---

Education and Skills Bill

moved Amendment No. 71: 71: Clause 70, page 41, line 5, after ““statements)”” insert ““— (a)”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 72 and 73. The amendments replicate those which we tabled in Committee. We have brought them back because we did not think that the Minister’s reply in Committee was adequate. As I said at the time, the noble Lord told me what I had already told him. We think that this is a very serious issue. Already, well over 1 million young people aged 16 and 17 are travelling to pursue education courses. An increase in this number will come when this legislation comes into effect. The Government are very anxious that young people have a choice in their education options and that they learn to use public transport. Yet often that choice cannot be exercised and young people have no alternative but to resort to private cars because there is no public transport available or because it is unduly expensive. We know that under the terms of the 2002 Act, strengthened by the Education and Inspections Act 2006, local authorities are supposed to have transport plans which demonstrate how they are promoting these objectives, and there are a number of outstanding examples where this has been done. Notable is the example of London, where transport is now free for all young people up to the age of 18. I referred in Committee to Somerset, where, for £420, young people can obtain an annual Rover ticket to cover all transport needs. However, far too many local authorities are not doing what they are required to do, and transport to and from college remains a big issue for many young people. It is very lame for the Minister to respond that local authorities have these duties and should be carrying them out. This Bill will in many senses exacerbate the problem, because it will increase the number of young people seeking to travel to and from home to school or college. However, it also offers an opportunity to strengthen the local authorities’ duty, and the amendments do precisely this. Instead of lamely lamenting the fact that local authorities do not do their duty, the Minister can accept the amendments or promise to bring forward others that do the same. It is quite wrong that colleges are having to devote, in total, somewhere between £3 million and £4 million of their funds to providing transport facilities that local authorities are not providing when that money should be devoted to the education of young people. Amendment No. 73 is also in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Low. I pass on the noble Lord’s apologies for not being here to speak to this amendment himself. Again, we are bringing back this issue, because although there has been some progress and discussion since the Committee stage, the trail seems to have gone cold. We would like to know what has happened to it and to have assurances that the Minister will take up the cudgels and make sure that things happen. We have redrafted the amendment in order to meet some of the objections that have arisen. As before, the amendment puts an explicit duty on local authorities to ensure that qualified disabled students up to the age of 25 have access to a means of transport. We define qualified disabled students as those who, by reason of their disability, cannot use public transport without assistance and for whom private transport is also out of the question; for example, blind and visually impaired students. The main stumbling block in the discussions that have been held has, as always, been costs, and the danger that the amendment would lead to vast expenditure on taxis for long journeys for the students concerned. There are two responses to this objection. The first is that the total number of students involved is extremely small, in the region of 10,000 from a total in further education of well over 1.5 million. The number is so small in relation to the total that it should not worry the ministry. Secondly, ““qualified disabled learners”” consist only of those who are visually impaired or who have complex disabilities. There is a large number of people who are listed as disabled but who are perfectly able to travel by public transport. Even among those who might be listed as qualified disabled learners there are quite a number who, if given assistance, can use public transport. A number of local authorities are providing what are called ““travel trainers”” so that the students concerned can be trained to travel. For example, a visually impaired student might well be able travel by train or bus provided that they learn the route and know what changes have to be made. Given a certain amount of travel training in this respect, they can and like to be independent. Similarly, a blind student is often able to travel with a dog. If the student concerned is making the same journey as other students, other students might be able to travel with them as travel assistants. Local authorities could employ them in that role. Given a little creative thinking, local authorities do not have to provide expensive taxis; there are other means of meeting the requirement. That is why, in rephrasing the amendment, we have defined ““access”” so that it, "““may include the provision of training or assistance with travel on public transport as well as the direct provision of the means of transport””." This issue has been around for a very long time. When we discussed it in Committee, I spoke about the extent to which I had worked on it with Lady Darcy de Knayth. We saw a little movement from the Ministry during the summer. Some meetings took place, and there has been correspondence with Skill about it. However, the trail seems to have gone cold. I hope that the Minister will tell me that she will take up the cudgels on behalf of the disabled students that we are discussing. These rights and duties already exist in legislation relating to local authorities but, once again, local authorities are not delivering on those duties. The Ministry should make sure that they do. I hope that the Minister will see fit to accept our reasonable amendment and that we can see some real progress. I beg to move.