EDUCATION BOARD DISTRICTS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXVI, 22 August 1933, Page 3

EDUCATION BOARD DISTRICTS

NELSON’S EFFORT TO EXPAND AREA CANTERBURY BOARD’S SUPPORT As previously reported only on the casting vote of the chairman (Air W. P. Spencer) the (.‘auterhury .Education Board reached the decision lo support the. effort that is being made by the Nelson Board to have the .Marlborough area included in its territory. The following report was submitted to the board (says the “Press”) :■ — “In response to a request that local members of ihe hoard should meet a delegation from Nelson for the purpose of discussing a proposal emanating from that board, that its district boundaries might with advantage be extended. the following members me", the Hon. W. Mclntyre (c’.riivman of the Nelson Board): —Messrs S. Baird, W. A. Banks, S. R. Kvison, J. .1. Hurley, ami W. R. Spencer. “Air Mclntyre stated that, as a result of shifting population and the raising of the school age, the attendance in the Nelson distiret had fallen jto about 0000, and as a consequence ! the question of its existence as a s* palate district became a very vital one. . 'i'lie Nelson Board suggested that the . Alarlborough district (at present administered by the Wellington Board!, and possibly the counties of Kaikoura, Cheviot, Amuri, and Grey (in the Canterbury district) might reasonably and economically be attached to Nelson.j “After an informal discussion, in which Mr Mclntyre agreed with members that the proposed inclusion of the Canterbury areas was not in the same category as the Alarlborough district, it was decided to recommend the hoard to support any movement having for its object the enlargement of tile Nelson district by the inclusion of Alailborough. The committee is not prepared to support any a!feral on of the Canterbury boundaries/’ LEGLSLAT.ION NEC K S 3 Alt Y “The North Island tries to grab everything, and they will try to grab Nelson, as well as Marlborough, which they have got already,” -said Mr W. A. Banks, nmving the adoption < ; £ the report. An act of Parliament would be necessary to alter Die boundary, and lie suggested that the hoard should write to members of Parliament supporting the inclusion of Marlborough in the Nelson district. They could not, of course, agree to give up the areas mentioned in the Canterbury district. Mr S. R. Kvison said that the extension of the Wellington district lo include Nelson as well as Marlborough would bring them a SLcp nearer centralisation. Air S. Smith thought that the board should do no more -hail express its opinion. “PRINCIPLE WRONG” Air IT. J. Bigncll moved as an amendment that tiie report should be received and that no action should be taken. Nelson was a small board and a dying board. It realised that it was in danger of extinction, and so it was trying to increase its territory. The report, he claimed, was full of misstatements. The principle was wrong < and the hoard should not support it. Air G. S. Thompson .seconded the amendment. “We do not want to help any move ( towards centralisation, blit I trink we i are interfering unwarrantably,” he ; said. “We ought to wait until we ( know the feeling of the .Marlborough t people, and if they v/int It, we can I then come in behind them *-vitu all our weight.” The voting was six ail, and the chair- < limn gave his casting v >tj for the \ ■ adoption of the report. 1 , | I “CANTERBURY’S GENEROSITY” ■! i Under the above heading, the Marlborough “Express” says:— “The Canterbury Education Board lias been \ery liberal with the Marl-1 borough territory. ‘Hands oil’,’ so far j as its own ground is concerned; but by; six voles to six, plus the chairman’s; extra weight, it resolved to support the ’Nelson Board’s movement to annex .Marlborough. It is a very regrettable piece of 'meddlesomeness, accentuated by the chairman’s disregard of the principle that where opinion is equally {divided a casting vote should go to the 1 status quo. The Nelson Board may be in real danger as to its identity —evidently its chairman made a strong point of the possibility of extinction, and, presumably, Canterbury does not favour the idea of an extension of North Island affiliations; lmt why should May]borough's interests he ignored? Tlie six Canterbury members seem to have given no thought whatever to the claims and wishes of the Alarlborough community. They did not stop to ask whether it might not he a ease of sacrificing the best interests of the school children of this province in order to serve the purposes of Nel-