EDUCATION BILL.

Taranaki Daily News, 1 November 1921, Page 7

EDUCATION BILL.

DEBATE IN PARLIAMENT.

TARANAKI MEMBERS’ VIEWS,

(From Our Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Oct. 30.

Speaking on the Education Bill, ifi the House, Mr. R. Masters (Stratford) said he did not think the Education Department was being treated fairly in the matter of finance. He believed that no other department was having its expenditure reduced to the same extent as the ‘Education Department. Yet education was the last point at which economy should be applied. Mr. Masters asserted that the Minister had misled the House by saying that the inspectors had approved of a reduction in the number of organising teachers in the Taranaki district. The actual reports showed that the inspectors had warmly approv’d of the work of these teachers, and had stressed the need of their work. He accused the department of making savings at the expense of the children. A school system that got only two thirds of the children through the sixth standard could not be regarded as good.

Mr. Malcolm: That is where I disagree with you Some of the best children in the country will never pass the sixth standard.

He approved of the effort to prevent very frequent changes in the teaching staff, but was not sure that the provision would prove effective. He suggested that instead of saying that a teacher should not be appointed to a new position within twelve months of an appointment the Minister should provide that a teacher should not apply for a new position within twelve months. The boards would then have a discretion in the matter, since, if necessary, they could offer positions to teachers who had not applied. A hard and fast rule of the kind proposed by the Minister would embarrass the boards in filling vacancies caused by promotion, marriage, and death. Mr. Masters approved of the proposal to compel the registration of private schools, but did not think that the standard of efficiency should be the State schools. Some private schools had been established because the neighboring State schools were not satisfactory. The scheme of registration proposed meant that if children attended an unregistered school then parents could be prosecuted for not sending their children to a school within the meaning of the law.

Mr. Parr: You are quite right. Mr. S. G. Smith (Taranaki) thought that school committees should have a right to representation on the National Council of Education and on district councils. He was in favor of the immediate appointment of an assistant director of education. The appointment should go to one who had specialised in secondary work. The Minister: Hear, hear. Mr. Smith expressed appreciation of the clauses regarding children who were crippled or backward. He hoped that the department would not fail to give effect to the provisions. He agreed largely with the proposals relating to registration and inspection of private schools. Many private schools had been called into existence through the dissatisfaction of parents with the accommodation provided at public schools. The publication of a special journal in the Education Department had been foreshadowed. Surely this was no time to found a journal to express, possibly, the views of the Minister of Education. He was prepared to predict that the columns of such a journal would contain very little criticism of the department’s policy. The country, it had been stated, was well served by its Press, and this was another argument against the publication of a new journal by the department.

No local authority should have the right to charge for the water children drank at school, and while the Minister was exempting school property from the by-laws, he should go further and prohibit this charge. Mr. Smith said he was as loyal as any man in the House, but he did not see why primary school teachers should be singled out for a special test. If the teachers should take the oath of allegiance, the same rule should apply to all other civil servants. The clause seemed to imply a reflection upon the teaching service. He did not know a single teacher who would object to taking the oath, but all civil servants should be on the same footing.

Mr. Smith thought that an attempt was still being made to reduce the powers of education boards. If the Minister wished to abolish the boards he should come into the open and let the House settle the question. He added that it seemed futile to ask at present for increased expenditure on education. Yr. Massey: Or anything else. Mr. Smith thought that an exception might be made in the case of children. For five war years the Dominion had stagnation in the matter of new schools and improved schools. There was no excuse now for the continuance of conditions that were unfair to the children.