“Teachers’ College Needs High School”

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32392, 3 September 1970, Page 12

“Teachers’ College Needs High School”

Secondary teacher training demanded a special high school closely associated with the secondary division of the Christchurch Teachers’ College, the College Council was told last evening.

The principal of the secondary division (Mr E. P. Blampied) was commenting on a question asked by the chairman of the council (Professor H E. Field) on whether normal schools should be created for secondary teacher training.

“1 know that normal schools, secondary, would be more difficult to organise than normal schools, primary, and I would not be impressed with this type of school for the secondary division.” Mr Blampied said. When the secondary division had been planned for the Ilam site land could have been set aside for the erection of an associate school there, he said. However, the Department of Education was not apparently now in favour of the “asso-

ciate school concept,” Mr Blampied said. He said he did not see how secondary teacher trainees could be properly trained without the use of a school of this type. Mr R. K. Milne asked Mr Blampied if existing secondary school boards in the Christchurch area could be given information on the needs of the secondary division of the college on the matter. which was also later discussed in committee by the Council In recent weeks some criticisms that the secondary division of the teachers’ college has had to work in virtual isolation from the service it was meant to serve, has been made by a senior lecturer at the college, Mr C. Knight, who also suggested that the time had come when some form of associate high school should be set up. It is believed that with the special development planned for Burnside High School, which is in close proximity to the Ilam college site, this may be earmarked by the Department of Education as the college’s first official associate high school.

He described the tax as “this miserable, penal payroll tax,” and.said that it was an ill-conceived measure, full of inconsistencies, which would add “fuel to the flames of inflation.” The Government had taken urgency on the second reading debate of the Payroll Tax Bill.

The tax would do nothing to overcome the labour shortage, Mr Moyle said. It would curtail job opportunities rather than create more, and there would be a preference for employing more people on a 40-hour basis instead of fewer on an overtime basis.

Why, Mr Moyle asked, must the Government penalise labour-intensive industries. Why was it only exporters who qualified for relief from the payroll tax? “What is the difference oetween funds saved by import substitution and funds earned by exporters,” he asked. Why should exporters get relief when perhaps first and second-stage manufacturers had contributed towards the export products. The first and second-stage manufacturers would pay the tax, he said, and they either passed the tax on, forcing up the price of exports, or did not expand “What incentive is there in this bill for a new manufacturer to get established when he knows that he is 4 per cent down the drain on every dollar of wages he pays,” Mr Moyle said. After two hours of further speeches the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Kirk) rose to his feet and in an impassioned,