Strategic Director (Children and
Young People). Experience at the first Panel meeting shows that it is unworkable for an
officer to carry out both advisory and decision-making roles.
2.3.
Secondly, there appears an inconsistency of approach in the application of Policy criteria
when one of them (the “social danger” criterion) is currently not available for
consideration before the Appeal stage. Members are asked to consider if this should be
removed or added to both stages.
3.
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1.
That the Strategic Director (Children and Young People) or his nominee, acts in an
advisory capacity only to the School Transport (Hazardous Routes) Appeals Panel.
That consideration of the “social danger” criterion be available to the Chief
Transportation and Asset Management Officer when he carries out his assessment of
hazardous routes under the Hazardous Routes Policy or that this criterion be
removed from the initial, officer and subsequent Appeal stages.
3.2.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
To clarify the role of the Strategic Director and to remove an anomaly in the use of
assessment criteria under the Hazardous Routes to School Policy
Terry Garner
Strategic Director – Children and Young People
4.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
4.1.
Following on from the recommendations of the Children and Young People Scrutiny
Committee, as amended by the Executive Board, revised arrangements have been put in
place to consider Appeals that particular routes to schools were hazardous and, as a
consequence, that free School Transport should be provided. Members will be aware that
it is a parental responsibility to ensure that their child reaches school unless transport
responsibilities fall to the Authority in line with the Authority’s statutory role regarding,
‘distance’, or under its Hazardous Routes policy.
4.2.
The original recommendation of the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee was
that both the initial assessment of the safety of routes and the consideration of any
subsequent Appeals be handled at officer level. The Executive Board amended this to
allow initial officer determination but to set up a Member / officer Appeal panel to
consider Appeals. The Strategic Director (Children and Young People) was nominated, as
the Statutory Officer, to join the three Member Appeal Panel. The first meeting of the
Appeal Panel was held on 27 July 2005, and this report provides an early perspective on
the work of the Panel.
4.3.
Two issues emerged, apart from the Appeal itself. The first related to the difficulty in
having an officer as a member of the Panel. There is an obvious tension when an officer is
required to offer advice and to assist in the weighing of evidence. At the meeting in
question, the issue was resolved by the Strategic Director restricting his role to clarifying
process and criteria, and not taking part in the decision making process. This suggests that,
in future, only Members should be involved in the decision making process.
4.4.
In addition, during consideration of the Appeal it became apparent that one of the criteria
available to the Appeals Panel was not available to the Chief Transportation and Asset
Management Officer in making his initial assessment as to the categorisation of a route.
The criterion of “social danger” which may be relevant specifically to routes crossing
public open space and footpaths/bridleways is available for the Panel to consider on appeal
only. However, as the Appeals Panel is intended to be reviewing the decision taken by
officers it seems a little perverse for them to be able to consider an extra issue which was
not available to the officer and which, if it had been, may have influenced his decision.
Accordingly it is suggested that either all the criteria contained in the Hazardous Routes to
School Policy should be available for consideration at the first stage (Officer level) or that
the ‘social danger’ issue is not considered at either stage. This should ensure that where an
appeal against an officer decision is made the Panel has the opportunity to review all
criteria applicable under the Policy.
4.5.
The consideration of social danger is exceptionally complex. Such issues could vary with
the age of the child, the nature of the route and, possibly, weather and levels of lighting.
The Council does not, at present, have an agreed mechanism by which such issues can be
judged effectively. Police records concerning the frequency of reported incidents on a
particular route can be of use but there has historically been some difficulty in gaining
speedy access to such information. If Members do wish to include such a criterion at both
stages, time will be required to develop and agree such issues. Member attention is also
drawn to the financial and staffing implications set out in sections 7.2 and 7.4 below.
5.
CONSULTATION
N/A
6.
SCRUTINY COMMITTEE COMMENTS
6.1.
These have been considered already by the Executive Board.
7.
IMPLICATIONS
7.1.
Policy Framework – the recommendations do amend the Council’s policies in respect of
the consideration of School Transport Hazardous Route Appeals.
7.2.
Budget – the extension of the Social Factors criterion to the first stage assessment of
School Transport routes may mean that more routes are deemed to be hazardous thus
increasing School Transport costs.
7.3.
Legal - N/A
7.4.
Staffing – it is envisaged that further staffing resources will be required to ensure that
‘social dangers’ investigations are made at officer level, in dealing with current and future
hazardous route applications. The additional burden on staff resources will not become
apparent until any alteration is made to this element of the policy.
7.5.
Other - N/A
8.
EVALUATION OF OPTIONS
8.1.
N/A