PARLIAMENT

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2285, 20 October 1914, Page 7

PARLIAMENT

, EDUCATION BILL. INSPECTORS AND BOARDS. THIRD READING AGREED TO The House of Representatives 6at at 7.30 p.m. Mr. AV. A. VEITCH (Wanganui) gave notice of his intention to introduce tho Public Health Amendment Bill. The Native Land Amendment Bill (tho Hon. W. H. Hemes) was introduced and read a first time. Tho Minister intimated that he ■would move tho second reading of the Bill pro forma. EDUCATION BILL PROGRESS THROUGH COMMITTEE CENTRALISING THE INSPEC- ■ TORATE. The Education Bill was further considered in Committee. On the part 'of the Bill dealing with special schools for mental defectives and others, Mr. J. A. Young said that he would like to see an amendment of the law to relieve teachers of the unpleasant duty of reporting to the Department cases of mentally defective children in their schools. In small country schools teachers were apt to incur , the displeaeure of parents for donig so. The Hon. J. Allen said that teachere were only asked to notify cases, and not to investigate them. Ho had never heard of any .teacher objecting to doing this work. Inspectors and Boards. Clause 127, providing for the centralisatidn of tho inspectorate, was somewhat fully debated. Sir Walter Buchanan eaid that it would be a great loss to education if the inspectors were taken from tho control of the Education Boaijds. His experience was that the most valuable featuro of the control of our sclioolb was the knowledge of the.schools by the Education Boards, and the application of that knowledge through the inspectors.

" Mr. Allen: You will get that still: Sir Walter Buchanan: How jean that be when tho board is deprived absolutely of any influence, by direct instruction or otherwiso, over the inspectors? I know very well what goes on in Victoria. Thero tho Department of Education is not in sympathy with tho. remoter country districts, and tho whole administration is in the interests of the larger centres. Sir Walter Buchanan concluded by saying that if ho thought lie could iu-, fluence the -Minister not to persevere with tho proposal, ho would move an amendment. He had no hope of doing this, but he would appeal to the Minister not to insist upon the change. Mr. J. A. Hanan said the proposal was one of tho best in the Bill; and he congratulated the Minister upon having introduced it. Although centralised, the inspectorate, or tho inspectors, would still bo located in education board districts, and would still be available for consultation with tho boards. Would Lead to Abolition. Mr. D. H. Guthrie said.he had always been opposed to the clause, believing that it would prove to be a retrograde step. Probably the change would prove to be in the interests of the /teachers, and the Bill had been called a teachers' Bill. For his part, he regarded it as his duty to consider not only the teachers, but the children and the' parents of the children. Mr. T. K. Sidey said that one.reason for the centralisation of the inspectorate was that it was desirable to have uniformity of standard all over New Zealand, especially as certain primary ifchool certificates were accepted as qualification for admission to' certain branches of the Public Service. Sir Walter Buchanan said that if this waa the only defence for the proposal, it was certainly a very weak one. What-Mr. Sidey said was so desirable could easily be compassed in another .way. He was sure that the effect of the clause would be the final abolition of the boards, and in the meantime it would prevent the most useful men from giving their services on education boards. Even at that eleventh hour he would urge the Minister to reconsider the clause. ' Mr. G. J. Anderson said he hoped the Minister would not reconsider the clause, which was the best in.the Bill. Mr. W. A. Veiteh said the only fault he could find with the clause was that it did not go far enough.. He would vote at onco for a clauso to put teachers directly under tho central authority, Failure Possible. Mr. D. H. Guthrie declared that the member for Wanganui was suffering frdni a bad attack of "Pirani-itis, Mr.-Pirani being secretary of tho Education Board. (Laughter.) ' Mr. Guthrie.said there was nothing in the contention that uniformity in the test Examinations was desirable, because it ivas achieved already—the examination papers in those , classes were set by the Department. He did not agreo that tho classification of teachers could be uny bettor done; by a centralised inspectorate than it could be done under the present system. • Who was to make the classification? The inspectors? But the inspectors,, scattered all over the country, could consider the classification only when they came together. And on what would they decide it?—on tho individual judgment of every individual inspector. Such an arrangement would not ensure uniformity of grading any more than tho present system. ' Dr. A. K. Newman said that he had for long been of opinion that inspectors sliould bo placed under a central authority. One of his objections to the scheme as proposed was that the inspectors while working in the territory of education boards would not be working under their control. This would mean a divided control, and a divided control never answered. His solution, of."tho difficulty was to abolish the' boards, whose < period of usefulness had Glided. . Minister in Defence. The Hon. J. Allon said ho had no desire to do away with the boards nor to minimise, the good work thoy had done. His own opinion was that the beard would allow them still moro valuable work. In answer to tho objection that the inspectors, if under the central authority, would not bo in touch with tho back-country schools, ho would, rofor to tho Native school inspectors, who were in tho closest touch with the small schools undor their care. And these Native school inspectors" wero under tho direct control of the Department. Tiio board, under his scheme, would not lo.so the power of appointing teachers, and the boards wculcl control the teachers absolutely. In his opinion uniformity of standards in the schools, and the classification of teachers on a uniform basis, were of paramount urgency, and unless thero vvas somo scheme for centralising the inspectorate, tho difficulties in/ tho way of those reforms wero insuperable. The change would moan that inspectors would bo appointed by the Public Service Commissioners, but already the Commissioners appointed Native inspectors' and no difficulty nrose. Invariably they followed the recommendation of tho Departmnnt, '.On* qf the improvements he tfl.,

bring about under the Bill was that of appointing special inspectors to deal with special subjects. Hβ hoped tho House would help him to pass the clause. Ministerial Control. , Mr. H. G. Ell moved an amendment to provide that inspectors should .bo appointed by the Minister of Education. Mr. T. M. Wilfdrd said he hoped the Minister would take \no notico of tho resolutions passed by the AVellington Education Boajd, whioh was one of tfae most conservative boards in the Dominion, and not at all a reflex? of the community. The board had, in fact, sought to prevont the passago of tho Bill. Mr.' J. A. Young said that the move for the centralisation of the inspectorate was a ■ very good one. He thought it was very desirable that they should not bo under the boards. Sir Walter.. Buchanan said the committee would have no difficulty in estimating at their true value the remarks of the member for Hutt. He was suro no man had done more in the service of education in New Zealand than the late chairman of tho Wellington Education Board. Did the charge of conservatism lie against him?. Mr. Wilford; No. I believe he was the only Liberal of the lot of you. Mr. Ell's amendment was defeated by 24 votes to 19, and the clause was retained on the voices. Medical Inspection. There was considerable debate on the clause making it a punishable offence for the parent or guardian of a child declared iby a medical inspector _ of schools to be suffering from a serious disease or a serious bodily defect to neglect to obtain for such child suitable medical or surgical treatment. The clause provides that a parent so offonding may be deemed after a second notification of the condition of his child, and after a second failure or neglect to submit it to proper treatment, to have been guilty of cruelty towards or neglect of such child. _ The clause was amended by the addition of a- proviso, moved by Mr. Wilford and accepted by the Minister, that it should be a good defence' to a charge of cruelty or neglect that the failure of the parent to procure medical aid was unavoidable or accidental. Tho clause with the proviso was agreed to on the voices. Tho Bill was reported with amendment and read a third time. The House rose at 1 a.m.