EDUCATION GRANTS

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 751, 25 February 1910, Page 6

EDUCATION GRANTS

IS THE MINISTER INGENUOUS? WELLINGTON BOAKD'S OPINION. Referring to the matters placed before the Minister for. Education by' a. deputation oh Wednesday, the chairman-of tho Education Board (Mr. K. -Leo) stated yesterday that the' Minister, had .completely cut off the. grant that .had.been. made' in previous years, for the reinstatement of old buiidings.' The Minister eaid.-that no interference would be.' riiado with: tho maintenance grant;, but the. board- had lost.;altogether! the-'sum", of J!2000' hitherto granted for the restitution of .old buildings. They had'had a debit balance in the .rebuilding fund of je-1700 at'the end of the year, and had been relying upon this grant of. ,£2OOO to clear, off. half of it. In;-another. year, they would have, beeii solvent, if the grant had been madb again. Other boards: were: taking up the matter, and the question was • being 1 discussed by two other boards whether they should Test content with their position. Mr.. Field: The Minister-did not defi: nitely-say "No," did -he?'.' Did.ho not promise to reconsider the matter? ! . The ' chairman said that in one ! sense the Minister promised to reconsider it. He had. said-that , he recognised that the Wellington Board was in a somewhat different ■ position to that of-, the othor boards. He saw'that the'board.had been embarrassed for want of school sites', and this trouble was not experienced in othor parts, particularly in the South Island. The boards had spent i>ll.ooo on buMdiiigs, and ■ they had received only JKO-α). The. Minister had promised to: look into the matter, although-,: as. he; said,' it was outside his province, having happened before he took office. ■; .'./•... •

Mr'.' Bucharian regretted that he had. been unable-to attend the deputation, but it appeared-that one, of the points of the Minister's defence was that'.the board received all' that Parliament' 1 voted. . It seemed.that he wanted'the deputation to believe,that.the Government would have given more money',had.Parliament voted it.. The Minister; knew very well that the responsibility '. of,"' saying Vwhat the' vote should be-rested on the Government; The Minister's: answer appeared'to bo .a lie and a sham. ,"One doeS;not. like to- use strong language," .added Mr. Buchanan, "but there it is." . :'■ , : .'•'■.-'

Mr. Field: Parliament would have been delighted to vote anything, tho Minister put on the Estimates.,' ■ Mr.' : .Buchanan , said that- that was exactly the case; Parliament' could not increase,, the,, vote... This... was the. second occasion:-on'which the , board.'-'had- been placed: .in .an- unsatisfactory position. Four-or five, years' ago,. the', board' had been made -"stalking-horse"- for a number of.drastic changes in' the Education Act.. In .the course .of discussion,- the, board had been'accused of overspending money, arid three;Echools were.cited examples . of : extravagant, administration and .maladministration by" the board. What had been- the experience since ? Two of - the . schools. had had to' be .enlarged, and the third, Levin School, required enlargement now.. ;■' .'■■•., . ■ .'■ Mr. Field:' Epuni . and .Muritai were two Of them. . . : ■W\ -'■■'.

; Mr.' Buchanan eaid that, in' this ■ reduction- of the .maintenance funds, the board -had been ~again 'made-.a '• victim; The reasons given for the reduction did not apply , to : the'.Wellington .Board,,, although it might, apply to .other boardsl The Minister..deserved and -should have received : .a very effective -reply- from the. deputation as to the powerlessiiess' of. the House of Representatives ; to" vote any; 'more- money for education, purposes, un-: less'the- Minister brought; the ■ amount down upon the. Estimates. :' • ."•■■' A letter, of protest against the reduction,, was received froni the.-'. Wanganui Board, and it was. decided to acquaint that board .with the representations .made and the result.- ■ ■'... , ; ,-,v -- . . ■': ..