§ Mr. W. R. PEELasked whether the President of the Board of Education is now able to state how it was that the late chief inspector's circular was sent round to the inspectors without his knowledge or consent; and whether he is prepared to recommend such changes in the organisation of business in his Department as would prevent the issue of important circulars on matters of policy without his previous consent?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI have already explained that the confidential memorandum to which the hon. Member refers, was sent to inspectors in conformity with the practice of the Board to encourage a free and unrestrained interchange confidentially of opinions on educational subjects between their officers—a practice which I believe to be for the good of the Service. The fact that officers of the Board do not hold identical views on all educational matters should not, and I believe does not, prevent them from loyally promoting whatever may be, for the time being, the policy of the Board. The document was printed and distributed with the concurrence of the originating officer and the sanction of the Permanent Secretary. Matters of trivial importance, of which there are many thousands, are not brought individually to my notice; they are dealt with under general authority given to responsible officers, but the consent of the President is obtained for the issue of important circulars, conveying instructions or advice, committing the Board on matters of policy. The Memorandum in question did not convey instructions or advise or commit the Board on matters of policy. Now that the publishing of confidential documents abstracted from the office of the Board has received some public approval and encouragement, I am forced to face the possibility, although I hope not the probability, of a greater risk of such publications. A Memorandum which by publication might give rise to misconceptions of the policy of the Board assumes an importance which it would not bear when confined only to those to whom it is confidentially addressed, and who can rightly estimate its importance and meaning. Bather than run the risk of pain and offence being caused, or of misconceptions arising as to the policy of the Board, I am enlarging the categories of papers which are to have my express sanction.
§ Mr. W. R. PEELWill the right hon. Gentleman state whether the circular, when it was sent out, was accompanied by a covering letter; and, if so, who signed that letter?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNo, Sir; the circular was not sent out accompanied by a covering letter, and, therefore, no covering letter was signed.
§ Mr. W. R. PEELDoes the right hon. Gentleman tell us that the question of what class of persons should be appointed to these posts or under local authorities, and whether they should be confined to graduates, is merely a small detail, and not a matter of importance?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNo; the Board has given no advice or instructions on the appointment of inspectors to the local authorities, and no intention has ever been expressed by the Board of interfering in such matters. The individual opinion of the inspectors is a matter which I believe to be of less importance than the declaration of the policy of the Board itself.
§ Mr. HOAREWill the right hon. Gentleman say why it was that he inserted in his answer that these matters were trivial and of no importance?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANIf the hon. Gentleman wishes to ask any further questions on the answer I have given I think he had better wait to see it in print, and with that object I propose to circulate it with the votes.
§ Mr. ALFRED LYTTELTONWas this alleged confidential document circulated among more than one hundred people, and does the President of the Board of Education believe that a document circulated among so many persons can remain confidential.
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThere is no difficulty in answering that question. The whole of the circulars sent to the Board inspectors have previously been regarded by them as confidential, and I have no reason to believe, because they happen to be one hundred in number, that they are less trustworthy in regard to confidential documents than any other officers of the Board.
§ Mr. W. R. PEELasked on what date was it brought to the right hon. Gentleman's notice that the late chief inspector's circular had been issued; and what steps did he take to counteract the effect of this circular and to explain to the inspectors 880 that his own policy was diametrically opposed to that contained in the circular?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI first became aware early in February that the memorandum had been sent to inspectors. At that time my attention was called to the fact that a copy of the document had been seen by some persons not in the service of the Board. In reply to the second part of the question, I took whatever steps were in my power to prevent the further publication of the document, but publication in the widest possible way was given to it by an hon. Member opposite. As the inspectors had no reason to believe, and were not likely to believe, that I shared the views expressed by Mr. Holmes, no occasion arose for me to circularise them. The inspectors understood perfectly well that the document was not intended to be an exposition of the policy of the Board of Education. In view, however, of the misunderstanding created by the publication and the pain and offence caused thereby, I have, as I explained on Thursday night, recalled all existing copies of the document still in the hands of officers of the Board.
§ Mr. HOAREHas the right hon. Gentleman forgotten that his private secretary had some correspondence about this document in the middle of January?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI do not forget that fact. I have stated when I first knew of the document, and I have nothing to add to that.
§ Mr. RUNCIMANIn the first sentence of my answer I said I first became aware of it early in February.
§ Sir WILLIAM ANSONMay I ask whether the documents issued by the Chief Inspector are to be accepted by the subordinate staff as expressing his views, and not as expressing the opinions of the Board of Education?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANWhen a document is issued by the Board of Education to make a declaration of policy, that declaration is made quite clearly, and, as the policy of the Board of Education, can only be expressed by my authority.
§ Mr. GOLDSTONEMay I ask the right hon Gentleman whether he will consider the advisability of reverting to the former practice of his own Board, namely, of 881 issuing with the Code instructions to inspectors, thus making them public property?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI think I ought to receive notice of that question, which does not arise out of the reply. My hon. Friend is, I think, referring to another practice altogether.
§ Mr. HOAREasked whether Mr. Holmes' memorandum was issued to inspectors other than elementary school inspectors?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANYes, Sir; it was issued also to the Board's inspectors of secondary and technical schools.
§ Mr. HOAREWould the right hon. Gentleman inform me what is the number of inspectors to which the circular was issued first of all, and, secondly, why it was that in his speech on Wednesday he said that it was issued to the elementary school inspectors?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNo, Sir. I have looked up the OFFICIAL REPORT, and I did not. I said it was addressed to the inspectors of the Board. As to any further question as to numbers, I must ask for notice.
§ Mr. PEELDoes the right hon. Gentleman still think it a wise thing to have confidential circulars issued to several hundreds of people?