News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


Outrage as Sussex council plan to spend £80 a day on schoolboy's cab


A council planning to spend up to £80 a day on taxi fare to take a ten-year-old boy to school has been criticised for wasting taxpayers' cash.

Schoolboy Daniel Foulds-Holt will be taxied to and from school next term - even though a bus to a neighbouring school stops outside his front door.

His parents Jeremy Holt and wife Ros Foulds have branded the £80 cost a waste of money.

Tory MP Nick Herbert claimed “common sense” is needed to save taxpayers' cash after the boy's parents found out West Sussex County Council's annual school transport topped £5 million.

Ten-year-old Daniel lost out on his first choice of secondary school because he lives 350 metres outside the recently changed five-mile catchment area.

Instead he was placed in Steyning Grammar School, 4.8 miles from their home in the tiny village of Edburton, near Henfield – despite there being a school bus which stops outside their house to first choice Downlands Community School, in Hassocks.

The only way to get to Steyning is by taxi, which by law the council has to fund.

Mrs Foulds, 45, a psychologist, said: “It makes no sense at all. It puts my son in a ridiculous position, is a financial waste and it's environmentally damaging.”

Husband Jeremy, a 46-year-old managing director, added: “Both schools are good schools and so it is not a situation of making objections to either but we think it's perverse to spend so much money on transport.”

The pair contacted taxi firms that are contracted by the council to ask how much they would quote the local authority for the twice-daily school run.

Mr Holt said: “The nearest approved taxi company is in Burgess Hill and they would have to come from there to here to the school and back to Burgess Hill.”

Mrs Foulds calculated that her son’s transport would cost the taxpayer more than £80,000 over the next five years.

After putting in a Freedom of Information request the couple found the council transport bill had risen from £4,301,629 in 2004-05 to £5,588,500 in 2008-09.

Although the majority of the cash last year was spent on transporting children with special needs, a massive £864,615 was spent on taxi fares for pupils without special needs.

According to figures released to the couple, this means an increase from £567,616 in 2004-05.

Mrs Foulds said: “Spending money on taxis for children with specials needs we can all understand but what shocks me is that not far short of £1m is being spent on people like Daniel who could get on a bus.

"In our case the council could end up paying £16,000 a year which is totally unnecessary. The public interest issue is about money.”

Nick Herbert, Arundel and South Downs MP, said: “The council need to use some discretion in this case so that a common sense solution can be arrived at to save public money.

“When the school bus stops practically outside the door it makes sense to allow him to travel to the school of his parents' choice rather than incur so much cost in taking him to Steyning.

“I accept there has to be rules but there does need to be some discretion and common sense in exceptional cases.”

Councillor Peter Griffiths, West Sussex County Council's cabinet member for education and schools, said there would be a review of school travel and admissions.

He said: "It's in its early stages but the very detailed submission made by the couple will be considered as part of the process."

Lib Dem opposition councillor Morwen Millson said: “I welcome the cabinet member's decision to review the council's school travel and admissions policy but in the meantime the decision with this child should be reviewed.”

A council spokesman said it could not comment on the £80 figure but said: "The student concerned does not start school until September and it may be a taxi journey that is shared.

“We have contracts with more than 40 operators to provide transport for children with special needs, as well as some non-special needs students, and there is a contract process designed to keep down costs.”

Comments(30)

stan bailey says...
10:40pm Mon 6 Jul 09

It beggars belief how they waste our money. Couldn't they buy him a bike.

alice1 says...
11:42pm Mon 6 Jul 09

stan bailey wrote:
It beggars belief how they waste our money. Couldn't they buy him a bike.
Or even the parent's could take him to school it won't be the first time parent have done this, it's called a school run look's like they have read up on what they are entitled to

John Steed says...
7:16am Tue 7 Jul 09

stupidity the educaton authorities should be required to revue the 1st school choice
furher more a review of why such high use taxis in general

alyn, southwick says...
7:29am Tue 7 Jul 09

alice1 wrote:
stan bailey wrote: It beggars belief how they waste our money. Couldn't they buy him a bike.
Or even the parent's could take him to school it won't be the first time parent have done this, it's called a school run look's like they have read up on what they are entitled to
Why should they it's the council's decesion to send him to that school.

alyn, southwick says...
7:33am Tue 7 Jul 09

This really is (not) surprising considering the same council refused to pay for a bus pass for occasional use for a child with learning disabilities to aid her guardians in providing independence training on the grounds of cost. They prefered to continue paying for a taxi!

tilburyre says...
9:10am Tue 7 Jul 09

There are children with learning difficulties in West Worthing who are taken by taxi to school in Worthing. Fair enough but why are Rustington taxis used instead of Worthing cabs?

Chicken and Beans says...
9:27am Tue 7 Jul 09

alyn, southwick wrote:
alice1 wrote:
stan bailey wrote: It beggars belief how they waste our money. Couldn't they buy him a bike.
Or even the parent's could take him to school it won't be the first time parent have done this, it's called a school run look's like they have read up on what they are entitled to
Why should they it's the council's decesion to send him to that school.
They DID choose it as a second choice though, so they should have made provisions should he have missed out on his 1st choice.

mothy says...
10:10am Tue 7 Jul 09

Chicken and Beans wrote:
alyn, southwick wrote:
alice1 wrote:
stan bailey wrote: It beggars belief how they waste our money. Couldn't they buy him a bike.
Or even the parent's could take him to school it won't be the first time parent have done this, it's called a school run look's like they have read up on what they are entitled to
Why should they it's the council's decesion to send him to that school.
They DID choose it as a second choice though, so they should have made provisions should he have missed out on his 1st choice.
I guess they should have chosen somewhere further away - how stupid of them to choose the 2nd closest school when they have to put down 3 options..

wheres is Henfled anyway?

MarcoPolo says...
10:15am Tue 7 Jul 09

If the parents are so concerned about money, why not buy him a bike!

Dizd says...
10:44am Tue 7 Jul 09

In my day - late 1960's early 70's parents/children were responsible for getting themselves to school - no one paid my fares etc etc

Ming says...
10:58am Tue 7 Jul 09

I wish you could get a tax rebate for not having kids...

Chicken and Beans says...
11:06am Tue 7 Jul 09

mothy wrote:
Chicken and Beans wrote:
alyn, southwick wrote:
alice1 wrote:
stan bailey wrote: It beggars belief how they waste our money. Couldn't they buy him a bike.
Or even the parent's could take him to school it won't be the first time parent have done this, it's called a school run look's like they have read up on what they are entitled to
Why should they it's the council's decesion to send him to that school.
They DID choose it as a second choice though, so they should have made provisions should he have missed out on his 1st choice.
I guess they should have chosen somewhere further away - how stupid of them to choose the 2nd closest school when they have to put down 3 options..

wheres is Henfled anyway?
Henfield is in the middle of nowhere. There is NOTHING near it anyway.

Arnie says...
12:33pm Tue 7 Jul 09

Ming wrote:
I wish you could get a tax rebate for not having kids...
You can, but only if our kids can be excused from paying for you when you're a pensioner.

Osama bin there says...
12:40pm Tue 7 Jul 09

"The only way to get to Steyning is by taxi"

Actually, no. Believe it or not there are other ways - such as driving your child yourself.

The indiscrimate use of taxis to take children to and from school is utter madness, and is yet another example of why this country is totally shot away.
I would be that this would never happen in any other country in Western Europe.

Osama bin there says...
1:05pm Tue 7 Jul 09

Sorry - last line should say 'I would be certain that this...'

Ming says...
1:09pm Tue 7 Jul 09

Arnie wrote:
Ming wrote: I wish you could get a tax rebate for not having kids...
You can, but only if our kids can be excused from paying for you when you're a pensioner.
...im paying for myself right now, I dont see much else in return for the contributions I make.

Granny says...
1:30pm Tue 7 Jul 09

If the parents are so bothered by the arrangement, which beggars belief by the way, then presumably they have transport, the parents being a psychologist and a managing director, and could afford to take their son to school themselves. The money saved by the council could then be put to better, more sensible use.

Mutteroo says...
1:36pm Tue 7 Jul 09

I love how the council justifies the cost by stating this boy will be sharing with others. So actually the cost may be more like £20 per child per day. Oh that's much better isn't it?!

This is a case of council decisions being based on idiocy and not on common sense. No doubt if the parents appealed the decision, I would suspect that their son would had been given Downlands? If the parents were happy to accept this school then I don't see why they are not making provisions to get their son to the school themselves; after all, if they had put Steyning as a first choice, they would HAVE to get him there - without any council financial support!

pun master says...
1:56pm Tue 7 Jul 09

£40 on a 5 mile cab journey? £40. I'll come and do it myself for £80 a day...

alice1 says...
1:56pm Tue 7 Jul 09

Granny wrote:
If the parents are so bothered by the arrangement, which beggars belief by the way, then presumably they have transport, the parents being a psychologist and a managing director, and could afford to take their son to school themselves. The money saved by the council could then be put to better, more sensible use.
Hear hear,well put why don't the parents offer to pay themselves they do have very good jobs in fact they could send their boy to a private boarding school

davyboy says...
2:16pm Tue 7 Jul 09

typical council decision. they should send him to his 1st choice, with the appropriate transport. this is a ludicrous waste of tax-payers money. having said that, maybe the parents did this on purpose. i assume they both have a good income, and that they should be made to pay something towards to cost of the taxi. either that, or take him themselves. all these taxi journeys should be means tested, and local companies used. i cannot believe that the nearest company is in burgess hill. heads should roll for this.

Jim BB says...
3:27pm Tue 7 Jul 09

I loved the comment by the mother that it's environmentally damaging - yet she's not offering an alternative, including taking him to school herself.

CeeBee says...
4:30pm Tue 7 Jul 09

ITV reported this weeks ago, do try and keep up Argus.

Charismatic Andrew says...
4:35pm Tue 7 Jul 09

Although the article mentions "Steyning Grammar School is 4.8 miles from their home village of Edburton" it doesn't mention that the alternative - Downlands Community School, in Hassocks is almost double that - 9 miles away (even if there is a bus route).

This boy should get on a bike and ride to school. And he should get a haircut whilst he's at it. Who does he think he is? A member of Hanson?...... mmmbop....

ronrostog says...
6:52pm Tue 7 Jul 09

Ridiculous but that is the council for you. A pal of mine who had to do Community Payback for a while told me that if you were a little late instead of being sent home and penalised the supervisors would order cabs for the late offenders instead. Out past Ringmer this was. Said the cab firm were coining it in. Yeah, at whose expense?

Sense In Sussex says...
9:10pm Tue 7 Jul 09

A bike is a good idea unless you know the road, which is an accident blackspot. Would you send your 11 year old out on a bike in the dark, in December when a bus goes from outside your house?

And as for driving him, well most people with jobs don't finish work at 3.00pm! Would you quit your job because the council wouldn't let your kid on a school bus?

The impact on the environment is the same, whether its a taxi or the kid's parents and its more poluting than a bus that goes anyway. Think it through.

As for the hair, I think the kid looks great. The Dad should grow his and loose a few pounds!:)

I'm sure Peter Griffiths of WSCC will find a way for common sense to prevail and get the kid on the bus.

Like some of the comments about this story he'd be crazy not to.

Henfield Hovite says...
8:59am Wed 8 Jul 09

It sounds to me that the choice of school was based solely on the ease i.e. less effort on the parents to get their child to school. Downlands is no better than Steyning so why would you want to undertake double the journey. There are also about half a dozen school buses that run daily between henfield and steyning. Most of the kids who live in henfield and surrounding areas get the school bus. It is not obligatory to live on the bus route, so many parents we know have to drive their kids to the bus stop and be at the bus stop after school when they are dropped off. It may not be ideal but this is what parenting is about, making sure your kids get to school safely. Also, if you choose to live in the sticks..... The parents seem like they are just making a point because they couldnt get into Downlands. If they drop their son at the end of the Edburton road by Cromwells, there are several buses heading between Henfield and Steyning packed with Steyning school kids.There you are, I have just saved us tax payers £80 a day!!

cantmoveforbins says...
11:15am Wed 8 Jul 09

Aaahh - look at the poor father and son in the photo, so hard done by and they deserve out pity for their plight. Now if his parents put in as much effort for their son as they did to research the council's transport costs then there would be no taxi required.
It's like me scoffing my face with a Big Mac while writing a letter to McDonalds that they produce too much fast food.

B G Gruff says...
12:53pm Wed 8 Jul 09

Middle class parents know how to work the system to try and get their child to the school of their choice.

Sense In Sussex says...
1:55pm Wed 8 Jul 09

It's not the parent's plight it's the tax payer's. And it has happened because the council have been so inflexible. You can't blame the parents for pointing out it is ridiculous. Our money is wasted by government all the time. It's a shame more people don't make a stink when it happens. Perhaps things would improve then.


Outrage as Sussex council plan to spend £80 a day on schoolboy's cab WASTE: Jeremy Holt and son Daniel

Most popular






Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses