EDUCATION DEADLOCK

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 151, 30 June 1928, Page 11

EDUCATION DEADLOCK

DEPARTMENT'S POWERS REPLY TO BOARD 'The Education Department has made a further statement as fallows in reply to tho Education. Board, regarding the deadlock between the two bodies over the appointment of a principal to the Wellington Training College:— 'fWhcn tho Minister of Education gave his decision that ho would not proceed with' the regulations intended to overcome, the deadlock regarding the appointment to tho Training College it might reasonably have been assumed that tho end of tho controversy was reached. The chairman of the board, Mr. T. Forsyth, M.P., however, could not forbear following up the Minister's pronouncement by a statement which tho Department regrets continues to misrepresent the position and calls for ■ a reply. . . "The Minister said quite fairly and truthfully that there is nothing in any statute giving boards control of training colleges^ and that Mr. Forsyth was entirely in. error in stating that tho board is charged by statute with tho administration of the college. Instead of admitting his error, Mr. Forsyth has returned to tho charge and tries again to justify his misrepresentation of the law on the matter by quoting a part of the Act that 'has reference- only to normal schools, and is quite besido the question. "Notwithstanding all that Mr. Forsyth has said to the contrary, the plain fact is that all the powers the board has with respect to the Training College are given by-regulation and not by statute. MR. FOKSYTITS STATEMENTS. "Further iucorrest statements by Mr. Forsyth are:—(l) That it was never contemplated that references to the Minister in connection with the. .appointment to the Training College should confer on him the right to overlook the selection of the Committee of Advice endorsed by the board, and (2) that the deadlock is the result of unjustified assumption of authority on the part of the Department. A reference to the regulations which have been in operation for many years will show that tho particular ejause reads as follows: —. 'After consultation with tho Committee of Advice the board shall make recommendations to the Minister regarding appointments to the staff of tho Training College, and on receipt of the Minister's approval thereto tho board, shall make appointments accordingly.' "This regulation makes no referenco to consultation with the Minister, as. Sir. Forsyth suggests, but to consultation with the Committee of Advice, and tile only- possible interpretation of the regulation is that the Minister shall, have the final decision before an appointment is made, that no appointment can be made till he approves, and that a duty is placed upon the Minister arid his advisers to see that competent persons are appointed to positions on the Training College staff. Yet Mr. Forsyth refers to1 the action of the Department and the Minister as 'u'njus- ! tified assumption of authority.' As a matter of fact, the Department has I never regarded its duty a;-'a matter of form, and it frequently refers back recommendations to boards for further consideration, and in a few. cases. has insisted on other selections to the un-. 'doubted'advantage of the institutions. '•"The position of principal of a train-., ing ' college who "will for soino years control tho training and influence the efficiency of the young teachers of tho schools of one-third of the Dominion is so. important that tht Minister, on whom'rests the final responsibility of appointment, must exercise the. greatest care and seek the fullest advice before approving. "In the case under review all the inspecting officers/ including two Directors of Education, were firmly of opinion that the board's recommendation was not a wise one, and what could be inbro reasonable under the circumstances than for the Minister to ask the board to readvertiso for applications in order that a wider selection might be secured? .....