Father faces gaol over teacher-bond

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33694, 18 November 1974, Page 2

Father faces gaol over teacher-bond

(N.Z. Press Association)

HAMILTON, November 17.

A Taihape farmer, Mr P. G. Clark, faces gaol because of his opposition to what he calls the “iniquitous” teacher bonding system.

He is one of six people | who hope to change I bonding legislation by refusing to pay bonds owed to the Education Department.

Mr Clark’s daughter enrolled at teachers’ college this year, but after about six months decided that teaching was not for her. She was in no position to repay her bond and her father was landed with the bill.

He refused to pay, and has gathered support from five other people, who have also refused bond payment. The group wrote to the Director-General of Education (Mr A. N. V. Dobbs) stating their refusal and giving their reason. Copies were also sent to the Minister of Education (Mr Amos) and the Opposition education spokesman, Mr L. W. Gandar. i Mr Clark received

acknowledgement from the Acting Minister of Education (Mr Fraser) and a pledge from Mr Gandar that, if the present Government did not change the bonding legislation, his party would “resolve its position.” The reply from the Education Department was a summons.

The five others in the group have also been served with summonses, but Mr Clark thinks these may be only threats. His bill is for $331.63. Full bond repayment is $6OO, or $l5OO for studentship repayment,

The amount of bond repay-! ment required by the department is the same as the sum paid in allowances to the student to the time the bond! is broken, if this amounts to! less than the full bond. “I told the department 1 wouldn’t pay the bill ... I’m prepared to go to gaol, if! that’s how far they want to take it,” said Mr Clark. Finding out Young people could not be expected to know if they would like teaching until they began training, he said. Some colleges treated students’ first year as probationary, but others enforced repayment of the bond if a student had been enrolled for a couple of weeks, he said. “The legislation is interpreted and applied in various ways by different colleges.” Mr Clark said the group opposed the present bonding system on a number of grounds:— There were too many anomalies as to who was forced to pay the bond. $l5OO was “an extremely heavy fine” for wanting to change a job a person, did not like. The “fine” was totally un-[ justified if compared! with fines for man-! slaughter on the roads.! Colleges were able to terrain-! ate students’ training! without notice, but* students had to pay a! “fine” if they wished to! end training. The Education Department was not bound to give bonded students a job. Teachers who could not get teaching positions could J be “fined” for taking! other jobs. No date had been set for! the cases to come to court,! said Mr Clark. Association support The Students Teachers’ Association will support any campaign against student teacher bonds, says its president (Mr D. H. Benson-Pop?). “We would like to see two main improvements in the law — greater ease of deferment of the bond, and provision for transfer to other branches of Government service,” he said. Both these improvements were promised in the Labour Party’s manifesto, but had not been enacted. His association still had to decide what supporting! action it would give Mr! Clark, and other future cam-! paigns, against the bond, said! Mr Benson-Pope.