SCHOOL AGE IN BRITAIN

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 41, 18 February 1931, Page 11

SCHOOL AGE IN BRITAIN

BILL BEFORE LORDS

INTERESTING DEBATE

(Received 18th February, 2 p.m.) LONDON, 17th February. In the House of Lords, Lord Ponsonby, moving the second reading of the School Age Bill, described it as a small step forward on the educational ladder, an attempt to break down the barrier which for many generations had been purposely preesrved in order to keep the workers in subjection through ignorance. Cries: "No," "Withdraw." The speaker said he did not believe the Opposition really opposed the principle of raising the school age. "Tliej expansion of education produced the Labour Party. That is why you hesitate to carry it further." Lord Hailsham, moving the rejection, said that the only motive was stated in Mr. Snowden 's House of Commons declaration, namely, that, however desirable the reforms might be, the country could not at present afford them. j The Aithb in hop of York regretted' [that Lord Hailsham had taken si load "from thb rising hope of stew, unbending Tories, who at. present was Chancellor of the Exchequer." The main principle of the Bill was the raising ot' the school age. If they rejected tho Bill, it would be inferred that the House of Lords opposed that principle. "By the age of fourteen people had begun to read, but the cultivation of taste had not begun. If it is true that the greatest social and political peril is the cheap newspaper, the root of it is the limited education of the people. If they had education they could not, and if they had more they would not, read them. As it was, we condemn them to be the victims of such an influence." Tho Bishop of London, supporting the Bill, claimed that tho Anglican Church had been the pioneers of education in England for centuries. At prosent they were, paying £10,000 a week for this. The people must be educated. The debate was adjourned.