MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.

HC Deb 11 May 1899 vol 71 cc353-62

CAPTAIN SINCLAIR (Forfar)

rose in his place, and asked leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, viz., "the new scheme for Secondary Education in Scotland as set forth in the Minute of 27th April, which provides for the distribution of £35,000, and will become operative on the 27th day of this month"; but the pleasure of the House not having been signified, Mr. Speaker called on those Members who supported the Motion to rise in their places, and not less than 40 Members having accordingly risen,

CAPTAIN SINCLAIR

said that he was reluctant to trespass on the time of the House. If the First Lord of the Treasury would be good enough to undertake to arrange that the Minute should not come into operation until they had had an opportunity of discussing it, he would he very glad to sit down at once, so far as he was concerned; but if the First Lord of the Treasury could not see his way to do that, then he must say he would feel obliged in the circumstances of the case to bring the matter before the House. The reason that influenced him was that this was a new Minute dealing with a sum which was applied for the purpose of secondary education in Scotland, and the method adopted by the Minute removed practically from Parliament all direct control of this secondary education. It superseded the existing authority, and it made the Scottish Education Department supreme over the existing authorities to an extent and degree which it had never held before. He did not think the House, perhaps, realised the confusion into which Scottish secondary education had been brought by nine years' government by Minutes and circulars from the Scottish Education Department——

THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUK,) Manchester, E.

Will the honourable Gentleman allow me to interrupt him? He has made a direct appeal to me.I do not know anything about this, but I have been inquiring from my hon. friend near me, and he informs me that nothing can be done under the Minute for some little period. The distribution is not until 31st October, and no steps of a character which will commit the House, or anybody, can be taken for some little time. I will bring on the Scottish Estimates at as convenient a time as possible. I have already tried to bring them on, but owing to the objections of my hon. friend opposite they were postponed. I believe, however, that the Scottish Estimates will come on at a period before any steps of a serious character are taken.

SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN (Stirling Burghs)

Perhaps I may be allowed to point out that even the opportunity of the Scottish Estimates will not be a very good opportunity for the discussion of the Minute, and for this reason—on the education vote for Scotland there is ample material for a long discussion, because there is an entirely new Code this year, and a very great deal of matter that requires to be discussed. This Minute is a definite matter by itself, and if the right hon. Gentleman can give this facility to the Scottish Members, I am sure it would be in the interests of Scottish education.

CAPTAIN SINCLAIR

said that he could only express his regret that the right hon. Gentleman was not able to see his way to give them this concession. His purpose in intervening to-day was to claim the right that this question should be discussed by Parliament. If the right hon. Gentleman would be good enough to give them a definite undertaking, he would be still very glad to withdraw, but as that was not the right hon. Gentleman's intention he must proceed. He begged to remind the House that the first grant was given as long ago as 1890. The number of authorities which administered that grant was something like 238 in Scotland. The second grant was given two years later, and for the purpose of the administration of that grant, 39 new and separate authorities were created. There had been two such grants since then. Altogether the sum of money, with this £35,000, available was about £175,000, not taking into consideration the £200,000 which they had for endowments, and at the other end of the scale the part which was claimed for secondary education by the higher standards of the elementary public schools. The objection to the Minute was that it added to the confusion that already existed in secondary education in Scotland. In the first place, it added to the number of authorities who had a right to distribute these grants. There were certain authorities which had laid upon them the duty of distributing the residue grantunder the Act of 1890. There was another set of authorities which had the right to distribute the grant under the Act of 1892, which went by the name of the Equivalent Grant. The Scottish Education Department had the duty of distributing £2,000, they said, for agricultural education, and also the money which came to them from the Science and Art Department, and which was now administered by the Scottish Education Department. This new Minute, which set forth the new method in which the grant was to be administered, adopted an entirely new procedure. That very fact in itself seemed to him to condemn the method which had at present been established. They had, therefore, an additional element added to the confusion. The first paragraph of the minute proposed to devote £2,000 for the purpose of defraying the cost of inspection, and the cost of the leaving certificates. In Scotland £2,000 aleady went to this purpose from a separate source. He wanted to ask the Lord Advocate if he would inform them what different method was to be adopted in reference to this additional £2,000? Was it intended that this £2,000 should be really additionally applied for this purpose, or was it to relieve the Equivalent Grant, from which at present £2,000 was taken for this purpose, and were they to have a new separate set of inspectors? The next paragraph proposed to allot £2,000 for agricultural education. In the first place they had a sum given to this purpose from the Science and Art Department, under the Scottish Education Department. Now they had this new grant of £2,000 also to be readministered by the Scottish Education Department under conditions which they did not yet know. Besides the total sum of £4,000 they had the County Councils in all parts spending money in agricultural instruction of various sorts entirely separately, and, it might be, out of touch with the central institutions by whom at present the £2,000 now devoted was applied. There was an increasing demand in Scotland for this form of instruction, and it did seem to him that when they had the total money devoted to this purpose, coming from a multiplication of sources, there was little likelihood of building up from the beginning a satisfactory form of instruction in Scotland, and there were large gaps in the present system. The present £4,000 went to four central institutions, and, on the other hand, the grants from the County Councils went generally to itinerant lecturers and courses in the county districts. There were large gaps in the East of Scotland. There was a wide district for which no provision was made. There were Perthshire, Forfarshire, and Fifeshire, all without institutions in this direction which they ought to have. He did not ask what institutions the money was to be allotted to, but he asked why more money was not allotted for this purpose, and how the money that was allotted was going to be spent. As to the next part of the Minute, would the State aided schools, with higher departments, be eligible for moneys under this grant? When the Secondary Education Committee undertook the work of endeavouring to organise secondary and technical education in counties, they had the two years' balance moneys in hand. It had always been expected that their work would be strengthened and supplemented in some degree by the action of Parliament. Without that help it was more than likely that in some counties grants that had hitherto been made to certain institutions would have to be reduced in time to come. He wanted to point out another defect in the present system, namely, the entire want of continuity— which characterised the present method of distributing the grant——

* MR. SPEAKER

If I had known the line of argument the hon. Member was going to adopt I should have hesitated in saying that this was such a definite matter that it could be presented to the House on a motion for adjournment. The hon. Member seems to me to be raising the whole subject of Scottish education. That is not a definite matter on which a motion for adjournment could be founded. I thought there was one definite point in the scheme to which the hon. Member objected. But to discuss the whole subject of Scottish education generally on a motion for adjournment would be quite out of order.

CAPTAIN SINCLAIR

said he was perfectly ready to bow to that ruling, and he assumed the House was in possession of all the facts in connection with this matter. He would therefore only endeavour to point out that this Minute added to the confusion already existing, and was a Minute to which some of them took the strongest objection. His main objection was that the Minute adopted a new method of aiding secondary education in Scotland. It was a scheme which was entirely new in its method and in its application. The main objection they took to this Minute was the objection taken last year to any further dealing with this subject by Minutes or Circulars issued by the Scottish Education Department. This method of dealing with the subject had brought secondary education in Scotland into a state of chaos, and both sides of the House had admitted it. Lord Balfour of Burleigh, in his Paisley speech, had admitted it, and they were all agreed that the multiplication of authorities was disastrous, and managers and teachers might well be discouraged by the complexity and confusion into which the system had been brought. The only difference between them was as to the method of dealing with this intricate subject. The Scottish Secretary proposed to deal with it by Minute——

* THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. GRAHAM MURRAY, Buteshire)

Mr. Speaker, I understand you to rule that the hon. Member must confine his remarks to a definite matter— namely, the effect which this Minute would have at once if it was not not discussed in the House to-day. The hon. Member is raising the whole question of Scottish secondary education, and it will be impossible to confine my remarks in reply to anything less than a justification of the whole policy of the Government. I ask whether your ruling does not really shut out the line of argument which the hon. Member is taking.

* MR. SPEAKER

What was in my mind in putting this to the House was the fact that a Minute was coming into force on the 27th May which I understood made some material alteration in the administration of Scottish education, and that there would be no other opportunity of discussing it before that date. It is to the mischiefs that would occur in consequence of the Minute coming into force on a certain date that I would ask the hon. Member to address himself. When the Lord Advocate rose, the hon. Member appeared to me to be addressing himself to the general question as to whether an alteration in the administration of Scottish education ought not to be done by legislation, instead of by Minute. That clearly would be out of order upon a motion for adjournment.

CAPTAIN SINCLAIR

said his point was that he wished that the mischief would last only a few weeks, but he was afraid that it would last for a longer period. The method of administering the secondary education funds that had been adopted by the Scottish Secretary would, he believed, be prejudicial to secondary education, and would increase the existing confusion rather than relieve it, and put the matter on a sound footing. Scottish secondary education was in need of the time and attention of Parliament, and it would never be in a satisfactory position so long as it was controlled and administered solely by Minutes issued by the Education Department. The effect of such a method was to kill and stifle the public interest which ought to be taken in the question of education in Scotland, and which would be taken if another method was adopted. Any one who examined the state of secondary education in Scotland——

* MR. SPEAKER

The hon. Member is now clearly entering into a matter which on an Education Bill would be pertinent, but which is not within the leave given to discuss a definite matter of urgent public importance.

CAPTAIN SINCLAIR

bowed to Mr. Speaker's ruling. He would only again repeat his strong protest against the method which had been taken by a responsible Department in dealing with this subject. There had been no time for any expression of public opinion in Scotland with reference to this minute, and he did not think that such a method as this was likely to truly advance the interests which he was sure the Lord Advocate had at heart.

Motion made, and Question proposed— That this House do now adjourn."—(Captain Sinclair.)

MR. CROMBIE (Kincardineshire)

seconded the motion. He said they had no desire to impede the business of the House, but they considered that it was a matter of urgent importance to stop the operation of this Minute. They felt that if this Minute came actually into operation it would add another item to the already great confusion which existed in the administration of Scotch education. His hon. friend had already pointed out that there already existed a large number of authorities which did administer the money. It was perfectly competent to the Education Department to have handed the money over to be administered by the County Committees, but they had not done so, presumably because they found that the administration of the money by these County Committees had not been wholly satisfactory. By bringing forward this Minute the Education Department had admitted to the full that the present system was not working sufficiently well. They were proceeding in the wrong direction, and the Minute was entirely wrong in principle. Such administration as this only doubled and trebled the already existing confusion in Scottish secondary education, and if this Minute was acted upon, it would make it more difficult to unravel the present tangle.

* MR. GRAHAM MURRAY

admitted that this was an important question, and also that the Minute was a departure from that of the Minute of 1893. It rather went back to the Minute of 1892, and was to a great extent a reaffirmation of certain principles which it would have been well if the then Secretary for Scotland had not departed from. It was, however, impossible to discuss this matter in a manner that would satisfy his hon. friend, as the hon. Member himself had said, without raising a debate upon the entire subject of Scottish education. In accordance with the ruling from the Chair, what he had to do with was the present mischief of the minute. The hon. Members had been unable to show that there were any present mischiefs at all. As to the fact of the minute being promulgated, that was the fault of the Act of Parliament, because it provided that there must be a Minute issued providing for the distribution of this money. The scheme, such as it was, provided that grants were to be made by the Education Departmeut in favour of certain secondary or technical schools, that before making any such grants they were to be satisfied of certain things, and that the method of distribution should be as follows:—Every such school shall forward before 1st October, 1899, for the consideration of the Department through the County Committee, a return containing certain things and their proposals as to assistance. Therefore no practical action could take place on this Minute until procedure. began with the forwarding of new schemes on the 1st of October. The hon. Member was perfectly well aware that the Minute had no force of law in the sense of a statute. It could be at any moment superseded by another Minute. Technically speaking, the Duke of Devonshire and the Secretary for Scotland might put a Minute on the Table of the House every day of the week, and each Minute might supersede the other. Consequently it was abundantly clear, as the Scottish Estimates must come on before 1st October, hon. Members opposite would have full opportunity to discuss the whole policy when they would not be hampered by any ruling such as was given to-day. If, after discussion, hon. Gentlemen did persuade the Government, then another Minute could be published, and no harm would be done. The Government could do what Sir George Trevelyan did in the last Parliament, when he upset his own Minute at the instance of one of his own supporters. But he did not think the present Scottish Secretary was likely to follow a similar course. He therefore appealed to hon. Members opposite not to persist in their motion, but to put off the discussion till a more convenient opportunity.

MR. BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.)

agreed as to the difficulty of discussing the question without going beyond the limits of the ruling laid down. At the same time the Lord Advocate had not presented the whole case. What his hon. friend said was that this method of distributing was inconsistent with the method laid down by another Minute, and that this imparted an element of confusion into the whole subject, which demanded attention in the interest of secondary education. The committees in the burghs and counties who were distributing the grant in 1892 expected that this grant would be given to them as an additional fund to distribute, which would be the natural thing to expect, as it would seem only natural that this further fund should be placed in their hands. If that was not done, and a new method of distribution was introduced, it would practically oust these committees. Surely, therefore, it was a proper thing that the whole subject should be reviewed, and that this Minute, instead of being a partial one, dealing with £32,000, should deal with other money also, and place the distribution of the whole of it on similar principles. The Lord Advocate had stated with truth that these Minutes could be re-called at will, and the Minute said on the face of it that no action was to be taken for a month. They called attention to it in the interests of the committees. They also called attention to the Minute in the interest of the schools, as it held out the hope of sharing in £32,000 upon application to the Scottish Education Department. Although the applications were not to be sent in till the 1st October, they might begin to be sent in now, and the schools might at once take steps to secure a share in the amount, so that it was not correct to say no action could be taken at present. Those who could not afford to wait could commence at once to secure it. They were also desirous of calling attention to the confusion which beset the subject. The Lord Advocate said this Minute went back to the principles of 1892. Did the hon. Gentleman remember that the Minute of 1892 was rejected in consequence of discussion in the House of Commons? If they had an opportunity of bringing the substantial merits of the case before the House, and could argue that to proceed by Minute instead of by legislation was a mistaken and unfortunate process, he thought they would be able so to convince the House. It would be a very great convenience to have all these Minutes in a collective form. In deference to the feeling entertained in the House, and in the Committees of Schools in Scotland, who had not had an opportunity of expressing an opinion upon the subject, he appealed to the right hon. Gentleman to take no action until the House had a chance of debating the question.

MR. BUCHANAN (Aberdeenshire, E.)

hoped the Lord Advocate would respond to the appeal of the right hon. Gentleman. Would the right hon. Gentleman ensure on behalf of the Government that there would be an adequate opportunity of discussing this Minute and the various questions arising on it?

* MR. GRAHAM MURRAY

said the hon. Gentleman might be quite sure that he would represent what the wishes of Members on the other side were, and he was quite sure that his noble friend Lord Balfour would give them most favourable consideration. He must deprecate an actual pistol being put to his head, but he could assure hon. Members that he would transmit their views. More than that he did not think he could be fairly asked to say.

CAPTAIN SINCLAIR

said he was sure the right hon. Gentleman, in representing the feelings of the House to Lord Balfour, would not underrate the strength of that feeling, and, relying on the undertaking the right hon. Gentleman had given, he asked leave to withdraw his motion.

Motion by leave withdrawn.