Four-Day School Week Rebuffed, Bus Concessions Stay Local

High-Level Summary

Westminster Hall debated two e‑petitions: extending free bus travel to over‑60s across England and reducing the school week to four days. Members examined costs, equity and whether concessionary bus travel should be determined nationally or locally; the Minister highlighted the existing national entitlement for those at state pension age, local discretion to go further, and multi‑year funding. On schools, Members discussed teacher workload, pupil wellbeing and evidence on learning time; across parties, speakers and Ministers did not support reducing the school week due to impacts on attainment and families. No divisions occurred; in both cases the House resolved that it had considered the petitions, and Ministers set out current policy and funding.

Detailed Summary

Free bus travel for over‑60s (e‑petition 702845)

Context and participants: The petition asked Government to extend free bus travel to everyone over 60 in England, aligning with provision in devolved nations and some city regions. Opening the debate, Tony Vaughan outlined regional schemes and funding context, including estimated costs and recent support: “making the policy nationwide would cost central Government roughly an additional £250 million to £400 million a year.” [ref: a2.1/2] He also referred to “a £3 billion multi-year bus funding settlement for 2025 to 2029” [ref: a2.1/4].

Key arguments: Iqbal Mohamed argued the current approach creates inequality and pressed for a national entitlement: “National problems require national solutions.” [ref: a5.0/3] He cited wellbeing benefits: “Older bus pass holders are 37% less likely to be sedentary” [ref: a5.0/6]. Mohammad Yasin highlighted local government finances: “Local authorities, including Bedford borough council, are facing unprecedented financial pressures” [ref: a7.0/2]. Polly Billington noted availability matters: “free bus travel is of little value if there are no buses.” [ref: a8.1/2] Raising affordability and targeting, Jerome Mayhew cautioned that taxpayer funding must be justified: “The starting point for the provision of any service is that those who benefit from the service should be the ones who pay for it.” [ref: a12.0/4] and that extending eligibility is “likely to cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds every year” [ref: a12.0/12].

Government position and next steps: Minister Simon Lightwood reaffirmed the statutory English National Concessionary Travel Scheme: “free off-peak local bus travel is available to those of state pension age” [ref: a14.2/2], with eligibility linked to “the state pension age” [ref: a14.2/3]. He said local authority spending on the scheme is “around £795 million a year” [ref: a14.2/4], emphasised that “local communities already have powers to go further” [ref: a14.2/5], and set out wider support including “long-term investment of more than £3 billion over the next three years” [ref: a16.0/2]. He added a revised formula includes “a rurality element for the first time” [ref: a16.2/3], funding will be “linked to an outcomes framework” [ref: a16.2/4], and the single fare cap is “extended until March 2027.” [ref: a16.2/5] Outcome: The motion was agreed—“Resolved, That this House has considered e-petition 702845 relating to free bus travel for people over 60.” [ref: a18.0/7] Next steps not stated in the transcript.

Length of the school week (e‑petition 727514)

Context and participants: The petition proposed moving to a four‑day school week by adding an hour to each remaining day. Dave Robertson outlined the proposal—“calls on the Government to reduce the school week from five days to four” [ref: a20.2/3]—and reported pupil and stakeholder feedback, including concerns that “a longer day would be too tiring” [ref: a20.2/8] and that some feared “they would go home or to school in the dark” [ref: a20.2/10]. He said the National Association of Head Teachers “did not think that this proposal was the answer” [ref: a21.1/2], and warned that “suddenly needing to provide childcare on one of those days would be a huge challenge.” [ref: a21.1/5] From a prior school trial of an extra “period 6”, he said they “could not find that it had made any difference” [ref: a21.1/8].

Key arguments and Government/Opposition responses: Caroline Voaden said her party “do not believe that switching to a four-day school week is the answer” [ref: a24.0/13], favouring flexible working to improve retention. Nick Timothy argued learning cannot be compressed: “It is not credible that five days of learning and activity could be realistically compressed into four.” [ref: a26.0/4] He pointed to family impacts: “A four-day week would see more than a month’s worth of school time lost” [ref: a26.0/5], and cited evidence that extended time particularly benefits pupils “from lower socio-economic backgrounds” [ref: a26.0/9]. Minister Josh MacAlister restated the minimum “a minimum school week of 32.5 hours” [ref: a29.0/4], noted that “additional time in school, when used effectively, can have a positive impact” [ref: a29.0/3], and confirmed there are “no plans to reduce the school week from five to four days.” [ref: a29.0/8] Outcome: The motion was agreed—“Resolved, That this House has considered e-petition 727514 relating to the length of the school week.” [ref: a30.0/6] Next steps not stated in the transcript.