In these testing times, doesn’t everyone deserve a break?

Some schools are more relaxed than others about turning a blind eye to term-time absences – and the current legal ban doesn’t apply to independent schools. Less well-off families, by contrast are then hit in the wallet for playing by the rules

Prices for holidays outside of school term time can be as much as 36 per cent more expensive (Getty/iStock)

Now is the time when many families will be thinking about getting away for a bit of sun. However, today’s revelations by The Independent about the increased cost of airport parking during school holidays are likely to create a degree of gloom. In the worst cases, airports increase their car-park charges by more than half compared with term time. Staggeringly, parking rates at Edinburgh airport more than double.

Striking though those statistics are, they may not come as much of a surprise to parents who already face huge school holiday surcharges on air fares and accommodation compared with those who are able to travel outside the standard vacation periods. Research last year by FairFX found that week long holidays including flights and four-star accommodation for a family of four were 36 per cent more expensive in the first week of the school summer holidays than the week before.

To some extent, it is hard to argue with airport bosses who say the discrepancy in parking charges is simply an inevitable consequence of market forces. When demand for travel is low, competition drives prices down; when everyone is desperate to get away, costs rise.

Yet it is also undeniable that for people who have school-age children there is now little choice over when they go on holiday. In 2013 the Government took legislative steps to try to prevent parents from taking their children out of school during term time. Those who do so without the express permission of the headteacher can be liable to a fine and maybe even prosecution. The case of Jon Platt, whose legal challenge to such a fine is currently being considered by the Supreme Court, will be vital in determining the Government’s future approach.

Naturally, the desire to keep term-time absences to a minimum is understandable. Taking children on holiday when they should be in lessons is potentially disruptive to the individual pupil and to the smooth running of schools more broadly. Headteachers’ authority is easily eroded by parents who refuse to play by the rules.

Nevertheless, the ever-growing cost of vacationing outside term dates puts parents under real strain. There may be an element of keeping up with the Joneses, but it is not unreasonable that families should want to take a break from the daily routine. In the age of austerity, that is not easy when holiday prices are so high.

Moreover, it is plainly obvious that some schools are more relaxed than others about turning a blind eye to term-time absences – and the current legal ban doesn’t apply to independent schools. Parents with the means to take their children on what can legitimately – or arguably – be described as “educational” trips are often able to get the requisite dispensation. Less well-off families, by contrast, often don’t have the wherewithal or the confidence – or indeed the cash – to play the cultural card. They are then hit in the wallet for playing by the rules.

The Supreme Court’s verdict in the Platt case may force the Government to think again and to allow local authorities and individual headteachers to take a more flexible approach. This would make sense. If families are better able to stagger their holidays throughout the year, the financial discrepancies between term and school vacation breaks will be less significant, and those on lower incomes are likely to be the biggest beneficiaries. Then all we’d need to worry about would be the desultory value of the pound.