HC Deb 09 July 1928 vol 219 cc2007-12

Order for Second Reading read.

Sir J. GILMOUR

I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

My colleague from Scotland will recollect that two years ago, when we were discussing the problem of rating, I gave an undertaking in the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills that I would take steps to set up an Executive Commission to inquire into the condition of all educational trusts in Scotland. Following upon that, in April last year, I appointed a representative Departmental Committee as a preliminary to further procedure. That Committee has reported, and they ascertained that there were considerable sums of money in regard to which we desired a decision. The Committee, under the chairmanship of Lord Mackenzie, heard evidence from all the interested parties, and submitted a unanimous report last autumn. The report entirely corroborates our opinion that there is urgent need for a change. A large sum of money is involved, amounting to an annual value of £200,000 in 1882, and over £250,000 now. It is certain that that large sum of money is not always being spent to the best advantage, there having been, of course, as the House knows, many changes, administrative and legislative, since the last Endowments Commission was appointed nearly half a century ago. Fees have been abolished entirely in primary schools, and to a very large extent in secondary schools. Secondary education has made, of course, great advancement. Then there have been Education Acts, particularly those of 1908 and 1918. Where there were nearly 1,000 school boards, there are now 37 education authorities. Perhaps the most important point, from our immediate point of view, is that a great system of bursaries has been established, applicable to all the higher stages of education, and provided from public funds. In the financial year ended 15th May, 1927, the authorities spent no less than £263,000 on bursaries. All these considerations show that an examination of the situation is imperative.

We have followed quite closely the example of the previous Commission, plus the unanimous recommendations of the Committee which we set up. All I would say to hon. Members to-night is that I hope they will give this Measure a Second Reading without much discussion, in order that we may take it to the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills, where I undertake to give the fullest consideration to all points which they desire to raise. I believe this Measure is earnestly desired by the educational interests of Scotland, and I recognise that hon. Members would like to be satisfied that there are safeguards which would protect the proper use of these funds, and I think I shall be able to satisfy them that we shall give every consideration to proposals that may be put forward. Already, there has been considerable discussion between the head of my Department in Scotland and the interests concerned, and I am satisfied that this is a change which is desirable from the point of view of educational interests in Scotland.

Mr. WESTWOOD

After the assurance given by the Secretary of State that the necessary Amendments to this Bill will receive due consideration I feel sure there will be no desire to oppose the Second Reading. There is no doubt in the minds of those associated with their administration that the money arising from some of these endowments could be applied in other directions in a manner which would be carrying out the spirit of the original donor. As one who has had some little part in the negotiations I can testify that we have been fairly met by the heads of the Department and by the Secretary of State. Though some of the points are matters for Committee, it is worth while pointing out here that Clause 3 (1, a) does not make it clear that where new schemes are being prepared to replace existing schemes the Commissioners must give consideration to the original intentions of the donor. I understand that as a result of negotiations, there is an understanding that the paragraph will be made more explicit when the Bill is in Committee. Further, Clause 4 (1, b) excepts from the purview of the Commissioners the university endowments. But there are also endowments in Scotland which are set aside specifically for university purposes. I have in mind a scheme which has just been approved by a body of governors and by an education authority which sets aside a certain sum of money which can be used only for one purpose, namely, the provision of bursaries at St. Andrews or other Scottish universities; and those associated with the endowments would like to see even these particular endowments left clear of the purview of the Commissioners; but I admit this is a matter for discussion in Committee. In Clause 9 certain words are omitted which were in the 1882 Act, namely: so far as applicable or applied to educational purposes. I have in mind two types of endowment in Scotland. One is the endowment dealing wholly with education, and the other is the endowment which may deal partly with education and partly with charity. In the Kirkcaldy district, for instance, we have an important trust fund, part of which is used for educational purposes and another part for feeding and clothing the poor people. Then there is the Morgan Trust, which is one of the finest educational trusts in Scotland. It has an annual income of £3,250, of which £2,350 is used for charitable purposes, providing boots and clothing, so that the poor children may be kept in a healthier condition and be enabled to derive greater benefits from education. There is a desire on the part of certain governors associated with this particular endowment that, so far as the charitable side of the trust is concerned, they should be allowed to continue their schemes without interference. I do not say that that is altogether desirable, but I am submitting the view of those who have asked me to refer to this particular subject.

Another point I want to mention is the provision made under Clause 28 allowing education authorities to submit single schemes dealing with all the endowments under their control. In the case of Fife, we have 29 endowment schemes which could be managed quite well under one scheme, instead of having 29 audits and 29 different managing bodies, I sincerely hope that the Second Beading of this Measure will be carried unanimously, and that in the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills we shall be able to hammer out any little differences.

Mr. COWAN

I think the Measure which we are now considering is one which will receive a hearty welcome in every part of the House. The Report of the Departmental Committee has clearly shown that it is not only desirable, but absolutely necessary in the interests of efficiency that there should be a revision of the various endowment schemes in Scotland. The powers which it is proposed to confer on the Commissioners under the Bill are very considerable, but I believe that in order to achieve the full purpose intended it will be necessary still to further enlarge those powers in some respects. We have the assurance of the Secretary of State for Scotland that he will be quite willing to consider any representations of that kind. There is one question which I wish to ask. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman can answer it now or whether it will be more convenient for him to answer it during the Committee stage. I want to know when the right hon. Gentleman will be able to give the names of the Commissioners whom it is proposed to appoint. I am sure every hon. Member of the House would be much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman if he would publish that information as soon as possible.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR

My colleague in the representation of Dundee (Mr. Johnston) was unfortunately unable to be present at our meeting with the representatives of the Morgan Trust, but I was very glad to hear of his approval of the suggested Amendments. I should have expected the Secretary of State to state more explicitly that he had been reviewing those suggested Amendments. The hon. Member for Peebles (Mr. Westwood) has mentioned their main features, and I should have thought that, during this brief consideration of the Bill on Second Reading, the right hon. Gentleman might have touched upon some of them and let us know whether he is in agreement with them. The representatives of the Morgan Trust, while they feel that there is no particular necessity for any change, are quite agreeable to the majority of the suggested Amendments put forward by the representatives of the various endowments involved in the fulfilment of the general undertaking, and perhaps in particular the right hon. Gentleman might say whether there is a scheme in reference to Clause 3 (1), and what assurance there will be that the purpose of the founder will be carefully reserved. I am quite willing that the Bill should receive a Second Reading, but should be glad if a more definite statement could be made now as to the right hon. Gentleman's views regarding the suggested Amendments.

Sir J. GILMOUR

I think it would be very undesirable, at this stage of the Bill, to go into details in regard to the suggested Amendments. I have assured the House that we will give full consideration to them, following on the discussions that have already passed between my Department and the interests concerned. With regard to the question which has been put to me as to the composition of the Commission, perhaps I might give the names to the House, and I hope that they will be accepted as representative of the various districts of Scotland. The following have consented to serve: The Earl of Elgin; Sheriff Fenton, who has particular legal knowledge, which is desirable on these questions; the Hon. Lady Hope, who served on the Committee and who represents the women's side; Mr. Joseph Duncan, who also served on the inquiry, and has wide knowledge of the matters involved; Professor Gray of Aberdeen, representing the North of Scotland; Mr. John Roxburgh, representing the West of Scotland; and Sir Alexander Wright, the general manager of the Royal Bank of Scotland, representing the Edinburgh district. Mr. Roxburgh also sat on the Committee of Inquiry, and has taken a great interest in these matters. I hope that the House will believe that this is a very strong Commission, and, will, therefore, have confidence in it.