Parents on low incomes might delay sending their children to school until they are five years old if Cheshire East changes its travel policy, councillors said.

The statutory duty for councils to provide travel support, for those eligible, begins the term after a child reaches five up to age of 16.

Travel support for children below compulsory school age is discretionary.

Cheshire East's current policy provides free travel support for [eligible] children attending a reception class from the term after their fourth birthday (referred to as 'rising fives').

The council is looking to 'refresh' its compulsory school age travel policy – but some councillors expressed concerns about the impact on children from poorer households.

Cllr Rod Fletcher (Alsager, Lib Dem) said: "Some poorer families don't have cars or access to cars."

He said this could mean they don't take their four-year-old children to school.

"If that's true, that would concern me because some poorer children could be losing out," he said.

He added he hoped this would be considered by the council's cabinet when it made any decision at a future meeting.

Gill Betton, head of children's development and partnerships, said: "One of the potential implications could be that parents decide to defer entry until the child is five."

But she said most of the children would become eligible for free transport during the year and there was also the potential to purchase a 'spare seat' in a lot of cases.

The cost of buying a spare seat is about £930 a year – and it would be pro rata.

Cllr Fletcher said some families might not have the money to purchase a spare seat.

Mrs Betton said there was an appeals process.

Cllr Liz Wardlaw (Odd Rode, Con) said the potential change could result in a six-year-old child from a family getting free travel to school while their younger sibling under the age of five wouldn't qualify.

Mrs Betton said that could potentially be the case, but that child could purchase a spare seat for a term or more.

Poynton councillor Jos Saunders (Con) said: "Fifty per cent of those rising fives this year are children with special needs.

"Those families already face huge challenges and to have that transport taken away, I think, could add to those challenges that they're experiencing."

She added: "That reception year is really important for children to socialise, to make friends, and to get used to being in a school environment.

"And if you've got families… who are struggling, and they then take the decision not to send them to school – maybe it's a child who's born in August, for example – that's virtually a year of not having that support to go to school.

"I think we could end up storing up problems, especially for our children with special needs, who, in my opinion, need to be at school and have that structure.

"I would urge the cabinet member for this to re-think this particular policy because I think it would have an adverse effect on our children."

The views of the scrutiny committee will be passed to cabinet which will be the decision-maker.

Any changes which may affect children's eligibility would be consulted on.