Report raises concerns over child safety on school run

A report by the Auditor General has raised concerns over the safety of state schoolchildren on the school run, saying many of them are being left unsupervised on the bus or as they wait outside the school gates.

"It seems that there is no established policy on supervision of students while in transit. Lack of adequate supervision on school buses results in lack of safety for students," says the report.

The Auditor General also found that many students were having to wait outside school gates, unsupervised, either because their bus picked them up too early in the morning or was delayed in collecting them after school.

Despite the Auditor General's concern, a spokesman for the Education Division said supervising the entire school population was unwarranted as the division did not have a worrying history of accidents and doing so would be very costly.

The report, of a performance audit of the state school transport system published by the National Audit Office, was laid on the table of the House of Representatives earlier this week. State school transport is provided by three private companies on contract with the Education Division.

Part of the audit involved surveys carried out during the last scholastic year among school heads, parents and students, who were questioned on the efficiency and effectiveness of the system.

The report points out that supervision is one of the important welfare and safety measures that should be applied to school transport. As defined by the heads themselves, supervisors should maintain order and report "exceptional circumstances".

Yet, a quarter of the heads questioned in the survey admitted that no one supervises students on buses. The others designated a bus prefect or the driver himself as the supervisor.

Asked about who was responsible for the welfare of the students during the trip, a third of the heads said they did not know. The others either assumed the responsibility themselves, placed the onus on the driver or company providing the transport service, or put the burden on the Education Division.

"These perceptions raise serious concern regarding accountability for students' welfare," said the Auditor General. "It is not clear who is assuming liability for the welfare and safety of students in transit."

The National Audit Office sought legal advice on the matter and was told that as transport services were contracted by the division, it was the division which was responsible.

Five per cent of the school heads also reported that the first vehicle to arrive at school in the mornings did so before the school gates were opened.

"This indicates that students were left unsupervised outside the school premises," the report says.

On the positive side, the heads said they only received occasional complaints about drivers' behaviour, and very few complaints about excessive driving or lack of safety.

However, "another cause for concern" was students' behaviour on the vehicle.

"Bad behaviour causes drivers to be distracted. Forty-six per cent of the heads reported occasional complaints regarding students' bad behaviour. This may result from lack of supervision while the students are on the vehicle."

The parents surveyed were asked whether there was anything particular they wished to complain about with regard to the transport service. A quarter of them singled out child safety.

Some of the complaints revolved around "conditions leading to the absence of a safe environment, such as lack of safety measures, absence of shelters and lack of cleanliness".

Others were student-related, such as bullying, misbehaviour and lack of supervision on the bus.

There were also some complaints about reckless driving and driver misconduct.

A significant number of parents, mainly those of primary school pupils, said they had opted not to make use of school transport because of concerns over the absence of adequate saftey standards.

Asked about trip timings, nearly a quarter of the users reported that the school would be closed when the bus or van dropped them off in the morning. This means they lack supervision, adds the report.

Nearly four in ten of these said they waited outside the school gate, "perhaps in unsafe scenarios". Many more primary than secondary school pupils were reported to be waiting outside the gates.

In the afternoon, it was reported that nearly a quarter of the children often waited outside school premises, again unsupervised, for their transport to take them back home.

Another safety issue stemmed from overcrowding, with a quarter of users on the morning run reporting this problem on all or most trips, "meaning that not all the students were properly seated".

On the trip back home the problem seemed even worse, with a third reporting their vehicle was always or nearly always packed.

The Education Division was asked how it was planning to remedy the situation, given the importance of supervision for the safety of children.

A spokesman said: "We do not have a worrying history of accidents and/or major difficulties encountered by students during their trip to school and as they wait for the bus and outside school.

"Therefore, supervising the entire school population using school transport, which would result in very high costs, in the present circumstances is unwarranted."

However, the spokesman said that to ensure the safety of students during the trip to school, the division was demanding that in its agreement with the transport providers, the contractors must ensure that their drivers are of good conduct, that they drive safely and ensure at all times the safety of the passengers, and that the vehicle they use is roadworthy and compliant with road safety regulations.

"The Division of Education only provides supervision to students with disabilities according to their particular needs as statemented by the board," added the spokesman.