§ 34. Mr. F. WHYTEasked the Secretary for Scotland whether the Scottish Education Department has considered the regulation recently enacted by the Carnegie 1798 Trust whereby all students receiving payments of their fees from the trust must enter the universities by the avenue of the leaving certificate examinations; whether this regulation is an infringement of the autonomy granted to the universities by Act of Parliament; and whether he can take or has taken any action in the matter?
Mr. McKINNON WOODThe matter referred to is not within the province of the Scotch Education Department. It is difficult to see how it can be contended that to make the passing of the examination referred to a condition of participating in the benefits of the Carnegie Fund can be regarded as infringing the autonomy of the universities. I have no power to take action in the matter.
§ 35. Mr. F. WHYTEasked whether any communication was received from the Treasury before the scheme of the inclusive fee was adopted by the Treasury as a condition of the increased Grant to the Universities of Scotland; whether, if such communication was received by the Scottish Education Department, it was submitted to the Committee of Council on Education for Scotland; and whether the Committee expressed an opinion upon it; and, if so, what was their opinion?
Mr. McKINNON WOODThe adoption of the inclusive fee was suggested in the Report of the Scottish Universities Committee, 1909, and on that Report the Treasury invited and received the observations of the Scottish Education Department. I understand that the Vice-President did not consider it necessary to summon the Committee of Council to consider the point.
§ Mr. WHYTECan the right hon. Gentleman tell us what the observations of the Scottish Education Department on that question were?
Mr. McKINNON WOODIt is very unusual for a Department not responsible to quote its observations to another Department which is responsible, but I have no objection to telling the hon. Member what they said, "The institution of a composite fee for specific courses of study is a reform which has very much to recommend it on educational grounds."
§ 36. Mr. WHYTEasked whether the Scottish Education Department took any part in the negotiations between the Universities of Scotland and the Treasury 1799 on the subject of the inclusive fee; whether the Department was approached by any, or all, of the universities to use its good offices at the Treasury in order to assist the universities to make a proper bargain with the Treasury; and, if not, whether the Department ever offered its assistance during these negotiations?
§ 37. Mr. HOGGEasked if the Lords of the Treasury claim to have any power to interfere in the internal management of the Scottish Universities; and, if so, what jurisdiction they claim?
§ 38. Mr. HOGGEasked whether the Lords of the Treasury consulted the right hon. Gentleman prior to refusing additional Grants to Edinburgh University, unless the university found it possible to adopt an inclusive fee in medicine?
§ Mr. HOGGEWill the right hon. Gentleman say whether or not he has received communications from the universities that they are opposed to this inclusive fee for medicine, and whether he intends to take any action in regard to those communications?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI have already explained that those representations should be addressed to another Department. I have not received them.
§ 39. Mr. HOGGEasked whether the Secretary for Scotland, as Minister responsible to the House of Commons for the educational policy in Scotland, approves of the important changes, such as the adoption of an inclusive fee for medicine for the Scottish Universities, without any reference at all, either to my Lords of the Scottish Education Department, or to the representatives of Scotland?
Mr. McKINNON WOODAs I informed my hon. Friend last Tuesday, questions relating to inclusive fees at, or to the internal management or constitution of, the Scottish Universities are not matters for which I am responsible. As to the last part of the question, I would also refer my hon. Friend to my answer to Question 35.
§ Mr. HOGGEAm I to understand that the Scottish Education Department bas no concern in the educational results that will accrue in the Scottish universities from the imposition of the inclusive fee?
§ Mr. HOGGEMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he knows that the Scottish Members have no confidence in My Lords of the Treasury on any of these educational questions in Scotland?
§ 40. Mr. HOGGEasked whether the extra-mural schools of medicine in Edinburgh are responsible, not only for attracting students from all over the world to Edinburgh, but for supplying many of the most eminent teachers in the profession; and whether the Secretary for Scotland has considered the effect an inclusive fee in medicine at the university would have upon the continuance of such schools?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI have no information as to whether or not the facts are as stated in the question. The matter is not one for which I am responsible, and I am not prepared to express an opinion upon it.
Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTHas the right hon. Gentleman considered whether the imposition of inclusive fees would require a new Ordinance, or whether it could be done without a new Ordinance?
Mr. McKINNON WOODIt is not my duty to answer questions on that subject. It does not belong to my Department.
§ Mr. HOGGEHas the right hon. Gentleman no concern for the continuance and success of the extra-mural schools of medicine in Scotland as an educational advantage?
§ Visount HELMSLEYIs it not the custom for a Department which is not directly concerned to refer the questions addressed to it to the Departments which are concerned?
§ Mr. HOGGEHas the right hon. Gentleman sent copies of these questions to the other Departments concerned?
§ 41. Mr. HOGGEasked if any representations have been pressed upon the Lords of the Treasury by the Carnegie Trust favourable to the adoption of an inclusive fee in medicine at the Scottish universities; and whether this has been done solely with a view to the convenience of the trust?
§ Mr. HOGGEI beg to give notice that on the adjournment I shall call attention to the action of the Secretary for Scotland.
§ 42. Mr. HOGGEasked if the attention of the Secretary for Scotland has been drawn to the valedictory address of Dr. John Kerr, president of the Secondary Education Association of Scotland, on the 2nd November, at St. Andrews, suggesting the appointment of a consultative council of teachers approved by the Education Department, which might serve to keep the Department and the profession in closer touch; and whether he is prepared to entertain such a proposal?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI have seen a Report of the address in question. The suggestion to which my hon. Friend refers appears to have been made to members of the teaching profession and to have referred to the formation by teachers themselves of a body representing all branches of the profession. In the event of the formation of such a body I shall be prepared to give careful consideration to any representations it may desire to make, just as I am prepared to consider communications from existing bodies of teachers.
§ 43. Mr. HOGGEasked whether in view of the dissatisfaction existing in Scotland with the policy pursued by the Scottish Education Department, the Secretary for Scotland would entertain the suggestion that, before any further changes are finally determined, the changes contemplated should be submitted to the Scottish representatives in this House for their approval?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI must protest against such vague charges being made in the form of a question. I shall always be glad to give hon. Members every possible opportunity for considering changes of importance.
§ Mr. HOGGEWill the right hon. Gentleman name one single instance in which the Scottish representatives have ever been consulted with regard to an educational change?
§ 54. Mr. WHYTEasked the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention had been called to the fact that the President of the Board of Education has appointed, or is about to appoint, a Departmental Committee to inquire into the possibility of extending the benefits of superannuation to those elementary school teachers who did not expressly accept the Act of 1898; whether he is aware that this subject affects persons now discharging educational functions within the area of the jurisdiction of the Scottish Education Department; and whether he will make representations to the Committee in order to ensure that persons who have served part of their educational service in Scotland and part in England shall not fall between two stools and lose benefits to which they are clearly entitled?
Mr. McKINNON WOODThis matter has recently been receiving the attention of the Scotch Education Department, and my hon. Friend may rest assured that the interests of the teachers referred to will not be lost sight of.
56. Major HOPEasked the Secretary for Scotland when he intends to put into operation the new regulations embodied in the Scotch Education Department Minute of 27th March, 1911, which have the effect of reducing the size of classes in elementary schools from sixty to fifty, as the present uncertainty as to whether these regulations are to be enforced or not on 1st August, 1913, is disadvantageous to all school boards, but especially to those which have to immediately consider new building schemes to provide additional accommodation under existing regulations?
Mr. McKINNON WOODThis question will be carefully considered in connection with the next issue of the Day School Code, and I am not at present in a position to make any statement on the matter.