§ 67. Mr. TREVELYANasked the President of the Board of Education whether, in view of his proposal, in Circular 1371, to replace the percentage grant to local authorities by a block grant, he will undertake that the evidence given by local authorities and Government Departments before the Meston Committee shall be made available?
§ Lord E. PERCYI can give no undertaking with regard to the publication of the evidence given before the Committee by local authorities and other Government Departments; but, in so far as the 29 evidence tendered by the Board of Education to the Committee contained an expression of opinion on the merits, the opinion expressed was that of the Board, not of its officials, and it, therefore, represented, as I understand it, the views of the Minister who was then responsible for the Board's administration. The following extract indicates the nature of the opinion expressed:
The Board, as at present advised, do not favour the abandonment of the present basis of their grant system for any other which has yet been suggested. They look forward to a further development of the system of applying standards of cost as limits to the expenditure which the Board should recognise for grant purposes.
§ Lord E. PERCYI will consider that.
Captain BENNIs the Noble Lord aware that it is the practice of the House that such documents should be printed?
§ Lord E. PERCYI am aware of the practice of the House, and, of course, I will publish it if it is a document falling within that category. I have no desire whatever to conceal the nature of the document, but I asked my right hon. Friend the Member for the Northern Universities whether he had any objection to my making this quotation, because it represents, so far as I know, his personal opinion. He told me he had no objection. I hesitated about the document because I should like to have asked him whether he has any objection to its publication. I will certainly do anything that is proper and in accordance with the procedure of the House.
§ Mr. TREVELYANCould the Noble Lord do the larger thing I asked him in the question—whether we can have the evidence given before the Meston Commission, which was to inquire into the question the Noble Lord has prejudged, before the House is asked to make any decision on his new block grant?
§ Lord E. PERCYIn the first place it is not under my control, but I am not at all sure how far it would be desirable or proper to publish evidence that has been given to a, Committee which, I understand, is still considering its Report, and I do not think it would give 30 very good guidance to the House if the evidence were published without the Report of the Committee who had considered it.
§ Mr. TREVELYANIn that case would it not be better to wait until the Committee reported before prejudging the matter?
§ Lord E. PERCYIf I had no authority behind me for a. system of block grant expenditure but the Report of the Committee which has not yet reported, I should certainly have waited, but there is such a volume of authority on the subject, including some of the right hon. Gentleman's own colleagues, that I felt no hesitation in making this decision.
§ Mr. W. GRAHAMIn view of the known fact that 80 per cent. of the evidence given before the Meston Committee was opposed to the block grant and that the system of block grant is bound up with the rest of the system, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this House must have the Report before they can come to any decision in the matter?
§ Sir HENRY CRAIKIs there any reason whatever for publishing the evidence given before a Commission which has not yet reported and is it not the case that the Commission has been sitting for nearly two years and has practically ceased to be likely to give any report at all?
§ Lord E. PERCYThe right hon. Member for Central Edinburgh (Mr. W. Graham) has more information about the proceedings of the Committee than I have, because he is a member of it. I find it difficult to understand why, if the evidence was so overwhelming one way, the Committee has not reported.