ON SPEAKER'S VOTI

Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 97, 21 October 1932, Page 7

ON SPEAKER'S VOTI

X BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

&ILL READ SECOND TIME

{DEBATE IX COUNCIL

f On the vote of the Speaker,, (Sir (Palter Carncross) tlie secdiid reading of the Religious Instruction in Schools Enabling Bill was carried In the Legislative Council yesterday jfefternoon. The division resulted in 0.0 votes for and 10 against, and jfchere was a flutter of excitement ijamong the members and in the galperies as Mr. Speaker rose to give iiis ruling. He based his decision |on the established House of Comgnons practice which holds ,that a should, in giving his vote, ! further discussion on any jjneasure being considered. , Continuing the second reading de-, jfcate, the Hon. W. AY. Suodgrass said : |that he supported the Bill most strongly. It was most extraordinary that =there should be opposition to the introduction of the Bible into the schools jfrom an educational point "of view. It 'jvas the greatest book in the world, tend, the foundation of. all" knowledge. jFhere was no ground for saying that tthere would be insincerity in the teaching of the Bible, any more than there jivas insincerity in the teaching of geo- ' jgraphy. Since the introduction of the Rational education system many splcnjaid features had been added, and it ,"was time the crowning feature —no-. Jigious instruction—was added. A great deal had. been said about the -^Nelson system by the opponents of ' !thc Bill, but they did not seem to (appreciate the difficulties in connection jwith the system. In Nelson there were I fforty standards requiring to be taught, ; and there were only eight ministers .Ito do tho work. .With the aid. of assistants they were able to provide jeach standard with half an hour's religious instruction. . Although good jwoi-k. was being done it was impossible to extend the system to the outlying districts, and the time had,, arrived [when it should be made possible to JBccomplisn all that was desired. Why Should they deny the advantages which Jwould be obtained under the Bill to fche children in the country districts? i VIEWS OF THE MINISTER. ' The Minister of Education (the Hon. 18. Masters) sr.id that he was just £s sincere as anyone in his desire to feee that the boys and girls of the (Dominion; received religious instruction, but it was a question as to the frnethod that should be adopted. It regrettable to hear criticism about [the decline of the morality of the people of New Zealand. When (the Prime Minister returned from Engjand he had said that he was very jproud of the regard in which New pea)anders,were held in the Old Country. They had a name abroad for integrity, uprightness of character and {well-being, and attempts to belittle (the people of the Dominion were to [be deprecated. It had. been stated jthat the high schools, in which religious instruction was allowed, had projduced a type of citizen of which the [Country could be proud, but he was equally proud of the primary school jproduct. The child attended the primary school for seven, years, and the 'average stay at the secondary school frvas two years. Why should not thejtredit be given to both branches of Education? ' Reference had been made to the difficulties that might occur in country districts where the teacher might not ftvish to give religious instruction, and it had been suggested that tho difficulty could be overcome by administration. However, under the New Zealand system of appointment the teacher ,with the" highest grading marks was lentitled to any position, and neither ithe Minister nor the education boards pould interfere. ' iSOVIET,PROPAGANDA. .' An: assemblage in a large secondary fechool receiving religious instruction lander a religiously-minded headmaster jwas an inspiring spectacle, bnt if the frnaster were not a religious man the peremony would be mere formalism. The '[formal ceremony would be of no benejfet whatever. In Wellington there •jwas a paper called the "Soviet News," .Which was edited, managed, and dis■'tributed by a primary school teacher in the city. This teacher had the same right to stand up and give religious {instruction as any other teacher. Could -they allow a teacher who distributijed such literature to take charge of {&■ religious instruction class1? A member: Can't anything be done? Mr. Masters: We are helpless. I, as (Minister of Education, have no jurisidictiori' to do anything. The^ teacher • may edit this paper as long as he Sikes,: so long as such a position does not interfere with his work. A member: What about the Education JJoard? Mr. Masters: The board has no power. The Hon. J. A. Hanan: That was defcided in the Miss Park case. Sir James Parr will know; he was Minister of Education at the time. Mr. Masters said that he was anxious to see religious instruction given in the schools, but he was also impressed with .ithe possibilities under the Bill. There were definite indications that the instruction proposed would develop into piere formalism. It-had been said that the churches *rere unanimous, but he had a letter jfrom an Anglican bishop who said that he and a large number of the clergymen were opposed to it. It could not be emphasised too Strongly that it was laid down in the fcchool syllabus of instruction that i"the whole of school life should centre in character-training." It was stated in the syllabus that "charactertraining should not be regarded by the teachers as a subject, even though a Suggestive prescription is offered in the 'syllabus, but rather as the principal function the State calls upon the Jeacher to nerform." VIEWS OF PARTIES. The three political parties had planks 5n their platforms advocating a system of free, secular, and compulsory education, and surely it could be taken for granted that they were all alive to the welfare of the children. If the advocates of thell Bible in Schools showed the same amount of energy and initiative in furthering the Nelson system as in sponsoring the present Bill they "would achieve their objective. The Nelson system was spreading rapidly. In 1921 there were 10,000 children re- , jceiving instruction under it, in 1925 the number had increased to 25,000, and this year there had been a jump to 60,000. This figure was the absolute jninirmrm, as it had been impossible to find out if all the schools had taken advantage of it. He did not infer that the whole of the responsibility was on the clergy, who were hard-working, but with help they could accomplish tremendous things. In one town of 20,000 people where there were 2000 children there was not a single instance in which advantage was taken of the Nelson system. In Victoria, which had adopted the Nelson system, great progress had been made, and proposals were now afoot to give instruction to the remote schools by correspondence. AH the churches were co-operating in the work. In Setv Zealand it ought to

bo possible for thousands of children, who were not receiving instruction today, to be given religious training. The Recess Committee of the House of Eeprescntatives which had investigated the Biblc-in-Sohools question had reported against it. 1 "I am genuinely concerned about the question of the exemption of teachers," said Mr. Masters. ""Wo have 2600 schools in New Zealand, and 80 per cent, are one or two-teacher schools. The number of one-teacher schools was about 1600, and the appointment of teachers under tlie Bill would raise difficult problems, especially in the country districts where problems already existed. There was a distinct danger of the teachers being penalised because of their attitude on religion. A referendum of the thirty-one branches of the New Zealand Educational Institute, taken last year, had shown that twenty-two were definitely opposed to the Bill and three were indecisive. This showed that the measure did not have the goodwill of the big majority of the teachers, and this was an important factor. CRIME STATISTICS. In the matter of crime the statistics showed that New Zealand compared favourably with any other country in the world. Crime increases in the States of Australia where tho Bible . was taught, in the schools were heavier than in New Zealand. Ho did not say, however, that the question of Bible reading was a paramount factor to be considered. Iv New South Wales there had been an increase from 1925 to 1929 of 29.4 per cent., in New Zealand an increase- of 4.7 per cent., in South Australia a decrease of 2.6 per cent., and in West Australia an increase of 49.4 per cent. The main reason of the increase of crime in Now Zealand had been the growth in the number of motor-car cases. New Zealand had every reason to be proud of her commercial morality and the integrity of her citizens generally. SIR JAMES ALLEN REPLIES. In reply to the, debate, the Hon. Sir James Allen, who had introduced the Bill, said that the principal desire of the promoters of tho measure was to give the children a knowledge of God and to foster a Christian spirit, which was very necessary in the.world to-day. The Sermon on the Mount said "Blesesd are the peacemakers, for they shali be called tho children of God." A knowledge of this statement was required to-day throughout the world, and should not be denied to the children. A great deal had been said about the difficulty of dogma, but he was not concerned about dogma as it did not affect the question materially. He had not mentioned tho morality of the children and made no accusations. On the contrary; he regarded it as wonderful in view of the considerable disadvantages the children were labouring under because of the absence, of religious instruction. However, there were growing tendencies which were giving concern. There had been instances in the Otago University where disciplinary measures had had to be taken because of the unsatisfactory happenings which had taken place. There was no doubt that serious indiscretions ' were being committed. In 1921 the number of prisoners in the gaols in New Zealand'was 2120, ana in 1931 there were 3203. That was a matter for concern. . A member: A large number of immigrants arrived in the country during that time. Sir James Allen: Yes, and a lot arrived before that. Ho said that during the same period the number of New' Zealand-born prisoners had grown from 917 to 1939. Sir' Francis 801 l had stated th: t the passage of the Bill would leave the door open for the Catholics to claim State grants for their schools. Would Sir Francis Bell vote for grants to Catholic schools at the present time? If he would not, why would he become inconsistent on the passage of the Bill? At the conferences which had taken place with the Hierarchy it was stated that as far as the religious organisations were concerned there was no definite opinion, but that the matter was one for each organisation to decide for itself. It was stated that the passage of'the legislation would not be regarded as an additional right for State-aid to Catholic schools. * The Council then divided, and the vote resulted: For the Bill, 10; against, 10. ■■■■■';■/■..■..,. A RULING OF 1796. Mr. Speaker said that he would follow the mling laid down by a Speaker of the House of Commons in England named Addinjrton, who had been confronted with a similar position on 12th May, 1796. He had decided that when it was a question of whether a measure should proceed in order to enable it to be further discussed he would always vote in favour of further discussion. This practice had been followed ever since. ".If it had been the final division," said Mr. Speaker, "I would have in all probability voted against the Bill." The division list is as follows:— For the Bill: Allen . Moore Buddo Parr Collins Rhodes Hall-Jones . Smith Isitt Snodgrass Against the Bill: Bell ; Masters. Carrington Scott Fagan Stevenson Han an Trevithick . McCallum 'Witty Pairs:—For:" Mitehelson, Sidey. Against: Mclntyre, McGregor. The Committee stage of the Bill will commence to-day.