Highland Council's school taxi costs rise to more than £6m
Highland Council said in some remote parts of its region taxis were more cost-effective than using a bus for picking up small numbers of pupils. But it said that when most of its taxi contracts were renewed in 2022 or 2023 there were "significant" increases in prices due to "rising industry costs".It said it was working with communities to find other solutions to school transport.A Highland Council spokesperson said: "While traditional bus services have become less frequent in some areas, the communities haven't stood still. "Local residents, community councils and with the support of the Highland Council have come together to support innovative transport solutions that better fit local needs."
In Applecross in Wester Ross, Highland Council has provided funding to a local community company to run school transport.Two nine-seater vehicles have been leased for school runs, and they are also available to the wider community for use.The scheme has been running for about eight months.Megan MacInnes, of Applecross Community Company, said: "This is a very sparsely populated rural area."We have about 250 people living on a peninsula of 26,000 hectares."Like many parts of Highland region we struggle for infrastructure, particularly public transport."Dougie Maguire, a lead officer for the passenger sector with the Unite union, said hiring taxis in low density areas of the Highlands was likely to be more cost effective than asking a large bus firm to pick up two or three children.He added: "Highland Council isn't that much different from other areas where councils do have multiple taxi companies and some minibus providers as well."But there will be more of that in the area (Highland) because of the size and geography."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Trump is wrong to pick a fight with Powell – but is right about interest rates
Visiting Scotland last week, Donald Trump used a joint press conference to mock Keir Starmer. He castigated Labour's policies on immigration, energy and much else. The Prime Minister sat awkwardly, sporting his trademark rictus grin. Trump has lately dished out plenty of public humiliation – not least aimed at Jerome Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve. The president has put huge pressure on the Fed to lower interest rates, to boost US growth and ease interest payments on America's massive $36trn (£27.6trn) national debt. This jars badly with the conventional wisdom that central banks should be independent, allowing technocrat economists to set interest rates to bear down on inflation. That's far better for the economy in the long-run, but this precious independence is jeopardised when vote-hungry politicians seek to keep borrowing costs too low. Such independence has become an almost sacred policy concept over the last half century. And no central bank matters more than the Fed, which sets the course for monetary policy across the globe. Yet Trump, astonishingly, has lately called Powell a 'numbskull', a 'stubborn mule' and worse. On a recent Fed visit, he rebuked him over the cost of a refurbishment project – a potential pretext to sack Powell, which may not be legally possible, but which Trump often floats regardless. Between September and December last year, the Fed's committee of twelve rate-setters voted to lower the US benchmark interest rate three times from its post-Covid-peak of 5.25pc-5.5pc, in increments down to 4.25pc-4.5pc. But much to the president's frustration, rates have since stayed put. The Bank of England, meanwhile, has cut rates four times since last summer, including as recently as May, while the European Central Bank has enacted no less than eight eurozone rate reductions over the same period, the latest in June. Having held rates since the start of 2025, the Fed just did so again when governors met last Wednesday (although two Trump-appointees voted against, the biggest intra-Fed rate disagreement in thirty years). Fed policymakers are rightly worried about price pressures, with headline inflation hitting 3.7pc during the year to June, up from 2.4pc the previous month and well above the 2pc target. And Trump's era-defining slew of tariffs – taxes on imports into the US – means we could see a lot more inflation yet. With the President's three-month moratorium expiring this weekend, and tariffs now set to bite on some of America's largest trading partners, the Fed is understandably concerned. Powell insists the US economy is strong enough for the Fed to wait before further rate cuts, as we see if Trump's tariffs really do aggravate inflation. And last week's GDP numbers – a 3pc expansion from April to June – was certainly way above consensus forecasts, reversing a 0.5pc contraction during the first three months of the year, the worst quarterly performance since early 2022. This January to March shrinkage, though, was largely due to the huge rise in US imports as buyers sought to get ahead of Trump's expected tariff onslaught. And since 'liberation day' in April, when the President unveiled his tariffs on the White House lawn, imports into the US have plunged. This artificially boosted April to June GDP growth as the first-quarter trend unwound. Yes, consumer spending rose 1.4pc during the second quarter, outpacing the 0.5pc increase over the previous three months, supporting Powell's argument the economy is coping without further rate cuts. But 'final sales to private domestic purchasers', a key demand metric that the Fed watches closely, grew just 1.2pc over the latest quarter, slower than the 1.9pc increase between January and March. High mortgage rates are also holding back the housing market and related construction, as Trump relentlessly points out, with residential investment down 4.6pc during the second quarter. But that's part of a broader investment slump as business leaders look to see how the president's tariffs play out. For now, the market consensus is that the US economy is showing resilience, but more rate cuts may be justified as long as inflation isn't further provoked. So Trump's attacks on Powell are based on legitimate economic analysis. Yet his language is way over the top. Some say the president is picking headline-grabbing fights with the Fed chair to detract from mounting criticism over his handling of the Epstein files. I suspect he simply wants lower rates and, for now at least, Powell stands in his way. Ironically, it was Trump who appointed Powell in 2017. But having repeatedly called for him to resign, the president seems certain to replace him when Powell's term expires next May. In the meantime, Trump's ceaseless undermining of central bank independence is deeply damaging. Yes, the Fed has a 'dual mandate' to pursue both price stability and full employment, unlike the solely inflation-focussed aims of most other central banks. But while Trump's arguments may be technically valid, it should absolutely not be him making them, nor anyone else near the top of government. Given the tone he has set, though, Powell's successor will be seen as the president's lackey. And with US and global inflation far from tamed, that could end up being a serious problem. My general view is that central bank independence is far more important than any individual central banker. Andrew Bailey, for instance, has shown seriously bad judgement at the Bank of England – endlessly insisting post-Covid inflation would be 'transitory', for instance, while deriding those of us who correctly predicted otherwise. His appointment was a mistake, but he should stay, free from the threat politicians might remove him, until his term expires in March 2028. The same applies to Powell and far more so – he should serve his full term.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Can we put in an offer on a house if it is sold subject to contract?
My wife and I are looking at houses to buy. We fell in love with one we viewed a couple of weeks ago, but didn't make an offer as we didn't know the area it was in very well. We now regret not doing so, but have spotted that the house is now sold subject to contract. What does this mean and can we still make an offer? Jane Denton, of the Daily Mail, replies: If you see a house you like in a popular area, it is important to act quickly. I appreciate you weren't 100 per cent sure of the location of the property, but the market moves fast in many areas. The house you fell in love with was obviously appealing to other people, as it is now sold subject to contract. This means that the seller has accepted an offer from a prospective buyer for the house. However, at this point, in England and Wales at least, the sale is yet be legally binding as contracts have not been exchanged and the conveyancing process has not been completed. In Scotland, the deal would be legally binding at this point. What you are considering doing is gazumping the person who has had their offer accepted on the house you now want. This means, if your pockets are deep enough, you'll be submitting an offer higher than the seller has already accepted. In England and Wales, there is nothing from a legal perspective stopping you from getting in touch with the estate agency selling the house and putting in your own offer. Unsurprisingly, the lack of regulation or laws in this area is the subject of significant debate and controversy. The seller of the house you like can accept your offer if they choose to. If you are in a much better position than the current buyer, by for example being a cash buyer or chain-free, your offer may be more likely to be accepted. However, don't expect this to all go your own way. Not all sellers will be happy to accept other offers and may well view the concept of gazumping with disdain. I have asked two experts for their thoughts on your question. Liam Gretton, owner of Liam Gretton Bespoke Estate Agent, on Wirral Peninsula, says: At some point in their career every estate agent would have received this question, and it's completely understandable, especially when you find a property you fall head over heels for. When a property is marked as under offer, sale agreed or sold subject to contract, it means the seller has accepted an offer, and both parties are working toward completing the sale through the legal conveyancing process. However, it is important to note that until contracts are exchanged, the sale is not legally binding in England and Wales. This means the seller is still legally entitled to consider other offers, although doing so can understandably be a sensitive matter. While it is legally permissible to submit an offer at this stage, it is important to consider the moral implications of gazumping. The original buyer may have already invested significant time and money into the transaction, often spending thousands on surveys, legal fees, and mortgage arrangements. Gazumping can result in real financial and emotional loss for those buyers. For that reason, many sellers choose to honour their original agreement unless there are serious concerns or delays. Now, can you still make an offer? Yes, you can. Legally, estate agents are obligated to pass on all offers to the seller up until the point of exchange of contracts, unless the seller has provided written instructions to the contrary. If you have revisited your decision and would now like to proceed, the best course of action is to contact the selling agent by phone and email and submit a clear, formal offer with details of your position, including whether you are a cash buyer, if you are chain-free and whether you have a mortgage in principle. A clear and well-positioned offer can still be of interest to the seller, especially if there are delays or concerns with the current buyer. Sellers may still consider a new offer, however most will weigh this carefully against the progress already made. The agent won't be able to tell you the amount of the existing offer, unless the seller has given them permission. If you are thinking of making an offer, do so with respect and transparency. It is not about disrupting a sale, but about offering a serious alternative if things aren't moving forward. Amy Reynolds, head of sales at Richmond estate agency Antony Roberts, says: The short answer is, yes, you can still make an offer. When a property is marked as sold subject to contract, it means an offer has been accepted, but contracts haven't yet been exchanged. Until that exchange takes place – often several weeks later – the sale isn't legally binding, and the seller is still allowed to consider other offers. If you've done your homework and feel confident this is the right house, you can submit an offer. This practice is known as gazumping – where a seller accepts a higher offer after already agreeing to sell to someone else. Gazumping is legal in England and Wales, although many see it as ethically questionable. Some sellers won't entertain other offers once they've agreed terms, especially if they've built a rapport with the buyer or are committed to a chain. Others might welcome a higher offer or use it as leverage to push the existing buyer to increase theirs. The key thing to understand is that making a late offer doesn't guarantee success. The seller might decide to stay loyal to their original buyer. Or they may ask both parties to submit their best-and-final bids. Some buyers respond to being gazumped by pulling out entirely – so there's always a risk the seller could lose both deals and a good agent should explain this to the vendor. If you do want to proceed, contact the estate agent handling the sale and explain that you would like to submit a serious offer. Make it clear you are in a strong position if that is the case – the more attractive your circumstances, the more compelling your offer will be. Be aware, though, that gazumping can make things uncomfortable for everyone involved. And if you're in a similar position later on – under offer, waiting to exchange –it's worth remembering how it feels to be gazumped.
Daily Mail
7 hours ago
- Daily Mail
You can say that again! Rachel Reeves admits Labour has left voters 'disappointed'
Rachel Reeves has admitted that the Labour Government has 'disappointed' people. But the Chancellor insisted she had got the balance right between tax, spending and borrowing. She told an audience at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival that her job involved making tough decisions, even if they are unpopular. She told the Iain Dale All Talk Show: 'The reason people voted Labour at the last election is they want to change and they were unhappy with the way that the country was being governed. 'I'm impatient for change as well, but I've also got the job of making sure the sums always add up. You certainly can't do everything straight away, all at once.' Ms Reeves pointed to Labour's £200million investment in carbon capture in Scotland, which she said was welcomed by the energy industry. Rachel Reeves (pictured) has admitted that the Labour Government has 'disappointed' people. But the Chancellor insisted she had got the balance right between tax, spending and borrowing Reeves told the Iain Dale All Talk Show: 'The reason people voted Labour at the last election is they want to change and they were unhappy with the way that the country was being governed. Defending Labour's record, she said her party had the 'balance about right' At the same time, Labour's windfall tax, she said, was not liked by the sector. 'But you can't really have one without the other,' she said. Defending Labour's record, she said her party had the 'balance about right'. 'But of course you're going to disappoint people,' she added. 'No one wants to pay more taxes. Everyone wants more money than public spending – and borrowing is not a free option, because you've got to pay for it. 'I think people know those sort of constraints, but no one really likes them and I'm the one that has to sort the sums up.'
