EDUCATION AMENDMENT BILL.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLI, Issue 9332, 5 October 1910, Page 8

EDUCATION AMENDMENT BILL.

■ The. report on the Education Amendment Bill was considered last night in the House after the Defence. Bill was passed. Mr Masscy expressed the hope that the Bill would yet be in order to do away with the objectionable provision in regard to the matter of continuation classes. Mr Arnold (Dunedin Central) also took exception to the continuation classes, which would inflict a very great hardship on the working classes. If the children were compelled to attend, even then they could not be forced to learn. It was absurd to say that a child should attend school for ten half-days in every week. Mr Hanan (Invercargill) eaid he supported the proposal to make it compulsory on all children to attend school to the age of fourteen years. The 6chool age was gradually increasing. Mr Pearco (Patea) moved.: "That this Bill be read a third time this day six _ Jl. _ »> TT_ 1 3 4-1* *

months." He condemned the clause compelling children to remain at school. till the age of fourteen. He pointed out that a child might pass the sixth standard at twelve, and would have then to kill time for, two years u/ider a teacher who possibly was incapable, of teaching it anything further. More than that, the child was compelled to .attend every day, and so was debarred from learning farming operations which it waa necessary it should learn. Mr Wright (Wellington South) condemned the clause providing for compulsory attendance till the age of fourteen, arid also the compulsory daily attendance clause. This made for white slavery, because there were many mothers with large families who would be overburdened with work unless they could keep their elder children at home to assist them occasionally. Mr Allen (Bruce) suggested to Mr Pearce to withdraw his motion, and _to .move instead that the clauses to which he objected be recommitted. Mr Pearco agreed to this, but the Prime Minister objected. - The Hon. D. Buddo said he did not think there would be any difficulty in regard to the matter of attendance on five days per week, nor did he think it was too much that live hours per week should be devoted to technical education. 'These hours would not come out of working time. Mr T. M. Wilford (Hutt), while objecting to the compulsory clauses, said • he could not support an amendment the effect, of which would be to kill the Bill altogether. The clauses were objected to by Messrs Wittv and Forbes, but after some further " discussion Mr Pearce asked leave to withdraw his amendment. This was not agreed to, and shortly afterwards the amendment was rejected on the voices, after a division had been ca-Hed for. . The Bill was read a third time and passed.