THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1950. THE RETURN OF FRANCO

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27572, 14 December 1950, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1950. THE RETURN OF FRANCO

It is possible that in the near future France and Great Britain may re-establish diplomatic relationships with Spain, thus ending the period of four years during which that country was sent to Coventry with the moral disapprobation of the United Nations. The policy has been an unfortunate one. It has been stated that Franco is now more firmly established in power than he was in 1946, that he is quite unrepentant, and that the diplomatic ban had the effect of wounding Spanish pride and to that extent of bringing support to the dictator. It may seem strange, on first thoughts, that Franco should have been so indiscreet at a time when he must have been aware of possible changes as to do a little sabrerattling on the subject of Gibraltar. “ The Rock ” may be vulnerable to modern weapons from the Spanish mainland, but General Franco would be very ill-advised to use them, in any foreseeable circumstances. His remarks are therefore likely to be dismissed in official circles with that tolerance which it is known has to be extended to the speeches a dictator makes for -home consumption. Though France has a long-standing grievance against Spain, it has long been obvious that the weapons France’s Allies are prepared to bring to bear against Franco are ineffective. To renew diplomatic relationships would be a distasteful act since it is an admission of the futility of the past policy. Great Britain is in much the same position. In both countries there are influential political, forces which will oppose any retraction, and they will be able to bring forward as still valid the arguments which were found to be convincing four years ago. Franco’s Spain remains avowedly Fascist. The Christian Science Monitor, some time ago, went so far as to compare Franco unfavourably with Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin on the ground that he has made no gesture of social welfare to the people but has “ reaffirmed and strengthened -the crushing monopoly which a handful of Spanish aristocrats, clerics, high army officers and industrialists hold over 95 per cent, of the population.” It was ostensibly because it was felt that the United Nations could not co-operate with such a regime that the diplomatic ban was imposed in 1946, but actually the resolution was the outcome of a compromise between two rival blocs in the Assembly. It satisfied no. one, it did not disturb Franco, and it did cut the Spanish people off from the United Nations technical agencies in social, health, educational and in other fields where help is badly needed. Another anomaly was the exclusion of Spain—which is in a vital strategic position—from any plan of European defence. It was to a large degree this latter, fact which influenced the United States to change its attitude ,and support the small Powers’ resolution in the United Nations to lift the ban. Great Britain and France abstained from voting. Two months before this, the United States House of Representatives approved a Spanish loan of 62,500,000 dollars. It has been made clear that neither of these actions is to be interpreted as willingness to turn a blind eye to Franco’s misdoings. The renewal of diplomatic relationships will enable protests to be presented with full ■authority in Madrid and the building up of other contacts has more chance of effecting some amelioration in the lot of the people than could ■ be expected of a wholly negative policy.

BASIC EDUCATION

Despite the vehemence with which protagonists of the “ new education ” in New Zealand have defended their methods against criticisms from the world of commerce—in which the products of the system are expected to earn a living—there is ample evidence that many responsible educationists are becoming increasingly alarmed by the failure of the methods they teach to prepare children for later life. Some of this concern was expressed by the retiring principal of Columba College, Miss A. L. Loudon, in the report she presented at the prize giving ceremony on Tuesday night. In particular, she was critical of the lack of a proper foundation for language study, and in view of the fact that the arts degree course will soon include the compulsory study of one foreign language her comment on the situation as she sees it is worthy of repetition. Deploring the neglect of the necessary preliminaries to language study, especially the systematic treatment of the essentials of grammar, Miss Loudon said:

It is time that this deplorable state of affairs was subjected to some kind of remedy. There should be increased attention given to the study of formal English and arithmetic and less emphasis on a range of loosely defined subjects that make little demand on the child’s capacity for industry, concentration or memory .... It has been proved that much of the new education has been based on psychological presumptions that are far from sound .... Under its influence many children display indifference and incapacity for clear thinking, and acquire no real interest in sustained work.

The School Journal, one of the popular media for the dissemination of the new education philosophy, was trenchantly criticised by Miss Loudon, and her opinions in this respect appear to support the views of other teachers who have deplored the inclusion of trivial and unsuitable material in a publication that should exist for the purpose of encouraging children to appreciate literature.

There are, as Miss Loudon readily admits, good features in the system of education. But the good is being submerged in a mass of trivia, and children are being denied the teaching they need and the tuition in important subjects which is their due —and which they must have—if they are to cope successfully \vith the problems of real life. Dissatisfaction with present standards is not restricted to spokesmen for commercial interests; it has been expressed at all levels of the teaching profession and is echoed by parents whose concern at the inadequate preparn-

tion received by their children for the business of earning a living has been proved well founded. These remonstrances have not been made in any carping spirit, nor have they been inspired by a “ stick-in-the-mud ” opposition to change. They represent a very real apprehension for tj/e future of the children of our country, an apprehension that will net he allayed until a greater recognition of realities is given to the direction of our system of education.