§ MR. JOHN ELLIS (Nottinghamshire, Rushcliffe)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury when he proposes to place on the Notice Paper the Amendments to Clause 8 of the Education Bill which are needful to bring its provisions into harmony with the statements in his speech at Manchester, on Tuesday, 14th October.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI suppose the hon. Gentleman refers to the statement I made at Manchester that the fundamental policy of the Bill was to give complete control to the education authority in matters affecting secular education, and that we would be glad to consider whether that fundamental policy could be more effectively carried out by amending Clause 8. We have already accepted one Amendment put down in the name of my hon. friend the Member for the Wellington Division of Shropshire dealing with that subject, and we were able to induce the House, with the aid of the closure, to add it to the Bill last night. There may be other Amendments pointing in the same direction which we may be able to accept, and, in any case, there is one put down in my own name which would make it absolutely beyond question that the education authority is to be able to deal effectively 359 with all questions of the management of schools so far as secular education is concerned within its area. If the hon. Gentleman refers, as perhaps he also does, to the question of pupil teachers, there is an Amendment down in the name of the Under-Secretary for Education representing the views of the Government on that subject.
§ MR. BRIGG (Yorkshire, W. R., Keighley)There is also the question of grouping which will have to be dealt with.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI do not think that grouping could be dealt with in Clause 8, and, in any case, though it is important, I am glad to admit it is not a subject which I touched upon at Manchester.