UNIVERSITY AND STATE.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 235, 4 October 1928, Page 8

UNIVERSITY AND STATE.

QUEStION OF CONTROL*

yiEWS OP LOCAL PROFESSORS.

To statements by the Minister of Education supporting the Government's proposals in the University Amendment! Bill, a committee of the Professorial Board of the Auckland University College has issued the following reply:— "The Minister stresses the necessity of Parliamentary control, but the board would point out: (-1) That Parliament already control in the determination of the amount of the statutory grants both to the University and to the University Colleges. (2) That the proposed Act gives the Minister a power of veto which does not involve direct Parliamentary control since it is an individual act of the Minister, ; (3) That the democratic control Of the details of University policy does not necessarily involve Parlimentary control, and is Already provided by the constitution of the existing council, which is mainly an elected body.

"The board feels that the public should understand that such Government con-' trol of University policy as proposed is absolutely unprecedented in the Empire. It is a cardinal point of British University systems that the. University remains unfettered in the direction of its educational policy. The reason is obvious—if the University is to be the guardian of truth, it must remain absolutely free, dependent on the favour of no one, directing its own courses of study and master of its own educational development. In no other way can freedom of investigation and teaching be maintained. If the community served by the University supports its functions, realising its necessity, then at the same time tliey must realise that it cannot fulfil these functions properly unless it is free.

"It no doubt seems difficult to the Government authorities, who vste money for this purpose, to realise that they must trust the University to develop its own policy, but any other system has been shown repeatedly to be fundamentally vicious .in its results. In some nonBritish countries, political control is exercised, and the results have universally been condemned by the best educational authorities. Any reversal of the system here would be distinctly reactionary and would open the way possibly to deplorable results. The present Minister of Education is, no doubt, well-intentioned in his proposals, but what guarantee is there that the powers that would be obtained under the proposed bill, i.e., the veto on hew chairs and the regulation of the annual grant to the University, would not be misused in the future? It is quite easy to imagine circumstances where the personal predilections of the Minister or of his Departmental officials or possibly political considerations would outweigh the considered opinions of the representative University Council. And, at the best, the question arises whether the Minister and the Department are more efficient than the,elected University authorities to decide the intricate and expert questions of University policy"