HC Deb 18 November 1912 vol 44 cc3-4
2. Mr. PETO

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, in the case of the parish of Bishops Cannings, in East Wilts, where the Crown own a great deal of the land, in the year 1906 the Crown, as landlord, contributed largely not only to a new church school, but also to the restoration of the church; and, if so, why in the case of the parish of Bromham, under similar circumstances, he has refused to contribute anything to the improvements in the church school required by the education authorities?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Runciman)

In 1904 the education authority required a new school to be provided for the parish of Bishops Cannings and urged that it should be provided by voluntary efforts. That being also the general wish of the parish, as ascertained at a public meeting, a contribution was made by the then Commissioner of Woods. There was no provided school in the parish. No contribution was made to the restoration of the church in 1906, the last contribution to that object being made in 1884. The circumstances at Bromham are not similar as there is a provided school there.

3. Mr. PETO

asked whether, as recently as 7th June, 1907, his Department, under his predecessor, Lord Lincolnshire, contributed towards the expenditure on new ventilators and new floor required in the church schools at Bromham, Wilts; and, if so, whether he will state why and when the policy of his Department was reversed and the obligations of the Crown as large owners of land in the parish were evaded?

Mr. RUNCIMAN

A contribution was paid as mentioned. The greater part of it had been promised in 1905 towards necessary repairs and improvements, which, however, were not certified to be complete until 1907. The cost was then found to be greater and the original sum promised was increased to meet the greater cost. In December, 1907, it was decided by the Treasury to discontinue contributions to voluntary schools in places where there were provided schools.

Mr. PETO

Am I to understand from the right hon. Gentleman's reply that this change in policy agreed in time with the advent of the present Government to office in 1906?

Mr. RUNCIMAN

I could not exactly say.