Home-to-School Transport

Alex Brewer Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Alex Brewer (North East Hampshire) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Twigg. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) on securing this important debate.

Connection and mobility are key to a social, happy and healthy society—and, as we are hearing, an educated one. The ability to build networks, reach community and simply get where we need to go matters, and it matters most in the early years of a child’s development. It councils’ responsibility to ensure that money allocated is properly spent, but it is Government’s responsibility to ensure that councils have adequate funding, including for home-to-school transport. That funding is provided through recurrent general funding allocations, and the Government must make absolutely certain that their funding formula matches local needs. When it does not, families and communities pay the price.

I have a local example of exactly that. When Ancells Farm, a housing development in my North East Hampshire constituency, was built with the promise of a local primary school, families moved there in good faith. That school was never built. However, as part of a new arrangement, Hampshire county council promised a free bus to take children to their catchment school. That promise, too, has now been broken. What exists today is a bus service restricted solely to eligible students, with no spare seat capacity whatsoever. The decision to reduce the bus size, removing additional seats that parents were not only willing but actively prepared to pay for, has had real and serious consequences. It is the subject of a stage 3 complaint with Hampshire county council and has been referred to the ombudsman, but while complaints work their way through the bureaucratic channels, families are struggling today.

Let me be specific about what that looks like. I am all in favour of children walking to school whenever practical and possible. Parents are doing the school run twice a day, every day. Even by car, that is still time taken away from work. For those in paid-hourly or shift-based employment, it means hours lost, and hours lost mean money lost. For those in salaried roles, it means arriving late, leaving early or relying on the good will of employers, which cannot be taken for granted indefinitely. Some parents have had to reduce their working hours; others have had to turn down responsibilities or opportunities at work. Those ripple effects reach into every corner of family life. Less income means less financial resilience. It means fewer after-school clubs, fewer activities and fewer of the enriching experiences that support a child’s development and wellbeing. The broken promise of a bus is not just an inconvenience.

For the parents who do not drive, the situation is simply unworkable. The walk to the catchment primary school is 2.4 miles according to Google Maps—other maps are available—which is 54 minutes on foot. For a five-year-old, it would take considerably longer, as I am sure we can all imagine. For a parent doing the round trip twice—there and back in the morning, and again at the end of the day—that is close to four hours of walking every single school day. Those are four hours that cannot be spent working, caring for other children, managing a home or doing any of the other things that family life demands.

The route crosses the railway station entrance with no pedestrian crossing, and runs along the town’s busiest roads at rush hour. Parents have raised serious concerns about its safety. They have paid out of their own pockets for an independent safety assessment, which has identified real hazards, while Hampshire county council has refused to conduct a safety assessment of its own. One school is 10 minutes closer, which is not nothing for a young child, but it is not in catchment, and there is no public bus as an alternative because rural bus services, even in semi-rural commuter towns, have been cut.

Let me turn briefly to the law, because it is instructive. The Government’s own guidance on free school transport sets out clearly how children qualify. Rightly, they qualify if they cannot walk to school because of special educational needs, disability or mobility problems. They qualify when there is no safe walking route, but if the council refuses to undertake a sufficient assessment, who decides what is and is not safe? They qualify if the school is more than 2 miles away and they are under eight, or if the school is more than 3 miles away and they are eight or older. That often leaves families in the ridiculous situation of having to walk an eight-year-old to school while their seven-year-old is on the bus.

It is arguable that, for families on Ancells Farm, every single one of those criteria is met for every child in one way or another, yet parents have been fighting for years to keep the bus service going. We must consider what more the Government can do to ensure that local authorities are adequately funded and meeting their statutory duties towards the children in their care. I urge the Minister to consider what families are facing in Ancells and elsewhere across the country.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alex Brewer Excerpts

Monday 21st July 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Janet Daby)]

I absolute agree with my hon. Friend. This Government will indeed stop shutting good people out of good jobs. He is probably aware that the Department funds apprentices to achieve a qualification as part of their training. We do not set entry requirements; these are decisions for employers. However, we have allowed for more flexibility in English and maths requirements for adults aged 19 and over.

[Alex Brewer (North East Hampshire) (LD)]

T4. Children in receipt of funds from the adoption and special guardianship support fund often have significant mental health, wellbeing and educational needs. For many of these children, their individual therapy is the single biggest factor enabling them to continue at school. What assessment has the Minister made of the implications of cutting funding for this therapy?

[Janet Daby]

The adoption and special guardianship support fund provides valuable therapeutic support to children and families, which is why we have committed to continuing the £50 million to this financial year. We have been holding discussions with key stakeholders, and we will soon announce the next steps for the fund.

SEND Funding

Alex Brewer Excerpts

Thursday 12th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alex Brewer (North East Hampshire) (LD)]

Hampshire is a county that falls into the f40 group, which are areas that receive some of the lowest per-pupil funding in the country. This disparity is hitting pupils with special educational needs and disabilities the hardest. The cumulative deficit in Hampshire for the dedicated schools grant now sits at £86.1 million. That is not just a number on a spreadsheet but a daily reality in schools across my constituency.

Despite having to find the first £6,000 of funding for every EHCP, schools in North East Hampshire, as with elsewhere, are bending over backwards to do everything they can to support these pupils. A headteacher in my constituency recently explained to me that their budgets this year are so tight, and they have made every efficiency that they can, that they will be forced to reduce the amount of support for the children who do not have an EHCP but who do have additional needs. What is the sense in that, when we know that early intervention leads to better outcomes and lower costs?

Before being elected to the House, I ran a charity for young people with Down’s syndrome and their families. We saw at first hand the impact that early intervention can make in building the fundamental skills for life that many of us take for granted—walking, talking and participating in society. Children with Down’s syndrome will always need an EHCP, yet the families still have to go through a laborious process.

Many children need a bit of extra help at various points without an EHCP, yet the funding formula also works against them because schools cannot afford to fund the support. As Lily’s mum explained after Lily was denied an EHCP,

“The emotional and financial toll is huge, made worse by constant pushback and denial. There’s endless talk of SEND reform, but what about the children like Lily who need help now? Every delay is another failed day, risking long-term harm.”

I welcome the investments in education and training outlined by the Chancellor in yesterday’s spending review, but it is not just schools’ walls that are crumbling; the systems within the buildings need just as much care, investment and resource. One headteacher said to me:

“Of course teachers want to be paid fairly, but that’s not why so many are leaving the profession. We want better funding for the schools, for the kids.”

I conclude not with the numbers but with a quote from Olivia’s mum, a constituent of mine. Olivia is in her 16th month without appropriate educational provision. Her mum said:

“I am increasingly fearful for her future. How can she be expected to participate fully in society—to reach her potential, to build independence, to thrive—if she is denied even the most basic right to an education?”

The national funding formula must be reassessed and made fit for the future.

Relationship Education in Schools

Alex Brewer Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Alex Brewer (North East Hampshire) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you as Chair, Sir Jeremy. We are living in a time marked by increasing polarisation. Teenage boys and girls are drifting apart, driven by an online culture that fills a void where important discussions should be happening. I have spoken to teachers across my constituency, and the picture that they paint is a troubling one. They have reported that the behaviour in schools, particularly from boys, is deteriorating, with a notable disparity in how male and female staff are treated. Teachers in North East Hampshire and across the country are working tirelessly, yet behavioural issues are worsening. Online sexist cultures are manifesting themselves in many ways, including in the form of persistent backchat towards female teachers.

High-profile online influencers have found their way to reach boys and young men who are struggling with their identities and masculinity. We must rethink our understanding of masculinity, and what it means to be a man. We must do so in a safe, supportive environment that nurtures healthy development and respect. Feminism is not a dirty word—it is as good for men and boys as it is for women and girls, but that part of the conversation is frequently missing. Worryingly, abusive behaviour within young relationships is increasingly common, and most incidences of online sexual abuse now involve children offending against other children. Some 61% of children and young people also reported that they were unsure and unaware of where to seek support if affected by domestic abuse.

Schools are hubs of learning and centres of influence. Children must be able to define their place in the world, understand their identity and feel empowered to be themselves within an environment of support and understanding. Only with that can we expect young people to have the tools to navigate the internet and their real life interactions positively and safely. We must create legislation, outlined by my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) in her excellent opening remarks that paves the way for a curriculum that prepares—

[Sir Jeremy Wright (in the Chair)]

Order. Again, I apologise for interrupting.

SEND Provision: Hampshire

Alex Brewer Excerpts

Thursday 31st October 2024 Westminster Hall

[Alex Brewer (North East Hampshire) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) for securing this debate and it is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Mark. In North East Hampshire, as in many other places, special educational needs and disabilities come up repeatedly in casework, constituency surgeries and local council meetings. The system, frankly, is broken. I welcome the calls from the hon. Member for Basingstoke to work across parties on a solution.

Children are frequently not getting the support that they need, schools do not have the funding for further provisions, and Hampshire county council is running at an £86-million deficit trying to meet the need. As a result, children and their families suffer, despite the hard work of headteachers, teachers, teaching assistants and parents. I have met constituents to talk about these challenges, as well as meeting charities that support families in the local area and local councillors to talk through the concerns. I pay tribute to all those who support our children with additional needs, despite the complexity of the system as it stands.

Raising a child with additional needs is hard. We cannot deny that there is an additional parenting burden, although parents, of course, bear it willingly. There is also an additional administrative burden, and council budgets are squeezed so hard that they cannot meet that need.

The number of parents who have to make appeals for SEND support has more than trebled since 2014. When provision is scarce and parents have to fight for it, it becomes an exhausting battle just to have their child’s needs met. The increasingly cited narrative—that pushy parents are just trying to get a bit of extra help for their child—is utterly nonsensical given how much work it is to ensure even the most basic provision.

North East Hampshire is a beautiful place to live, but as a largely rural area with many small villages, hundreds of children have to travel a long way to their nearest school. Those families who live a long way from their nearest suitable provision have to deal not only with the stresses of the system, exclusion, lack of academic progression, high levels of anxiety and the opaqueness of the process, but with transport. Due to the severe lack of public transport, they often have to take private taxis.

According to the Department for Education, the net planned expenditure on SEND transport in Hampshire for the ’24-25 financial year is £56,795,000, yet I hear time and again from my constituents about the failure to secure transport in time for the start of the school year. The lack of a secure transport route can have a huge impact on a child’s relationship with school and their real and perceived safety. It also increases the pressure on working parents, who frequently must leave work or reduce their hours due to the lack of accommodation for their child’s needs. The result? A postcode lottery in access to support.

One of my constituents had SEND transport approved in June. We are now on the last day of October and they have not received any further information—two months of the school year have been missed. That is not good enough, and the situation is not unique in my constituency. Another child in North East Hampshire has been told to use a bus stop a mile away from her home, but because of her disability, she and her parents are understandably anxious about the safety of this journey each morning, given the challenges and dangers she faces when crossing roads.

Prior to being elected this year, I was the chief executive of a charity that supports children and young people with Down’s syndrome and their families. I saw at first hand what those families must grapple with to secure the right educational support for their child. The charity provides specialist support throughout a child’s education —a service that used to be provided by many county councils across the UK.

Charities are often left to pick up the pieces. I recently met Special Needs Jungle, which analyses the sector, provides recommendations and supports families. The Hampshire Parent Carer Network is also a helpful source of support and information. But these organisations cannot find additional services out of thin air.

In the Budget yesterday, the Chancellor stated that she wants

“to improve outcomes for our most vulnerable children”,—[Official Report, 30 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 822.]

but she also announced that VAT will be charged on private schools. That is highly concerning for North East Hampshire: we have at least four independent schools, each of which has explicit provision for SEND pupils, and our state schools not only are full but are telling us clearly that they cannot meet the needs of many children with additional needs under the current funding models. There is a budgetary disincentive to including children with additional needs in mainstream schools, which the Liberal Democrats have said we would halve.

The announcement of a £1-billion funding uplift for SEND in the Budget yesterday was welcome, but we must go further to clean up this mess. The system needs a complete overhaul, not just an increase in funding. We must undo the damage inflicted on our wider education system by the previous Conservative Government. We must ensure that early help is restored so that children develop the tools to navigate the school system as early in their lives as possible. We must rebuild play into our early years programme and dispense with testing at age five. We must build outdoor learning into our core curriculum and much more besides.

One school in my constituency is building a new room. It is not for teaching and it is not a classroom; it is a welcome room where children who are refusing to go to school can come and feel safe, secure and welcome. It is a bridge between school refusal and school acceptance. It is a great idea, but it should not be needed.

SEND provision must be flexible, tailored and suitable for all communities, both urban and rural. Most of all, it must be available, and that includes the transport required to get to the school gate. I close with a sentiment from an assistant headteacher in North East Hampshire, who said:

“Parents and families shouldn’t have to fight against systems that are meant to be helping their children.”