HC Deb 11 April 1892 vol 3 cc1093-4
MR. SUMMERS (Huddersfield)

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, with reference to the correspondence which has taken place between the Education Department and the School Board for London on the subject of an application of the School Board for authority to provide additional accommodation for 420 children in connection with the Burghley Road School—namely, a letter from the School Board dated 30th October, 1891, and a letter from the Education Department dated 25th February, 1892, whether the Department have receded from the position taken up in their letter to Mr. Ambrose Goddard, published in the School Board Chronicle of 20th July, 1889, and in their letter to the managers of the National School, Luton, dated 17th June, 1889, to the following effect:— My Lords consider that for the purpose of determining whether the application of a School Board under Section 10 of the Act of 1873 should be granted, the existing accommodation for older children should not be taken at eight square feet per child, which is the minimum allowance under the Code for the purposes of annual grants, but should be calculated at ten square feet"?

* SIR W. HART DYKE

It is obvious that the application in any particular instance of the principle to which the hon. Member refers must largely depend upon local circumstances; and looking to the grave responsibility attaching to any new departure in calculating a deficiency over so large and populous an area as that of London, I am of opinion that the Department should proceed with the greatest deliberation and upon the fullest information which the Board can supply.

MR. SUMMERS

Then in this instance the Department do not adhere to the position taken up in 1889?

* SIR W. HART DYKE

We have not receded from that position as to the general application of the principle, but there may be exceptional cases. I can assure the hon. Member the matter is not definitely closed. The Permanent Secretary, unfortunately, who has been dealing with the matter, is absent from illness, and I have not been able to consult him.

MR. SUMMERS

I will put a further question on the subject.