§ MR. ERNEST GRAY (West Ham, N.)
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether the charge for the training of pupil teachers by a local authority should fall upon the elementary or the secondary school account, and if upon the latter, then can he state who will be responsible for the number of pupil teachers engaged, and for the training of such teachers in urban districts and non-county boroughs having powers with regard to elementary education alone.
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,) Oxford University
The Board of Education are advised that‡ Set (4) Debates, cxxx., 966.684 expenditure incurred in educating pupil teachers should fall within expenditure under Part II. of the Education Act, 1902. I am not aware of any urban district or non-county borough in England or Wales which has powers under the Act with regard to elementary education alone.
§ MR. ERNEST GRAY
Does the hon. Gentleman mean that in urban districts and non-county boroughs this charge for the training of pupil teachers must be met out of the 1d. rate for secondary education—a rate not originating under the Education Act, 1902, and, if so, will he state how these charges are to be met when the produce of this rate is exhausted.
§ SIR WILLIAM ANSON
All I can say in answer to this Question is that these charges must be met out of money provided for the purposes of secondary education.