§ MR. JACKSON (Leeds, N.)
I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether his attention has been called to a letter and pamphlet circulated by the Leeds School Board in which it is stated that about 13,000 students in Leeds (the number enrolled last session) will be deprived of the further opportunity of self-improvement or training for com- 909 mercial and industrial pursuits, the work shown in the accompanying prospectus of last year's classes will be at a standstill, this result being attributed to the judgment in Rex v. Cockerton and the absence of official guidance or instruction from the Board of Education; and whether he will give an assurance that the provision in the Education Bill dealing with this subject will be proceeded with.
§ SIR J. GORST
The difficulty in which the Leeds School Board find themselves is caused by their having established schools which they have no legal power to maintain. No official guidance or instruction could enable them to use the school fund for purposes not sanctioned by the Elementary Education Acts. Under the existing law, the local authority, under the Technical Instruction Acts, can use the funds provided by those Acts for the maintenance of such schools, and further facilities are provided in the Bill now before Parliament. There is nothing to prevent the Leeds School Board from now arranging with the local authority for the continuance of such schools, either under the existing law or in anticipation of legislation on the subject.