Many Alterations To Education Bill

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30586, 31 October 1964, Page 3

Many Alterations To Education Bill

(From Our Parllnmetuarv Reporter) WELLINGTON, October 30. The Education Bill was being rushed through without regard for the community, inadequate time had been given to its consideration in the select committee and many important recommendations of the Education (Commission had not been included, complained Opposition speakers in Parliament today.

They were disputing the action of the committee in reporting back the bill to the House. The committee has extensively modified the disciplinary provisions in the bill. Provisions which would have allowed pupils reaching 15 in the first term to leave school at the end of the previous year have been dropped. The clause was struck out by the committee after hearing evidence from teacher groups and others.

Another change will require children to be enrolled at the age of six—previously seven—until 15. For those who face a walk of more than two miles from home to school or to the nearest public transport, the required school starting age will remain seven. A clause which would have allowed the Director of Education to grant certificates of exemption for part of a school term within which a child reaches 15 if attendance could be considered to cause hardship has been deleted. Discipline Changes The new disciplinary code for teachers has been considerably modified. Peremptory dismissal, transfer at the same or at a lower salary or with a temporary salary cut may be imposed on teachers who have been convicted of an offence for which the maximum punishment is not less than two years' imprisonment. The term of imprisonment was not pro”iously specified.

The penalties are now permissive: the bill, as introduced, made one or other of them mandatory. For purely professional offences, which will no longer include “displaying insubordination by word or conduct,” there will not be different procedures for major and minor offences.

A committee to investigate an alleged offence must be set up if an education board decides to proceed with a charge: in the original bill the investigation was reel uired if a teacher denied the charge. Investigating committees must report any minority opinion to the board and must furnish the teacher concerned with a full copy of its report and notes.

Deduction from pay of up to £lOO has been dropped from the various penalties which boards may impose. Clauses allowing the immediate suspension without charge of teachers in emergency cases of immoral conduct or gross misbehaviour and allowing school committees to make recommendations on the suspension, dismissal or transfer of a teacher have also been struck out. Appeals to the teachers" court of appeal, which will now be allowable even on cases of interim suspension, will be conducted by way of rehearings. Where, after an appeal, it appears that the appellant has been wrongfully punished, he must be reinstated—unless the court orders otherwise. Part-time Jobs “Moonlighting”—or the taking of part-time jobs—by teachers will be prohibited only if it is judged to affect their efficiency. An effect on their “standing” was previously provided as an alternative criterion.

Several penalties for general offences have been raised. For permitting employment of school age children which might interfere with their schooling or attendance, for obstructing truancy officers, for wilfully disturbing a school or insulting a teacher in front of pupils, and for failing to enrol a child, the maximum fine has been doubled to £2O.

For irregular attendance, which was to have borne a penalty of £2 and £1 10s a week for subsequent offences, the maximum fine is to be £2 and £2 a day for subsequent offences.

Certificates of exemption from attendance will be granted by head teachers, not by school committees or their members. “Rush” Criticised Mr J. G. Edwards (Opp., Napier) said it was a disgrace that the Minister of Education (Mr Kinsella) was rushing this bill through without regard for the community. The bill had been introduced on September 9, he said, and interested organisations had been given little time to prepare or present their submissions. Mr Kinsella replied that educational organisations had been informed in February that a bill was to be introduced and consultations had later been held between these organisations and the Government. The organisations had been given almost a month to prepare their submissions. “People should be able to make up their minds in this time.”

Most of the amendments had been minor changes, said Mr Kinsella. Of the 10 major alterations, most had been suggested by himself. All changes to the 1960 bill had been made at the request of educational organisations. At least six secondary

school principals had asked in 1963 that the school-leaving age be reduced in certain cases. All teaching organisations had been advised of the new provisions on the bill on March 23. He proposed tabling all letters and minutes of various meetings between himself and the various organisations, said Mr Kinsella. Leaving Age Mr N. J. King (Opp., Waitemata), said the fact that so many clauses had been amended, or deleted from the bill altogether, proved that this legislation was far too hasty. Mr R. J. Tizard (Opp., Pakuranga), said the bill had been rushed through the committee because Mr Kinsella had said he wanted it introduced this year. This meant the committee had time to consider the pros and cons of what was actually in the bill, but none to consider submissions. I “Teachers are members of

a professional group. It is demeaning to this house that we should treat them like a bunch of schoolkids.” Mr C. J. Moyle (Opp., Manukau), asked whether it was true that Mr Kinsella intended to consider further amendments to this bill next year. One fact which caused consternation to many members of the Opposition was that the bill did not include many of the important recommendations of the Education Commission. Two of the most important changes recommended by this commission were that the school-leaving age be raised to 16 and that changes in teaching administration take place, neither of these recommendations being heeded, said Mr Moyle. Teachers’ Support Mr W. H. Brown (Govt., Palmerston North), chairman of the Education Committee, which heard submissions on the bill, said he was amazed that the Opposition wanted to delay the bill. The only complaints the Opposition or other organisations could have had been rectified by deletions or amendments. Mr Brown said he was convinced all teaching organisations wanted to see the implementation of this bill as quickly as possible. It was not true that the committee did not have enough time to hear all the evidence. More than 20 submissions had been made. Fifty-four of the 207 clauses in the bill had been amended. The select committee’s report was tabled.