§ 71. Mr. MORRISasked the President of the Board of Education whether, in view of the fact that the elementary and secondary schools of London are inspected both by the inspectors of the Board of Education and the inspectors of the London County Council, any diminution of this duplication of inspection is contemplated, with a view to the reduction of unnecessary expenditure in London?
§ The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Lord Eustace Percy)I fully share the hon. Member's desire to 1654 secure every possible reduction in the cost of administration and inspection. The question of duplication of inspection has already been considered by my Department, and I am sending the hon. Member a copy of a White Paper on the subject which was laid before the House by one of my predecessors.
§ Sir HENRY CRAIKIs it not the case that in former years the grant was dependent upon inspection by the Department of Education, and that now no grant whatever is dependent upon inspection by the Board?
§ Lord E. PERCYMy right hon. Friend is quite mistaken as to that. The grant is dependent on the satisfactory condition of the schools, as ascertained by the inspector.
§ Sir H. CRAIKThe grant is not made to a particular school, but in a lump sum to the Education Department. How can a grant be altered by the inspection of an individual school?
§ Lord E. PERCYThe grant is not paid to individual schools. The grant to local authorities is dependent on the general efficiency of their schools.
§ Sir H. CRAIKAm I to understand that this duplicate inspection is carried out not for any purpose of administration, but simply to convince the Board of Education as a pious opinion that local education authorities are doing their duty?
§ Lord E. PERCYMy right hon. Friend is not to understand that and, moreover, he is assuming that there is duplicate inspection, which is not the case.