NORTH CANTERBURY EDUCATION BOARD.

Otago Witness, Issue 2437, 28 November 1900, Page 9

NORTH CANTERBURY EDUCATION BOARD.

At a meeting of- the North CanterburyEducation Board on the 14th, Mr Perryman moved, in accordance with notice — " That . having in view the wonderful liberality of the Government at the last session" of Parliament in raising /the honorarium of all members of both Houses of Parliament, thereby setting an example to all public bodies in New Zealand to be liberal in the administration of the law, the 5 per cent, reductions on teachers' and staff salaries, 5 per cent, reductions on incidentals to all district school committees, as well as on the travelling expenses of members of this board, recently made, and still in force, be henceforth discontinued." He said he had no intention of dwelling on the political aspect, but briefly show that what "was sauce for the goose was sauce for the gander. While they, as a board, owing to lack of funds, had been obliged as administrators of the law to reduce the salaries of teachers and to save money in every possible way, the Government had been spending it lavishly in all directions. He had had to sit on two reduction committees during the past 10 years, and did not .want to sit on another. The newspaper press had publicly stated that the Government had been making hay ■while sun shone. He would say the Government had feathered their own nests with feathers plucked from the lean pillows of undei-paid teachers. He asked if it was fair that teachers in full charge of country schools should only receive £60 per annum, while the Government had been adding thousands of pounds to their own salaries. It would not surprise him in the least if the whole of the teachers and civil servants of New Zealand demanded in a monster petition a rise in their salaries. Mr Hardy, M.H.R., in seconding the motion pro forma, said he did not think Mr Perryman could* be serious in putting it before the board. As long as he (the speaker) and Mr Buddo were members of the board and of the House of Representatives, they would do their best in the matter in the House. The .present Government, and former ones, had dealt liberally with education, and he knew that in future it would continue to be dealt liberally with. He felt sure that Mr Ferryman, who was the oldest member

of the boarU, would see his way to withdraw the' motion. Mr Rennie' said that Mr Perryman had evidently overlooked the fact that the Government had increased the capitation grant. Mr Scott said every member was anxious io raise the salaries of teachers if if were possible. It had been a very painful thing to do, but thearguments in favour of reduction were overwhelming, and nothing else could be done. The Government were not to blame for reduction, but natural causes in the district had brought it about. Mr Buddo said Mr Hardy and himself had done their best in the House to obtain an increase in the capitation grants. Whether the £40 vote to members of the House of Pvepresentati\es was right or not was not a question to be discussed at the 'board meeting. The chairman- (Mr T. S. Weston) said he was sorry that political or party matters had been introduced into the business of the board, and he could not help thinking party feeling had entered into the drafting of the resolution. Regarding the merits of the case,' he thought the Government intended to consider lower grade teachers in the distribution of the vote. The board had no means of increasing salaries. Mr Perryman was '"scarcely fair iri imputing the reduction, to the Government. There' was not on the board's list a teacher in charge of a country school getting only £60 per- year, but one lately had been "set down at that figure at an aided school, but that .question was not settled yet. He thought Mr Perryman should withdraw his motion. Leave having 'been given, the motion was withdrawn.