EDUCATION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXX, Issue 14978, 26 April 1909, Page 5

EDUCATION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —As the annual meetings of the householders of the dominion take place to-day, I would like te bring under their notice a few hurried notes. Recently your reporter interviewed the Hon the Premier on the question of an additional member to the Cabinet. The Premier combated the opposition to such an appointment by speaking to the effect that the business in the department of each Cabinet Minister had greatly increased ; in other words, the business of the whole Government had increased, and contended that any large firm in the dominion would, under, similar circumstances, do the same thing—increase . their servants. Mr Fowlda seems, in my opinion, to be hinting at retrenchment in the Education 'Department. The Premier’s statement answers him, if he should have any such intention. I grantthat there has been a lot of money expended on technical instruction, hut that is owing to the backward position of technical instruction in the past years. , . . When the late Mr Seddon took over the portfolio of Minister of Education, he said he found some Education Boards were mismanaged and some were extravagant. A couple of sessions ago, I think, Mr Fowlds said to a deputation in Wellington on the question of installing single desks gradually into new schools, that he had nothing to do with the choice of desk, but to see that the money paid over to the Education Boards was properly expended. - , In January, 1908, at Auckland, the president (Mr Aiken) of the New Zealand Educational Institute, said, Committeemen are elected for one year, and the Board members hold office for three. There is a constant and large variation in the personnel of the committees, and the result is that no Board and no Board members can with anything like effectiveness, •be called to account for expenditure of public money, or for any other act-. Is this desirable. I say, No.” A recent visitor from America (the Rev Geo. A. Gates, D.D., LL.D.) said: “ . . . thought we were bound at an early date to get into trouble over our system of allowing nominated Education Boards to spend the money furnished by the State, without control from the central body, to see that the expenditure was wisely and economically directed. That cannot go on for long.” The “Southland Daily News. . of April 19 says: ‘ 1 Let him (the Minister of Education) keep his hands off the system which, whatever else goes short in this dominion, must, good time or bad time, bo fed with full measure and overflowing. Education is the. one thing of the Government service indispensable. To stint that would be to go m the direction, of national suicide. The above paper is a strong supporter of the Premier and his Government. Now let me give you the expenditure of the thirteen Education Boards (not eighteen) for the past eight financial yeans:— £ s. d.

I am, etc.. LUMSDEN. Christchurch, April 25.

Expenses of Education Boards for year— Office expenses—staff, _ members’ travelling, printing, etc. . . .1900 14.532 4 0 1901 15,127 5 1 1900. 14,215 6 6 Staff salaries, clerical assistance and office contingencies (including inspection and examination expenses) 1903 30,493 7 11 1904 31980 15 2 , 1905 32.675 0 0 1906 35,148 10 Sr 1907 37,831 18 1 £312,004 7 8