EDUCATION BILL CONDEMNED

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22367, 2 April 1938, Page 16

EDUCATION BILL CONDEMNED

♦ VIEWS OF DOMINION CONFERENCE COMMITTEE TO REPORT TO MINISTER MR FRASER IN DEFENCE OF UNIFIED CONTROL (press association telegram.) WELLINGTON, April 1. ; In spite of reassurances* from the Minister for Education (the Horn P. Fraser), the Education Amendment Bill was condemned at a conference in Wellington to-day of secondary school board representatives from all parts of New Zealand. The conference expressed the opinion that the provisions of the bill were opposed to the best interests of education and appointed a committee to specify in a report to the Minister certain features to which particular objection was taken. Mr Fraser, who attended the conference this afternoon, said that many years ago, before he had taken any part in the administration of education, he had formed the opinion that the unification of control was in the best interests of education. The Education Department had no desire for centralisation. While he had been Minister there had been no sign on the part of the department of any inclination to increase its power. Personally, he had not the least wish to do so. On the contrary, he was prepared to discuss with all interested the possibility of divesting the department of certain powers that might well be vested in combined local boards. He would be disappointed if, as a result of the legislation, there was greater centralisation and he would be disappointed, "too, if there was not greater efficiency and achievement.

The Minister said he*, wished to disabuse the minds of the conference of any suspicion savouring of a desire to concentrate more power in the hands of the department.

Bill Not Final

The bill is not intended as the last word in education -administration,” he said. "It has been brought not with an y idea that it must go through-at all costs, but as an honest attempt to improve education administration by unifying our system of control, and I believe it is in the interest of the chil-. dren of the Dominion to do so. I’ll be very pleased to receive any suggestion or any proposal you may have to make as coming from administrators—and very important administrators—in our system of education. If I were convinced that the bill, or any part of its proposals, would be definitely detrimental, that would be all about it.”

Mr Fraser explained that the proposal- to unify the control of education was.no new thing. In 1912 a commission was set up by the Liberal Government, which took evidence from a considerable number of witnesses. After it had gone into the whole question, that committee brought down proposals for the reduction of the number of Education Boards from 30 to five. The act of 1914, however, did not include those proposals, but the idea could not be said to be new or strange. Nobody could say that they had had the scheme sprung on them unawares. Later, Sir James Parr, former Minister for Education, had invited Mr Frank Tate, a noted authority on education, over from Australia for the express purpose of going into the matter throughout the country, and he had made similar recommendations for the unification of control.

The Atmore Report

The next step was the committee set up by Mr H. Atmore in 1930. The committee went all over the Dominion and took a great deal of evidence, and on the sum total of this evidence based its recommendations.

Parliament could not continue to ignore the recommendations made first by a special Commission, then by a gentleman asked to come to the country specially for that purpose, and finally of the Atmore Committee. .The responsible opinion of those appointed to go into the matter was that unification of control was desirable. It was the unanimous opinion of a committee representing all shades of political opinion. The present proposals were based on the recommendations of the Atmore Committee.

l n . applying these proposals, said the Minister, he would be the last to belittle the associations and traditions that surrounded any particular school. I think there is a great deal to be said for the old school tie,” he said, amid applause, “but I do not think that a tie which should be worn on the neck with pleasure and pride should ®be allowed to strangle the development of our education system. We must ask simply what is best for the children of to-day, to-morrow, and the day after to-morrow. I can assure you that the measure has been brought forward in no endeavour to thrust anything down anybody’s throat. I cannot ignore the difficulties and defects in our present system or the recommendations of these committees, or the trend of educational evolution in other countries,” “Main Issue Side-Tracked" The discussion which had taken place during the morning was reopened after the Minister’s departure. “All of us who listened to the Minister’s speech felt that the main issue had been side-tracked,” said Mr L. T. Burnard (Gisborne). A motion that the conference considered the bill against the interests of education in the Dominion was then carried, and a committee was appointed to report on the proposals to the Minister. It comprised Messrs F. Milner (Waitaki), L. McKenzie (Wellington), W. Thomas (Timaru), J. Stanton (Auckland), W. R. Brugh (Otago), M. H. Oram (Palmerston North), Fell (Nelson), W. M. Stewart (Greymouth), and Mrs Knox Gilmer (Wellington).