Aid For Private Schools

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32114, 9 October 1969, Page 16

Aid For Private Schools

Sir,—Rarely have I seen a letter so full of emotive prose as is that of “J.R.G.” How he can ever subject children “impartially to a wide range of philosophies, free from religious and social prejudice,” I do not know. His first pre-

judice comes in his first sentence. I refer him to the report of the Cameron Commission or the Parliamentary Committee or the statement of the Ulster Bishops. He opposes the establishment of any school that considers its philosophy superior, yet he insists on the universal imposition of secularism and is at pains to maintain its superiority. If home and school conspire to give a youth firm moral teaching, he is “morally mollycoddled.” “J.R.G." sees no real chance of the young man freeing himself from such an education. Would that he were right!—Yours, etc., F. DURNING. October 8, 1969.

Sir,—Forty years ago Michael O’Brien and Stephen Bryant, bosom pals, went their separate ways for 20 minutes first thing each morning and for two hourly sessions during the week. They also went to different buildings on Sunday. They did not objects They were not displeased, on the contrary, to them it was a relaxing time compared to most of the normal routine, and in summer they were able to stand side by side at the common open-air services. It was and is a good school that has produced its fair share of worthy citizens, not withstanding yours truly. There was, however, one difference: there were no parents to interfere. Most of us had none, as State aid now appears to bq a sectarian issue, what do the children think?—Yours, etc., S. J. BRYANT. October 8, 1969. Sir,—One is impressed by the cogent arguments against State aid, such as “Three cheers for Varian J. Wilson,” by Max A. Havre and little else besides. The oftrepeated and most pitiful attitude of all is that of “Bethune” who objects to paying extra taxes, whereas the existence of private schools is saving the taxpayer money. Antidisestablishmentarianism and Varian J. Wilson would have made strange bedfellows and a tolerant man would have found little significance in the tenuous and practically non-existent link between the State and the denomination most concerned in this controversy. The offence taken by Mr Wilson reminds me of those who flipped their wigs at the wayout sounds of Genesis from any American spacecraft. More appropriate, perhaps, than the American Constitution is the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.

“A. B. Cedarian’s” guide for voters and occult diagnosis of Mr Kirk’s insincerity prompt a recollection of his political skinning of Mr Skinner. —Yours, etc., GEORGE KELLY. October 8, 1969.

Sir,—F. Duming thinks Mr Kirk has “the right idea.” Apparently he has, in the implementation of socialism. The N.Z.E.I. president, Mr Dwyer, says Mr Kirk assured him that the long-term policy of the Labour Party was to integrate independent and State schools into an integrated State system. Britain’s Communist Party, in December, 1942, issued a memorandum, “Britain’s Schools," advocating complete aboil* tion of religion from all Britain’s schools, whether in the form of teaching or control. Terming themselves leaders of socialist Labour, they supported sections of the people desiring full incorporation of church schools into the State system. In New Zealand, a certain proportion of State aid is desirable only in additional building subsidy, equipment, free text-books, free buses; certainly not for teachers’ pay or State ownership of land and buildings if religious independence is to be retained. Let us not be hoodwinked by political camouflage.—Yours, etc. FAIR PLAY. October 7, 1969.

Sir, —A reading of the Parliamentary debates of the session during which the 1877 Education Act was passed shows that the “free, compulsory, and secular” clause was a desperate compromise reflecting the bitterness of 1877, unsatisfactory to most parties, and really a victory for a secularist minority who took advantage of the current denominational rivalry. It was expected that sectarian feeling would soften as the nation matured, allowing a happier solution to evolve. The religious tolerance and moves towards Christian unity of 1969 would seem to call for some revision of the 1877 principles.—Yours, etc., QUINTILLIAN. October 7, 1969.

Sir, —Mr Kirk’s remarks concerning the offer of extra aid to independent schools seem full of evasions. We read of “temporary measures,” “interim payment,” and the like, concerning assistance with teachers’ salaries, and then this is followed by the announcement that, within kix months of being elected, Labour . would hold a round table conference of interested parties to shape future policy. As independent schools are a minority group it seems inevitable that at this meeting their voice and their needs would be lost on the platform provided for the vociferous and seemingly bitter anti-State-aiders from whom we have heard so much in recent weeks. Mr Kirk seems to have left himself plenty of loopholes after he has “bought” the private school vote. He even admitted in Wellington last week to Mr Hamlin that he wishes to see the independent schools disintegrate. Roman Catholic spokesmen who speak in favour of his offer should first read a little more closely between the lines.—Yours, etc., LONG-PAYING BUT NOT UNHAPPY CATHOLIC MOTHER. October 7, 1969.

Sir, —As a Roman Catholic wife with a Protestant husband, I think I am quite justified in speaking on behalf of both parties. Three of our children have experienced education in both forms. Two while attending State schools were perpetually tormented by bullies. The third, because of lack of understanding, was considered under average. On changing to private schools no complaints were made. The latter child is now considered above average. Discipline in most State schools is deplorable, supervision at lunch hour nil; the children run amok giving occasion for these bullies to harass the younger children. Teach the majority of State school children some Christian ethics, respect for elders, manners, and discipline. Half an hour set aside for these important teachings—the result a wellbalanced society, AH segregation could thus be eradicated. Furthermore, let me remind

Varian J. Wilson that we are indeed a free country and not yet Communist. We, too, resent double taxation.—Yours, etc., GABRIEL. October 6, 1969. Sir, —Varian J. Wilson has no need to set up his special school to teach agnosticism and humanism because the State schools already do this by default Any community which reaUy has beliefs usually makes sure they are taught in the schools. Space does not allow mention of the obvious examples. In the most recent census, the majority in New Zealand profess some form of Christianity, yet there are reasons why the State education system is secular. Surely, then, it is logical for the State to help those schools which do their best to give the Christian education which it cannot give in its own schools. The anti-State aiders’ best move is to persuade the next Government to state openly that New Zealand is an agnostic or atheistic country, not one professing Christianity. This would irrevocably demolish the main argument for State aid to church schools.— Yours, etc., F. October 8, 1969.

Sir,—Why is it that parents who pay fees to send their children to private schools have to pay tax on the

amount of the fees? In . most cases the fuH amount can be up to $lOOO a child a year. Many families have at least two or three children attending school and the amount becomes doubled, trebled, etc. Without private schools the New Zealand education system would have an even tighter squeeze than it has now. Take Canterbury, for example, with its high-coun-try. If parents wish to send their children to secondary school, they may well have to send them boarding. Where? At a cursory glance round Christchurch we find room for 80 schoolboy boarders at Boys’ High School. Where else does the Government have these boarding facilities for male schoolchildren in Christchurch? How about some help?— Yours, etc., FRUSTRATED PRIVATE SCHOOL BOARDER. October 6, 1969.

Sir,—Mr Kirk’s education plan is the best yet offered and it takes courage and integrity to produce it at such a time. In a country where some of our highest taxpayers cannot even read, we should get our priorities right and the best education for every child should be high on the list. No child ever suffered through being educated in a religious atmosphere by dedicated teachers, and in private schools, the slow learner seldom becomes what is euphemistically termed the reluctant learner and subsequently the vandal or thug. So let us not allow religious intolerance or inverted snobbery to cloud the election issue. I am not a Roman Catholic, my children are past school age, and I am not a Labour , member, just a taxpayer.—Yours, ” NO AXE TO GRIND. October 7, 1969. Sir, —Could some-one appoint an independent judge, umpire, referee, commission, or even a computer to decide who is subsidising whom? At present the parents of youngsters attending private schools feel that, through paying taxes—a proportion of which goes to education— they are subsidising the State education programme, while the parents who send their children to State schools are equally sure that some of their taxes are going to help private schools. In other words, we do not know what we are arguing about. I think that if this point could be cleared up we could then really get down to a logical discussion. —Yours, etc., SIDE-LINER. October 8, 1969.

Sir, —Perhaps the reason why Church of Ireland schools (Protestant denomination) receive a little aid from the Government of Eire is that a few Roman Catholic children attend their schools and Catholic schools receive aid in Protestant England. But Protestant schools, etc., are almost outlawed in Cath<> He countries like Spain, Co-

lumbia, etc., and adherents are liable to be persecuted. A referendum in New Zealand would produce an obvious result. So why should Mr Kirk unnecessarily give in to a minority? Teacher salaries paid in Catholic schools are only a fraction of those paid in other schools because their dedicated teachers allow their church to benefit financially. The money saved is spent on other church expansion needs. School fees are also much less than in other private schools. There will always be Catholic schools here, even without present generous Government aid, private school income tax rebates, and charity tax relief allowances.—Yours, etc., a:b.c. October 8,1969.