UNIVERSITY AND STATE

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 474, 2 October 1928, Page 12

UNIVERSITY AND STATE

NO MONEY WITHOUT CONTROL REPLY TO CRITICISM ( THE SUN'S Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON. Monday. As the State is directly concerned in the financial side of the university the Government must retain a substantial degree in its control. This is the effect of a statement regarding the University Amendment Bill made by the Minister of Education, the Hon. R. A. Wright, to-day. “The Professorial Board of the Auckland University College, according to a report in the Press, expresses its disagreement with certain proposals in the University Amendment Bill, because such proposals are said to be opposed to certain vital questions of educational principle,” said the Minister. “Tlie board asserts that the dei velopments of policy should be in the j hands of the university authority, un- | fettered by political control: that is, | free from Parliamentary control. Payments to Auckland last year from GovJ eminent grants and national endowj nient income amounted to over £16,000, j to which must be added students’ fees j paid by the Government, amounting to about £6,200. income from endowj ments granted by the Government amounting to nearly £2,000, and other payments. The income from Government sources is, therefore, about £25,000 out of a total income of about £35,000, and this does not include very largo payments, amounting during recent years to nearly £130,000. for buildings, equipment and subsidies. “It will thus be seen,” continued the Minister, “that the Government shoulders very heavy financial responsibility respecting university education, yet. according to the Professorial Board, the Government must have no voice in deciding what chairs shall be established or what schools shall be represented in the institutions. According to the board, a university college must be allowed to undertake instruction in every branch of learning if it so decided, notwithstanding that there may bo adequate provision in other institutions for the needs of the country for years to come. Freedom in self-development could be granted !f there was a guarantee that the cost of that development would not ultimately come upon the Government, but what is the present position? SELF-DEVELOPMENT ‘The Professorail Board makes much of the principle of freedom of selfdevelopment, but surely another principle is involved—that, if Parliament is expected to provide the money for university education, Parliament must have some voice as to how the monev shall be expended. “With regard to the grant to the New Zealand University by Parliament, and the determination of that grant from year to year according to requirements, the following is the position: i o?/f n - Uie universi ty was established in x‘oV,A 1 A t / eCeived an annu al grant of £3,000 for the purposes of maintaining the university, of establishing lectureships in affiliated colleges and defraying the expenses of scholarships and the necessary expenses of management. For a few years grants were made to affiliated institutions, but these ceased about 1878, and since that date the grants have been used largely to build up a capital fund for scholarships and other purposes. This capital fund has been added to from year to year until it is now over £71,000. the interest from which is over £4,000 a year. In 1910 the total accumulated fund was £30,135. so that in 17 years the university lias added to reserves £ 41,240. GRANT UNNECESSARY ‘‘Last year the general income of the university, apart from subsidies and contributions, was: Interest on investments, £4,074; examination fees, etc., £27,225; statutory grant, £3,845; total’, £35,144. The expenditure was: Administration, £7,925; examination expenses, £17,552; scholarships, £5,375; surplus income, £4,292; total, £35,144. From this it will be seen that the university is in a strong financial poeition, and could probably carry on without the statutory grant, which could be devoted to some other university purpose of a pressing nature. The Government, therefore, is quite justified in considering whether, as a matter of policy, it should continue to give the university an annual grant in order that it may be able to build up a large reserve fund when additional funds are so urgently needed for other university purposes.” STATEMENT WELCOMED POSITION NOW PLAIN SIR GEORGE FOWLDSS VIEW “The statement of the Minister of Lducation, while most unwelcome in some respects, is welcome in one respect at least,” said Sir George Fowlds, piesident of the Auckland Universitv College Council, to-day. ‘it makes perfectly plain to the public of the Dominion the relative positions of the Government and the University, and the intentions of the Government on the question of obtaining control of university education in New Zealand.” Ml*. Wright stated: “If Parliament is expected to provide the money for university education, Parliament must have some voice as to how the money shall be expended.” Compare with this a statement bv Earl Balfour in 1926:—“Undoubtedlv the growth of learning has brought with it characteristic dangers. One, I think, is associated with this very question of money to which I have referred. If the State be asked to subscribe great funds, either in this country or in any of the Dominions, or, indeed, in any country, there will always be a natural and pardonable instinct on the part of the State to control and supervise the working of an institution which it is doing so much to support. “It is perfectly natural, but it is extremely dangerous. I do not think in the older universities of this country, for various reasons, that there is any probability of the danger becoming a menacing one to any serious extent. Cambridge, Oxford and the older universities are receiving assistance from the State, but our university traditions are so deeply rooted that I do not think there is any symptom, as far as my judgment goes, of any Government attempting to interfere with the university autonomy which, whether it be well exercised or ill exercisd, is at all events at the worst far better than State control.”