Dismay at Withdrawal of School Bus Service
24 July 2012
Local TUV MLA, Jim Allister, has reacted strongly to the NEELB decision to withdraw the current school transport provision to two rural primary schools, Kells & Connor and Carnaghts. The shock decision was communicated to parents during the summer break and has caused anger among affected parents. These are the only two schools in the whole Board area to see removal of their school transport next term.Mr Allister has challenged the basis of the decision in a letter to the Chief Executive of NEELB and has questioned why consideration was not even given to amalgamating the service to the two schools:
Chief Executive, NEELB
Dear Mr McCurdy,
re: Home to School Transport - Kells & Connor and Carnaghts Primary Schools
I write to express my dismay at the precipitative decision to withdraw the above service, the lack of consultation relating thereto and the timing and manner in which the decision was conveyed to parents.
This is a vital service for many families in the rural hinterland serviced by these schools. It is a service which cannot be replaced by the offering of a token payment per day to entitled parents. The service is integral to the functioning of the schools and thus its withdrawal is a direct blow to their operational success.
I want to know why and how such a decision was made. What business case was produced - or was it merely an expedient and opportunistic response to the retirement of the current driver - what consultation was held with the schools and the parents, and why it was conveyed by scrappy undated letters on unheaded paper during the summer break?
I also enquire as to how and why the decision was made in light of the Board's statutory duty under Article 52 of the Education & Libraries (NI) Order 1986, and when and on what basis the new arrangements were approved by the department. If such free transport is properly considered necessary for other schools, then why not for these two schools? Parents and pupils at these schools have the same rights and expectations as those elsewhere.
Is this decision meant to be part of a Board-wide review of such services, or is it selective action only against these two rural schools?
I believe this unwarranted and destructive decision must be urgently reviewed and reversed.
Yours sincerely,
