§ 40. Mr. MACQUISTENasked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the cost of the Education Act per annum per scholar in the parish of Hounam in 1918–19 was £8 and in 1920–21 it is £18 1s. in the parish of Yarrow it was £4 and now £16; in Garngunnock £6, now £37 17s. 6d.; in Drymen £7, now £68; in Killearn £2 6s. Id., now £31 13s. 4d.; Strathblane £4 2s., now £40 19s.; Baldernoek £5 19s., now £31 4s. 3d.; Fenwick £1, now £16; in Largs £3 10s. 10d., now £22 7s. 10d; in Arrochar £5, now £24 3s., and that practically all the other rural parishes in Scotland are similarly afflicted; was he aware when he introduced the Act that it would have such an effect upon the rates; if he was aware, was any public indication given to the ratepayers that such increases were to be inflicted upon them so as to enable them to defend themselves; and, if such rates are continued, does he think that rural ratepayers will be able to have any children to send to school?
The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. Munro)As to the first and second parts of the question, while I have not verified the actual figures quoted, it is a matter of common knowledge that there has been a marked rise in the education rate in many rural parishes in Scotland. As to the third and fourth parts, in so far as this rise is duo to the same causes as have produced a rise in the cost of the other necessaries of life, I think that its full extent was not and could not have been foreseen. On the other hand, in so far as it is the result of the Act, I was, of course, aware that the enlargement of education areas, which involved an equalisation of contribution from the constituent parts of each, was bound to result in a gain to some parishes and a loss to others. I have no reason to 190 suppose that, in the many discussions that took place regarding the Act, both inside and outside of the House, this obvious consideration was absent from the minds of those who interested themselves in the matter. The last part of the question is, I apprehend, intended to be humorous rather than serious.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that this enormous increase of rates in this and other parishes will make it almost impossible for those who have large families of children to raise those families—that it takes them all their time to keep in touch with the butcher and the baker and to feed them? Is he not aware that in the country districts of Scotland there will be no satisfaction till his entire Act is repealed, and is he willing to apply the principle of local veto to this Education Act?
§ Mr. J. H. THOMASBefore the right hon. Gentleman answers that, may I ask whether he is aware that this opposition to education of the people is more imaginary than real, and limited mainly to questions in this House?
Mr. MUNROIt is difficult to answer all the questions which have been put to me, but I am rather inclined to agree, if I may say so, with my right hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Thomas). With regard to what, my hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Macquisten) has said about local veto, I understand that he has just come back from a campaign against that principle, and I am, therefore, rather surprised that he should seek to apply the principle to education. I think the form of this question suggests that this matter can be much better discussed in another way than by question and answer. I hope to have an opportunity of meeting my Scottish colleagues next week to discuss this question, and I hope that my hon. and learned Friend will be there.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENIs not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the objection in Scotland is absolutely overwhelming in every district; that, when I mentioned it at any meeting recently in Scotland, it was greeted with a storm of derision and hatred there; and that nothing has moved the feelings of the Scottish people more deeply than that this Act has been imposed upon them?
§ Mr. THOMASIs the right hon. Gentleman of opinion that the audiences that the hon. and learned Member would meet would be the best judges?
Mr. MUNROI do not know what audiences my hon. and learned Friend would meet, but I claim to be as well acquainted with the feeling in Scotland as he is, and I think that his interpretation of that feeling has been grossly exaggerated.
Sir J. D. REESDoes the right hon. Gentleman remember that, on the occasion of the discussion of the Scottish Estimates, when an hon. Member wished to raise this question he had no opportunity of so doing; and has the right hon. Gentleman any intention of abating this oppression, which is obvious to every visitor to Scotland?
Mr. MUNROThe incident to which my hon. Friend refers was one which I could not possibly have prevented. The discussion on the Scottish Estimates was limited through no fault of mine. With regard to the remedy for the problem which undoubtedly exists, that is to be discussed among the Scottish Members at the earliest possible moment, with a view to finding a remedy.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are some thing like 300 or 400 parishes—
§ Mr. SPEAKERSir Alexander Sprot.
41. Colonel Sir A. SPROTasked the Secretary for Scotland if he is now prepared with some form of relief for parishes where the substitution of the county for the parish as the rating unit for education is causing hardships?
Mr. MUNROI can assure my hon. and gallant Friend that I am giving this matter my most anxious consideration, and that I will welcome any specific suggestion for a solution of the problem which may come from him or from any other responsible person.
Sir A. SPROTIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that, so long ago as December last, he gave me an assurance, and gave the same assurance to a deputation, that the Department have under their consideration the possibility of devising some suitable form of relief for parishes where the substitution of the county for the 192 parish as the rating unit for education may have caused hardship?
Mr. MUNROThe Department is undoubtedly engaged in considering that matter now, but the solution of the difficulty is not nearly so easy as my hon. and gallant Friend seems to think. As I have said, if he has any suggestion to make I shall be most happy to consider it
Sir A. SPROTIs it not from the right hon. Gentleman that the suggestion ought to come, and not from me?
Mr. MUNROI shall certainly be ready to make proposals when I have the honour of meeting my Scottish colleagues, but I am far from regarding myself as the only fount of wisdom in this matter, and I hope my hon. and gallant Friend will assist me.