PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

New Zealand Times, Volume LI, Issue 11933, 13 September 1924, Page 6

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

THE YEAR'S ESTIMATES HOUSE RESUMES THEIR CONSIDERATION THE EDUCATION VOTE - The House was in its dullest moo 3 yesterday. Only a* small T>drtion of the afternoon had gone by when the consideration of the Estimates was. resumed. - The.-fi.rst vote taken was that for education, and on this subject members talked for many hours. « On a division regarding equal pay for men and women, a* motion •by-Mr-Holland (favouring equality in pay) was defeated by a very narrow margin.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL YESTERDAY'S SITTING VARIOUS BILLS DEALT WITH. The Legislative Council sat at 2.30 p.m. yesterday. The. Chattels Transfer Bill was put through the remaining stages and passed. „ Plymouth Borough and New Plymouth Harbour "*Boar 3‘' Exchange Bill, the Auckland City and Auckland Museum Empowering Bill and the Wanganui-Rangitikei Electric Power Board. Enabling Bill were read a second time. - Speaking to the New Plymouth Borough Council Empowering Bill, the Hon. R. Moore”eaid he disliked the trading clause (referring to the establishment of a boiling-down works). The Hon.-ETW. Alison said that the position in this case was that the borough counctf'-hAd established abattoirs, and now werwasking to be allowed to establish boiMngatewn—works to utilise the by-produßlffT ""TWsr* hw —did—not think, coold be objected to. The second Twadnig-of-the bilh-'was agreed to; — v • At 3.10’ p.m. the Council rose till < 2.30 p.m. bn Wednesday next. THE ESTIMATES CONSIDERATION RESUMED EDUCATIONAL MATTERS DISCUSSED. The House of- .Representatives met it 2.30 p.m. yesterday. The Thomas - Gawthron Trust Bill, passed by the Legislative Council, wan brought down and read a first time. At 2.45 “p.KK, other preliminary business (reported eb-o»hero>- hawing been completed, the House went into Committee-soL Supply on the Estimates. education vote EXCHANGE OF TEACHERS,.. On the.education vet© the Hon. C. J. Parr (the-Minister in charge, commented ©a. the great value of the system of exchanging New Zealand teach-, ora with British, Canadian, and ether teachers. —■ There were mutual advantages, he t&id 1 . Mr T. M. Wilford (Leader of the Oppoeition)i It gives them a different perspective.- - The Minister agreed, and remarked that it would be a good thing for the people in New Zealand to get out of this country’ - eVCry six years W see what was going lon in the world, because we were cut off from it down here. Mr G. R. Sykea (Masterton): Including members of Parliament. (La tighter.) The Minister: Yes. EDUCATIONAL OORRESEONDENOE. Mr Wilford said that when he was visiting ihe Federated Malay States some time ago he found in one of the schools a number of youths attending it first to learn English. "TEle'suggested to the headmaster thafThe'shonld get some of them to write letters in English about their country, "antT' he would get New Zealand boys tcTYeply to them. Twenty-two such letters were written, and ho had shown them, to headmasters in his district and they were getting their hoys to answer them. Ae to one of tho letters by a Malay hoy, each headmaster said he did not think there was a boy in his school coold beat it. He thought that such an exchange of letters would have a very good educational effect. He thought, too, that if copies of the “School Journal” could be sent to some of these schools it would have a tremendously interesting effect. Up to a few years ago, ne remarked French was the universal language of the world; hut now with the British Empire and the United States spreading everywhere, English was the universal language. To-day English was a compulsory subject in every Japanese school and in every Chinese university. Mr P. A. do la Perrelle (Awarua) asked if any steps had been taken hy the department towards the encouragement oti'wwinHamg;--*' Tho Minister agreed with Mr Wilford that it was a good thing to encourage New Zealand school children to correspond with children in other countries, and quoted the case of a Wellington school the pupils in which had Coen in communication with Victorian school children for the last ten years, the codespondence being kept up by successive pupils in the highest class. CORRESPONDENCE CLASSES. Mr E. A. Ransom (Pahiatua) inquired as to the work being done by the correspondence classes. He expressed the hope that they were not, intended to take the place of backhlocks schools, as the mothers in the backhlocks, after doing their day’s work, had not strength to teach their children hy the aid of correspondence classes. He re-ferred-to the question of teachers’ residences,' ■ many of which were unoccupied ; and urged that children who rode to school on horseback or on bicycles should"!*© paid'a subsidy; ' The'"Mißlstfer''stated that’ to begin with there were only twenty children in the correspondence classes, but, now there were 500 of them being taught in that way. These classes were not intended to take the place of hackblock schools, hut were essentially for isolated families—like those of lighthouse-keepera- : -cut off from civilisation. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon): What sort of results are you gettimtf

The Minister: We are getting most excellent results. The children in many cases are making even better progress than in the ordinary schools; and. in some cases, children who have been taught three years in the correspondence classes are now attending high schools. He added ,that there were 180 teachers’ residences unoccupied. Only recently a fine new residence had been built for a married teacher in a certain district, and' shortly afterwards he resigned and was succeeded hy a single woman teacher. That was typical of the difficulties the department had to, meet in that connection. There were 15,000 to 16,000 children riding to sohool, and to subsidise them all would he a very expensive thing. Mr Ransom: Do they all ride more than three miles to school 't The Minister could not say. Mr F. F. Hockly (Rotorua) mentioned the case of a family of five children, each of which had to have a horse to ride to school, and the cost of those five horses in the winter months could not be leas than 30s—a heavy tax on parents. TOO MUCH FRILLING. Mr R. Masters (Stratford), speaking to the question of efficiency, said be ■was inclined to think the syllabus was ciowdted with too much frilling, and that a great deal of the time was given , .tn, almost unnecessary subjects t hile those which should have more ntfentaon. were being more or less hammered- . The Minister tor 'Education: What subjects do you refer to. Mr Masters; taking the grade 4 schools:* said -56 minutes a week were given to reading, and 75 minutes to drill, 50 minutes to spelling and 56 minutes to handwork. The grounding was not what he thought it ought to be. Some of the time could he taken off handwork and put on to spelling. Employers were complaining that the young people taking employment to--day were weak in spelling, reading and composition were. weak, strong in arthmetic and disgraceful in writing. Mr H. T. Armstrong (Christchurch East) thought more attention could be paid, to technical,, education. There were hundreds of farmers desirous of taking ' advantage of our system of technical education, bnt it was not made possible for them to do so. EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK. Mr H. E. Holland (Leader of the Labour. Party) maintained that male and female teachers ehould get equal pay for equal work. If a young woman entered the Minister’s own profession (the law), suggested Mr Holland, great objection would he raised, if she charged a fee of, say, 5s only, instead of the prescribed 6s Bd. (Laughter.) He moved to reduce the vote by £1 ns an indication that men and women teachers should get equal pay for equal work. The Minister said that he told the women teachers that they must make any such claim as that through the New Zealand Educational Institute, the recognised teachers’ trade union, and then he would be prepared to discuss it. The n®w salaries scale did not bring about differentiation in pay between men and .women teachers, for such differentiation had always existed. He knew of no salary scheme in the world in which men and women were paid equally. ’JJJiis issue had been considered by Lord Burnham’s Royal Commission at Home two or three years ago, and that Commission came to the .conclusion that equal pay for equal work was impracticable; and they differentiated to the extent of 20 to 25 per cent, in favour of the men. Some single women teachers in the Dominion were getting as much as £9 per week; while headmasters got £SOO to £6OO a year, and first assistants £450. ~_MF G. Witty " (Riccarton): They snbuld"get the same pay as the men if they do the .work. The Minister said that it would cost £350.000 to £450,000 a year to lift the women up to the men’s salaries; but if the department brought the men down to the women’s pay, what about men and their families? Mr Holland: I never suggested bringing the men down. The Minister maintained that it could not be claimed that the women teachers in New Zealand were treated unjustly. They were very liberally paid. Messrs Sullivan, M. J. Savage (Auckland West), and R. McKeen (Wellington South) supported the amendment. Mr McKeen contending that the differentiation under the new scale had saved the departemnt £17,000 a year. The Minister said that it had been proved that that was not correct. Mr MoKeen: That is the calculation of the Teachers’ Institute. The Minister said that it was not Correct, and they had admitted it. Mr McKeen urged that there should be no cheese-paiing in regard to education. If there were, the results were likely to be very serious. The Hon. J. A. Hanan (Invercargill) said it was impossible to resist the principle of equal pay for equal work. He believed that if this were adopted one effect would be that women who were holding certain positions to-day would not all retain them; there would be readjustment. Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton) said he stood unequivocally for equal pay for equal work, and he thought that was the attitude of the country. THE ARGUMENT CONTINUES. Mr J. W. Jordan (Manukati) stressed the need for a special school for blind children, to give them all tho possible advantages of education. Air P. Fraser (Wellington Central) did not think the abilities of the teachers could be divided according to the lines of sex. Air It. A. Wright (Wellington Suburbs) argued that where a position was worth a certain amount of money those who “carried out the job” were entitled to the money that went with tho job. (Hear, hear.) The Alin is ter fcaid that married men

Would leave the teaching profession if conditions desired by the Leader of the Labour Party were given effect to. Married men had responsibilities that single women had not. Mr L. M. Isitt (Christchurch North) said the proposition that was put before the House was not one that would hear practical analysis. Mr s. G. Smith (Taranaki) supported the claim of equal pay for equal work. Mr G. McKay (Hawke’s Bay) said that ho could not but recognise the soundness of the principle, that an equal amount should be paid for equal service rendered, and therefore must support the amendment. NO INORDINATE SCARCITY OP MEN. Mr P. Eraser (Wellington Central) said that if there was an inordinate scarcity of men teachers, there might bo a plausible —not a sound—argument put up for the differention in pay between men and women teachers; but the proportion of men to women teachers was increasing, as the statistics of the department clearly showed. Mr Sullivan agreed that if the principle of differentiation in salary between men and women teachers because of the family responsibilities of men teachers was correct, then it should be applied also as between the men with families and the single men. Moreover, the men with large families should be paid more than the men with small families. Mr Savage said that the Minister had to explain why, in his own argument. the single woman teacher ; was not paid the same wage as the bachelor man teacher. Mr Parr: He has to save up to get married. Mr Savage held that the woman teacher also had a right to be able to save, so that either she might not have to enter the married state penniless or might be able to maintain her independence. > THE DIVISION. Mr Holland’s amendment was defeated by 29 votes to 27. The division-list was as follows:—. For amendment (27): Bartram Masters Pprrelle Monteith Edie Munro Fraser Murdoch Hanan O’Brien Holland Parry Jordan Ransom Langstons Savage Lee Sidey McCombs Smith Mcllvrido Sullivan McKay Thomson McKean Wilford Maopherson Against the amendment (29): Anderson Linklater Bell McLeod Bollard Macmillan Coates Massey Dickson Naas Diokaon NoswoTthy Field ' Parr Girling Pomaro Guthrie Rhodes Hawkcn Rhodes Henan* J, C, Rolleston Hocklv Stewart Hudson Sykes Hunter 'Williams Isitt » PAIRS. : For amendment > Horn Veitch Howard Armstrong Bye Forbes Wright Ngata Corrigan Against; Trike kysttar Burnett F - Rolleston Potter Bitchener Harris Dm Glenn ANOTHER AMENDMENT. Mr R. McKeen (Wellington South) moved that the total vote should he reduced by £9 as an indication that the staffing of schools should he 'based on the average roll instead of on average attendance. The Minister said that to carry put the suggestion would cost £150,000 to £200,000 a year. Mr McKeen urged that it would he better to spend the money that way and to economise on school building. CHARLATANISM? Mr Fraser nsked what had been the results of the intelligence tests. He noticed that they had been tried very tentatively wherever they had been adopted—not only ■ here, but in America, on the Continent, and in the Old Country. He was almost inclined to ask: Could anything good educationally come out of America? But he was bound to admit that the consolidated school was a very good idea. Still, there was no little charlatanism ’in America in regard to educational matters as well as other things; and he could not help thinking there was a great deal of it in the so-called intelligence tests. If such tests were going to he used to determine the vocations of children, then the children were going to he subjected- to one of the greatest possible frauds and injustices. It would be one of the most dangerous things that could be allowed to creep into our educational system. On a division the amendment was rejected by 33 votes to 20. . REPLIES TO QUESTIONS. Replying to questions by Mr MoKeen, Mr de la Perrelle, and others, the Minister said that a grant of £3OOO had been made to increase the subsidies to the school committees of the larger schools. This would mean £3O, £4O, or £SO to each of these committees, and that would be a welcome addition to their funds this year. The department had replaced this year the subsidy for swimming baths in school grounds, which were now subsidised up to £2OO. The question of replacing the “cuts” in the case of the secondary school teachers could not be undertaken, he was afraid, until such time as an all-round increase of civil servants’ salaries could be considered. Mr McKeen: You are increasing the salaries of the lower-paid secondary school teachers P The Minister: We are considering that. We think that we can save in another direction. He added that the department was only experimenting with the intelligence tests. It had been found, however, that the children who came out best m the tests also cams out best in the examinations; and that was an interesting fact. As a democrat, Mr Fraser should not object to the department experimenting in that' way. Mr Holland held trial teachers were entitled to the allowance that the hon. member was asking for. The Minister would 1 be well advised to concede it. The Minister said that the Education Committee would be meeting in the next few days, and he would put the matter before it. Tlie amendment was lost on the voices. On the stroke of midnight the total vote was carried nem. con. STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATES SALARIES AND SUPERANNUATION. The Crown Law Office vote (£5283) was passed without discussion. On the Department of Justice vote

(£46,065), the Leader of the Opposition (Mr T. M. Wilford) voiced the claim of stipendiary magistrates to higher salaries and superannuation allowances. The Hon. C. J. Parr (Minister for Justice) said that when the hon. gentleman brought up the matter last session he had promised to go into it. He had done so, and ho hoped to introduce, perhaps next week, a bill that would make a decided improvement in the present state of affairs, particularly as regards superannuation. The vote was carried. The Supreme and Magistrates’ Count vote (£96,680) was carried without discussion; as also was the Prisons Department vote (£84,971). , VESSELS LEAVING PORT ■WHO SHALX, DECIDE? On the Marino Department vote (£121.6441. tlie Minister (the Hon. G. J. Anderson), replying to Mr Fraser, said that there was nothing in the Shipping and Seamen Act to enable regulations to be issued empowering anybody except the captain to decide whether a vessel should leave port or not. Tho matter, however, was being gone into in connection with the question of wireless equipment for small vessels.