Manawatu Herald. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1891. Never Mind the Reason.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, 26 February 1891, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1891. Never Mind the Reason.

Oub readers will credit us with being sincere in the desire to see some changes made in our system of State Education. We have from time to time pointed out some glaring cases, and have particularly pointed to the abolition of Education Boards and to placing Inspectors under the control of the Department. We have shown how every Minister to whom this Department has been entrusted has evaded his plain duty, in refraining from laying before Parliament proposals to these ends. We stand a chance now of some action being taken, which, if not instigated by offended dignity, will still chiefly arise from the observance of scant courtesy, on the part of a Board to the Minister of Education. It may not be satisfactory that a minor action of this nature should lead to great results, when far better rea» wn* for moving in the matter haw

always been to hand, yet the ratepayers need not bother about the reason, so long as attention is again aroused. In dealings between Boards and Committees a great deal of friction has been caused by similar inconciliatory behaviour as has led to the present interest. We have also asserted that the Boards are the fifth wheel of the Education coach, and that a large saving of over £10,000 a year would be made by abolishing them, and that committees could work with the Department as easily as with the Boards. It is not long ago since we pointed out that the manner in which members are elected to the Boards prevents anything like real representation, so that the public would be as well served if they had none. We have mentioned that there is a chance of some action being taken, and it has arisen in the following manner: — The Minister of Education wrote to the Otago Education Board, and instead of replying courteously, they rather snubbed him. The Minister is a young man, but is entitled to every courtesy, if it was only paid to his office, though he has had advantages in education that entitle him to it for personal reasons. The Post has taken the matter up in a leader and argues that if Boards are apt to treat the Minister so, what are they likely to do with Committees ? Just so, now a man of rank has received

a dose, the unfortunate committeemen get sympathy. We must be thankful that it is even so. We hold entirely with the Pott, and trust our contemporary will keep to the point with its usual tenacity, and backed by other papers, the Minister may make some suggestions. We give the following extract from the Post's leader, so that our readers may see how very near it comes to the views we have already advocated : — " The Boards are apt to give themselves airs, and to assume a position they are not entitled to occupy. They often tyrannise over the committees, and then show impatience over the slightest control being exercised over themselves. The present incident will not be without value if it directs the attention of the Minister of Education to the necessity of Parliamentary reconsideration of the status of these Boards, the first point to be considered being whether their existence is necessary at all. We are by no means sure that the Education Department could not, with the aid of the local committees, administer the educational affairs of the colony more economically and more efficiently than they are now administered by the Boards. If however, the Boards cannot altogether be dispensed with — if there must be some body interposed between the Minister and the committees — then certainly the powers of the intermediary body should be considerably less than those now possessed or claimed by the Education Boards. They should not be enabled to so entirely ignore the over-ride the local committees, or to profess independence of Ministerial oontrol. Above all, the power of inspection should be taken from them, and assumed by the central authority. We shall never have a really satisfactory system of education in the calony.until tho Inspectors are officers of the Education Department, wi hout responsibility to any looal authority, and subject to frequent removals from one district to another, 't "ould almost seem to follow naturally on such a change that the teachers of the colony should be reoognised as one body, that promotion should run throughout the whole service, and that uniformity in the use of school books in the several standards should be established from one end of New Zealan 1 to the other. The substantial benefits which would accrue from changes of this character would a good deal more than atone for any dis d» vantages which might arise from the sacrifice of a certain amount of looal administrative control by the Education Boards. The subject is a most important one, and well worth early Ministerial :i?.t« tion.