§ 15. Mr. BLUNDELLasked the President of the Board of Education whether he will state the names of the new Roman Catholic schools which he has sanctioned since he took office; the names of those to which he has refused sanction; and the names of those in respect of which the applications were withdrawn; and whether he will state the reasons for which he refused to sanction two schools?
Duchess of ATHOLLAs the reply to this question is rather long, I will, with my hon. Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. DALTONMay I ask whether the Noble Lady could not give us the total sanctioned?
Duchess of ATHOLLThe hon. Member will find it will not take very long to read the answer in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. DALTONBut would the Noble Lady give us the figure? I wanted to ask how the number compared with the number sanctioned last year.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe Noble Lady could not be expected to say that without notice.
§ The following in the answer:
§ Since replying to my hon. Friend's question on 6th July last, I have sanctioned a further proposal for a new Roman Catholic school. The details are as follow:
§ 1. Proposals sanctioned.
- (a) England.
- Lancashire, Denton St. Mary's School.
- Swinton and Pendlebury, Moorside Road School.
- St. Helen's, Sutton Manor School.
- Durham, Stanley School.
- Felling, Pelaw School.
- Mansfield, St. Philip's (replacement of an existing school).
- Kingston-on-Hull, Southcoates Lane School.
- Bootle, The Stanley Hall School.
- (b) Wales.
- Flint, Hawarden Shotton School.
§ 2. Proposals withdrawn.
- Durham, Lasington Colliery proposed School.
- Essex, Stanford-le-Hope proposed School.
§ 3. Proposals refused.
- Middlesex, Harrow-on-the-Hill, Rox-borough Park proposed School.
- Yorkshire (North Riding), Pickering proposed School.
§ As regards the last part of the question, my decision was taken in each case on the report of the public inquiry, at which the three considerations laid down in Section 19 (1) of the Act were fully argued. Both were cases of existing schools. In one, the Board had already refused a proposal for a new public elementary school put forward by the local education authority, on the ground that further accommodation was not required. In the other, the school contained an exceptionally small number of Roman Catholic children, and, though in dealing with proposals for denominational schools, where the. wishes of the parents are strongly expressed, the fact that the school would be small does not determine the case against them, there is clearly a limit beyond which the Board would not be justified in transferring to public funds the cost of maintaining very small schools to meet the needs of a few families.