MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS (Notts, Mansfield)I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he is aware that a majority of the School Board of Flit-wick, Bedfordshire, two days before the nominations for a new Board, signed a contract for rebuilding the existing school, contrary to the wishes of three-fourths of the ratepayers, who had memorialised the Board in favour of building an infant school at a central spot; and that the School Board election resulted in the return of a majority which stopped the building operations, and prepared new plans, which plans were approved by the architect of the Department; will he explain why the Department, although it has admitted the superiority of the site chosen by the new Board, has nevertheless stated that it cannot sanction the new scheme; and that, unless the original plan be carried out before the 29th of December, the Department will appoint a new Board; and whether it is within the legal powers of the Department to sanction the new and superior scheme; if so, whether there is a sufficient reason why the wishes of the great majority of the ratepayers should not be complied with?
§ MR. ACLANDIn September, 1892, the School Board for Flitwick submitted plans for providing improved school accommodation by enlarging the existing Board school (which is an old National school taken over by the Board). These plans were finally approved, after full consideration by the Department, on the 1st December, and the contract was signed and considerable progress had been made with the works before the new Board came into office at the end of April last. A minority of the old Board were in favour of building a separate infant school in another situation, and after the election they became 471 a majority. The new Board stopped the building as soon as they came into office, and sent up plans of their alternative scheme, which were passed by the architect of the Department, but the Board were distinctly informed that this did not imply any approval of their scheme. The Department has never admitted the superiority of the new site. The new Board, however, persisted in refusing to continue the works begun at the old school, and cancelled the contract with the builder, who has been awarded a sum of between £600 and £700 as compensation. Meanwhile, the school has been made very cold, draughty, and badly lighted, and the sanitary defects of the building have been very imperfectly remedied. The attendance has fallen more than 25 per cent. between the first and third quarters of the year, and the health of the teachers and children has suffered. In view of this state of things, the Department have been obliged to give formal notice to the Board that if they fail to carry out the plans by the 29th of this month, they will be declared in default, and a new Board appointed. It is no doubt within the legal powers of the Department to allow a Board to alter approved plans on sufficient reasons shown. But it is impossible to allow a Board to reverse the policy of its predecessor by pulling down a building already begun, and throwing a large additional burden on the ratepayers.