§ 42. Mr. JOHN DAVIESasked the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that, though notice of the proposed change was given to the five local authorities maintaining the Normal College, Bangor, on the 12th September, 1921, no notice was in fact given to the college authorities with whom, both prior and subsequent to the said date, all financial transactions with the Board of Education have been conducted, with the result that it became impossible for the training college committee to issue a precept upon the local education authorities to meet the obligations involved by the operation of the new regulations, and that in consequence no rate provision was made by the constituent authorities for 1922–23 to cover such additional expenditure; whether he is aware that the constituent authorities are advised that the Board's action in making the new regulations retrospective was of doubtful 707 legality; that the raising of a rate to cover past expenditure is ultra vires; and whether, in view of all the circumstances, and in view of the fact, that the new regulations will inflict a great hardship on the small agricultural counties of North Wales, which are already overburdened with rates, he will consider whether the new regulations may be withdrawn, or their application to the Bangor Normal College be deferred until the next financial year?
Mr. WOODNotice of the proposed change in the arrangements for the payment of grant in respect of the Bangor Normal Training College was given in September, 1921, to the five local education authorities which are responsible for the college and which appoint the college committee. The Board assumed that the authorities would instruct their representatives on the college committee to take such steps as might be necessary in view of the new arrangements. I have received letters from two of the authorities concerned saying that they are advised that the Board's action in the matter was of doubtful legality, but the letters do not make clear the ground on which this opinion is based. The fact that an institution is maintained by several local education authorities jointly does not give the maintaining authorities any equitable claim to a larger contribution from the Exchequer than would be paid in respect of it if it were maintained by a single local education authority.
§ Mr. DAVIESIn view of the serious omission on the part of the Board of Education, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of making special arrangements to help these authorities?
Mr. WOODI am unable to give any such pledge as the hon. Member demands. I cannot admit that there is any serious omission on the part of the Board of Education. If he has any suggestions to make, I shall be most glad to consider them.
§ Mr. E. EVANSIs it not the fact that the Department failed to give notice to the authorities and it is the failure of that notice which has given rise to the trouble?
Mr. WOODNo, we gave notice months before to the five local authorities who appointed the members of the Committee.