“UNWARRANTED ATTACK”

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 571, 25 January 1929, Page 12

“UNWARRANTED ATTACK”

GOVERNMENT’S REPLY TO UNIVERSITY SUBSIDY NOT WITHDRAWN Press Association WELLINGTON, Thursday, j The Department of Education makes ; the following official reply to the chancellor of the New Zealand University, Professor J. Macmillan Brown, who in his address at the opening of the annual meeting of the council of the university, made an attack on the late Government for what he described as “removing the fixed annual subsidy, instead of increasing it,” and for “socialising the slowly increasing scholarship fund at the very moment when funds were needed most.” The chancellor, says the department in a long statement, goes on to speak of “the mutilation of the finances and State interference with the liberty of the university” as one of the greatest disasters to the education of the country. The university, we are told, will be on the verge of bankruptcy and will be in danger of becoming absorbed by the Education Department. As the result of the bureaucratic curtailment of privileges and liberties of local bodies the spirit of generosity to educational institutions will be annihilated, and disastrous results will follow. Strong statements such as these would lead the public to think that some very drastic action had been taken by the Government that presaged impending ruin and disaster to the university, that the very existence of the university and the colleges was at stake, and that the Government was starving university education. What are the facts? GRANTS BY GOVERNMENT Last year the Government found it necessary to provide additional assistance lor the professors and to strengthen the staffs ot the university colleges, and increased the grants to these institutions by about £ 10,009 a year. The total income of the university institutions from Government scources, including endowment income but excluding grants tor buildings amounting annually to many thousands, is now nearly £200,000. Yet Professor Brown talks of the “niggardly and destructive spirit” of the department and the Government. While investigations were being made into the needs of the university it was found that the income of tlie New Zealand University for 1927, including a Government grant of £3,845, was £35,144, while the expenditure was £4,292 less than that sum, and this expenditure includes nearly £ 8,000 for administration. At the same time the university has accumulated, funds of over £71,000 (not £32.000, as mentioned by the chancellor), and these funds are being rapidly increased. PARLIAMENT TO VOTE SUBSIDY The question then arose whether as a policy the Government was justined in providing grants to an institution that were not needed, when the needs in other directions were clamant. Clearly no Government should load the present taxpayer to provide funds to build up large capital sums, so that posterity would be relieved of its responsibility. It was therefore decided, not to deprive the university of its subsidy, as the chancellor states, but to allow Parliament to vote annually the sum that was considered necessary, and as a matter of fact the reduction in the grant for the current year is only £961. Whether this is so drastic a cut as to warrant tlie attack above referred to, let the public decide. As to the charges of depriving the university of liberty of action, the difficulty in the past has been to get the New Zealand University to function and exercise any control over its department of the education of the country, beyond acting as a mere examining Ijody for degrees. To charge the Government with usurping the powers of the university, with mutilating its finances, and with interfering with its liberty, merely because its income is reduced by 3 per cent., is too absurd for serious consideration. NO DESIRE TO INTERFERE The department has no desire to interfere with the university, so long as it will assume reasonable and effective control of its work. The history of university education during the past few years will show that the department’s policy has been to provide more and more facilities for university education, without interfering wich the functions of the bodies controlling our colleges. Certainly there has been no ground for the alarmist statement that the chancellor has published. At the same time it must be pointed out that if Parliament is asked to provide funds for any purpose it must, in the interest of the taxpayer, be satisfied that the expediture is immediately necessary. FOR VICE-CHANCELLOR PROFESSOR HUNTER RECOMMENDED COMMITTEE’S REPORT Press Association DUNEDIN. Thursday. The first report of the Finance Committee presented at the meeting of the New Zealand University Council to-day, contained the following clauses: “The committee, having considered the present financial position of the university, does not recommend the appointment at present of a vice-chan-cellor giving his full time to the duties of the position. As much of the work of the vice-chancellor will embrace consideration of academic questions, he should possess professorial status. The work of the vice-chancellor, especially in the first few years, will be very considerable, and will involve the withdrawal of the holder of office from any other activities outside his academic duties, and should carry with it a* substantial remuneration. “In all matters of academic character which come within the province of the chancellor to decide, the vice-chancellor shall act as advisor to the chancellor, and shall be responsible for carrying out the chancellor’s decisions. “In order to secure continuity of policy, the first appointment of a vicechancellor should be for a period of not less than three years. It is recommended that the honorarium of the vice-chancellor should be £3OO a year. “The committee recommends that the appointment of vice-chancellor be offered to Professor T. A. Hunter.” The clause relating to the powers of the vice-chancellor was referred back to the committee, and the appointment was offered to Professor Hunter, who is professor of philosophy at Victoria University College. Professor Hunter said he would like timo to consider the question. STUDENTS MAY APPEAL RESULTS OF EXAMINATIONS Press Association DUNEDIN, Thursday. At the meeting of the University Council to-day Professor T. A. Hunter presented the first report of the general committee dealing with matters which had been considered by the Academic Board. The statute dealing with the constituent colleges was amended by the addition of a new section providing that each college shall, between August 1 and December 1 in each *year, hold examinations in all subjects taught in which students who

have obtained exemption from atterd ance at lectures apply to be examined The statute relating to the conduct university examinations was altered ... as to provide that, by making applies tion within one calendar month ft the date of receiving the official resuh of his examination, any candidate si, ting for an examination for a dre'reV diploma or proficiency certificate have his scripts reconsidered bv the examiner The tec for such reconsi.fi! eration shall be two guineas. It was decided that instruction* should he issued to the office that fee should he returned in cases ' which the voice-chancellor considers the appeal to have been justified. Tile value ot the engineering travel ling scholarship, which is tenahle fw t eaF ’ increased from i 159 LLOO. provided that the scholar holds Position or emolument, a similar course w as followed m connection w.th the medical travelling scholarship.