“CONTRAVENTION OF ACT”

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22376, 13 April 1938, Page 10

“CONTRAVENTION OF ACT”

RELIGIOUS PRACTICE IN SOME SCHOOLS ALLEGED BREACH OF TBS SECULAR SYSTEM MINISTRIES INTERPRETATION OF LAW MISI UtOCUTIOf BLIGIUIJ WELLINGTON. April I*. A statement that he could only Interpret what was being done in soma 400 schools in the Dominion at present in the holding of daily devotional exercises as a breach at least of the spirit of the Education Act, was made by the Minister for Education (tb« Hon. P. Fraser) at a meeting of the Education Committee of the House << Representatives to-day, after the hearing of evidence on the Educetioo Amendment Bill, from the secrdasy of the Bible in Schools League (the Rev. E. O. Blamires). . The country, Mr Fraser said, had decided, rightly or wrongly; ** * secular system and toe qeedtoei whether ,toe present practice in 400 schools should be extended or eOmK nated was for Parliament to The Minister said that toe main <&Sy culty confronting him was that tod Education Act provided for secular education and no other, and there hM been introduced into primary scboolß something that was never prohilutqd in regard to secondary schools—rengsous exercises. . _ So far as primary »chocdsweaAß had been made perfectly plain Bp the type of education was to be lar. AJp to 1914 the question of fn use of a school building for any if ligious services seemed to be ambigm ous. and at that time there was inm serted a clause to allow the usee* school buildings‘for moral and IU9 ous instruction.

Purpose at Amendment “I cannot find anything that vqSB warrant an interpretation being pwqd on that clause to the effect that B had anything to do with the work tx the school in any way whatever.* Mr Fraser said! “Obviously there wa« no departure intended there from the secular system of education. Tlw amendment was njade to make it clear that religious bodies which had no place of worship should have fee' use of school buildings. Nearly 400 school committees have interpreted that clause as giving them power to let the school for use for five minutes’ devotional exercises.

“My difficulty is to reconcile that with the act as it stands,” he said. “I am driven to the conclusion that what has been going on is in contravention of both the letter and the spirit of the act • Advantage has been taken of that clause for the purpose of introducing devotional exercises in such a way as to make them inseparable from the work of the school and Is therefore a contravention of the decision of Parliament in 1877 and endorsed by subsequent Parliaments.”*

Mr Blamlres's View

Mr Blamires said he. was inclined to think that had facilities for rapid communication obtained in 1877, the passing of an Education Bill cutting out all religious instruction might have been difficult. The Nelson people particularly were concerned about this, and they found that the require-, ments of the act were for four hours of definitely secular instruction and that the boards had power to increase that to five hours. The Nelson system had begun to operate long before 1914. In that year the Bible in Schools League urged the introduction of the New South Wales system of devotional exercises and religious teaching by teachers. At present there waa no desire to bring any compulsion, either direct or indirect, to bear on teachers.

Mr Fraser: You would not that the method that has been duced since was contemplated M 1914?

Mr Blamires: I can point to a rfmii in Canterbury which has had'lk 1896.