CHILD WELFARE

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 9, 5 October 1927, Page 12

CHILD WELFARE

SEPARATE DEPARTMENT. NOT NEEDED WORK OF BOARD COMMENDED A proposal, made in the House yesterday, to convert the Child Welfare Branch into a separate department, did not receive support from the Minister of Education, who held that the work was being well done at present by. an expert under the Director of Education. Concerning suggested extensions, the Minister stressed the point that all responsibility should not be removed from the parents. Debate on the question arose out ot the presentation of the annual report on child welfare, the first speaker, Mr. H. 'G. R. Mason (Eden) suggesting that the work should be made a special department, subject to the authority of tlie Minister of EducationThe Leader of the Opposition (Mr. 11. E. Holland) said the Child Welfare branch was doing a wonderful work, but lie wondered if it were possible to extend its scope to include young people who were just beyond the age limit at present being handled by it. There were manv children who were not fit for punishment, but who were certainly subnormal or abnormal, npd who could be properlv dealt with in a special institution controlled by specialists in psychology. They could not pay too high a tribute to the work at present being done bv the Child Welfare Department, but it would be well worth while to extend its scope. Mr W. J. Jordan (Manukau) supported the proposal that , a special department should be established. Minister’s Reply. Replying, the Minister of Education (Hon R A. Wright) said he could not agree that the Child Welfare branch would be better administered as a separate department. The work was being quite well done now by an expert under the Director of Education. Lhe whole question was one of the amount of mouev the country could afford to expend. 'The Child Welfare Department was doing a very great deal of work that did not appear on the surface. It had been said that they were not doing enough, but the line had to be drawn somewhere. They must not take nil responsibility away from parents. It was right to do it where children were sub-normal or where the parents had lost control. He did not think New Zealand children were so bad after all. Eight per cent of the staff ill the Department were women. As it was recognised that in dealing with the cases that came under the Child \\ elfare branch, women could do very effective work. He agreed with the Leader of the Opposition that some children were too old to be taken in hand by the Child Welfare branch, and yet were subnormal. That problem would have to be faced, as such cases were not lit for a prison or Borstal Institute. The report was tabled. THE APPRENTICE PROBLEM QUOTA IN DISTRICTS Moving the second reading of the Apprentices Amendment Bill, m the House last night, the Minister of Labour (Hon. G. J. Anderson) said the object of the Bill was to remove the necessity for fixing the number of apprentices for a whole industrial district. The actual quota of apprentices would not be altered. Tne amendment was designed to meet, such a case where under existing conditions the whole of the apprentices allowed were quartered in a city and none were available for country employers. It would allow employers who had the facilities to take apprentices. . The question of the admission ot apprentices to trades was raised by Mr A. Harris (Waitemata), who considered the time had arrived when consideration should be given the question of opening the door wider. In the opinion of Mr. W. A. Aedcli (Wanganui) if the position were not improved tradesmen would come out from the Old Country, and the young men of New Zealand, who were not enabled to learn . trades, would be driven into an already overcrowded market for unskilled workers. ■ The Bill was read the second time, and referred to the Labour Bills Committee.