HC Deb 01 November 1937 vol 328 cc686-90

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain Margesson.]

11.15 p.m.

Mr. Logan

I wish to call the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education to an important matter which concerns Liverpool, and to the fact that in that city an election is taking place in which the whole topic is "no grants for non-provided schools." It was the unanimous opinion of the House when the 1936 Act was passed that not only Church of England, but Roman Catholic schools should be able to participate. It was not a permissive Measure; it was mandatory and operative. I would say to my colleagues that, whatever their opinion, they must agree that the House unanimously came to a common understanding in the 1936 Act that it should be operative. It was not a question of being permissive; it was only a question of coming to terms. We did come to terms, and I was pleased to accept the Bill in the Committee Room on behalf of the Roman Catholics. We got rid of the difficulties and came to a settlement by common agreement. We thought that the days of religious indifference, intolerance and bigotry had passed, and that in the House of Commons a solution had been worked out.

I find that in the City Council a declaration has been made which, in my opinion, has no authority. I declare that it is outside the procedure of ordinary municipal rule for a declaration to be made which is against the opinion of the House of Commons and to be made the cry as a political stunt at an election. This election has taken place. There will be losses. I am not going to say anything about an election under false pretences, but it is an abuse of the right of this House that any municipality should abrogate to itself the right to make a statement before an agreement has been arrived at. Nobody, whether he be Labour or Tory, has any right to make any pronouncement contrary to the wish of this House as expressed in an Act of Parliament. I go so far as to say that whether it be mandatory or permissive, no such right should be vested in any authority and it should not be allowed to place it as a false issue before the electorate. Is not such a declaration contrary to municipal procedure?

It was very hard for the late Minister of Education to get that Act through the House. There was a great difference of opinion, but the matter was settled. Now that it is being worked in the various cities in the country, I want to know whether it is the intention of the Government to put this Act into operation, and if that be so, how they intend to act with regard to the City of Liverpool, which refuses to put the Act into operation. Will the ratepayers have to conform to the wish of the Ministry, or is the Act to be a dead letter. If so, I can tell the Minister that there will be repercussions all over the country, and I am not anxious to see these sectarian differences arise again. I want the Minister to understand that the situation is most critical, and that in a matter of such paramount import- ance, no political party has any right to upset an arrangement made by this House.

Some people say that it is a permissive Act, but I am going to argue that it is not, because an agreement has to be arrived at with both sets of schools, and placed before the municipal body. The Minister has to be consulted. The Act lays down that the school-leaving age must be operative, and if this Act does not become operative in the City of Liverpool, the school-leaving age provisions cannot be operated, and therefore, it cannot be effective in any part of the country. In view of the alarming position created, what does the Minister intend to do? We discussed this problem here for a long time; it is a problem of many complexities, and all parties here, including every shade of opinion, were most anxious to get rid of the difficulties. Because of that feeling many difficulties were settled. As regards the hierarchy, an arrangement was entered into which was in the spirit of compromise, and it was adjudged by the late Minister of Education to be a wonderful achievement. He gave me to understand that of all places the city of Liverpool would be the last place where there would be any doubt in regard to the magnanimity of that particular education body in dealing with this subject.

It is very strange that an Act which occupied so much of the time of Members of this House, an Act in regard to which all the religious bodies were anxious to come to an agreement should have given rise to this position. I am sure the Minister must be anxious to get this difficulty out of the road. I am not anxious to engender any bitterness of feeling, but I want the Minister to enter into consultation with the responsible representatives of the City of Liverpool, and see whether we cannot get wiser counsels to prevail and get a settlement of this education problem once and for all. If he is able to arrive at any such amicable arrangement, he will have done good work for all concerned.

11.24 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education (Mr. Kenneth Lindsay)

In the very few minutes which are left to me I can only reiterate the sense of the answer which I gave to my hon. Friend, which was that my Noble Friend "hopes that the local education committee will come to no such decision." But I would like to put this Liverpool question in perspective and to say here, at this box, that this is a unique situation, and that throughout the rest of the country this Act is being worked with the greatest good will. I think the best I can do is to quote what the late President said during the discussion of Clause 7, because I think that gives the spirit in which the Act should be worked and really answers the question of the hon. Member about its being permissive: This plan is based on one fundamental conception, and that is that the local authorities are anxious to have an opportunity of getting reorganisation carried out with the co-operation of the church schools, that the plan, such as it is, based on voluntary agreement between the local authorities and the church schools, is one which the local authorities mean and desire to take advantage of, and that in leaving it to an agreement of this kind we are leaving it to an agreement between two partners in education who are really anxious to get a specific, important and urgent bit of work done. Therefore, the whole of the plan is based upon the belief, to which I see no reason to disagree, that the local authorities generally throughout the country are prepared if Parliament accepts this plan, to work it in a spirit of co-operation and good will and with a desire to get the best done for the children. So said the late President.

It is true that the Act is permissive. I think the important part of it, as far as Liverpool is concerned, is that we have to bear in mind that many of the school premises are notoriously out of date. They are unsuitable and they are cramped. I go so far as to say that they are unsafe. I happen to know that. I cannot complain of the tone of the hon. Member's speech, and I do not wish in these few minutes to engender any bad feeling. It is not for me to give an answer on a hypothetical situation which may arise, or to go into details about the various parties in this election.

All I can say is that we hope that better counsels will prevail. I do not personally believe that the expenditure of a ¾d. rate is going to cripple the finances of the City of Liverpool, though I realise that they are hardly hit in many ways. But I must say that if—and this is the question that the hon. Member puts to me a situation arises in which there is a complete refusal, it is perfectly clear that the whole situation will have to be re-examined, and we shall have to say that it will be the duty of the local education authority to provide accommodation, which, I need not say, would probably be still more expensive.

I do not think the hon. Member would wish me to go further than that to-night. My answer to his two specific questions is, first, that the Act is legally permissive, but there is a spirit behind it as a result of which it is being worked throughout the country in the sense in which the late President saw the Bill through the House; and, secondly, it is to the advantage of all parties concerned that during these next few days and weeks better and wiser counsels should prevail, and that the same spirit which is being shown in very different parts of the country, including the rural parts of England, should, in both the Church of England and the Roman Catholic parties, prevail in Liverpool.

Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine Minutes after Eleven o'Clock.