HC Deb 09 March 1944 vol 397 cc2340-3
Sir J. Lamb

I beg to move, in page 18, line 16, to leave out, "except an aided secondary school."

This Amendment is consequential upon a later Amendment, which I have upon the Paper. [Laughter.] The amusement of hon. Members shows how difficult it is to follow this complicated Bill. The question which I want to ask is a legitimate one. Will the later Amendment, which is to leave out Sub-section (2), be called?

The Deputy-Chairman

I am not concerned with the later Amendment at the moment. The Ruling is that the present Amendment can be discussed now, but if the hon. Member does not wish to do so, that is another matter.

Mr. Cove

Would it be possible to have an indication as to how wide the discussion may be on this Amendment? Will it cover a discussion on the Amendment which I have on the Paper—in page 18, line 18, to leave out from "shall," to "be," in line 19? I do not know whether I am correct in saying that I heard that my Amendment was not going to be called.

The Deputy-Chairman

As far as I can make out from the Amendment that has been moved, there should be a general Debate here on the extent of control. I do not want it to be too narrow and I do not want it to be unlimited in length.

Sir J. Lamb

The local authority will have the control of secular education in the county secondary school, and they wish to have the control of secular education in the auxiliary school. Is my right hon. Friend prepared to make the alteration suggested to enable them to have the control of secondary schools which they have in the council schools?

Mr. Cove

This raises rather an important issue. The Clause as it stands provides that in county controlled schools and special grammar schools, secular instruction should be under the control of the local education authority, except where the rules of procedure of regulations of government provide otherwise. I take strong exception to the exception that is being incorporated in the Clause. As I understand it, secular inspection is under the control, even in the Church schools, of the local education authorities. As we now have this Clause drafted, it will allow it to pass away from the authorities and to go to the managers. Here we are up against this fundamental principle—the same principle which we had earlier to-day—that, where public money is granted for public service and for running schools, there should be public control. That is the issue that is involved in this Clause, and, of course, it is a first class issue. I must say that the Clause as drafted is really retrogressive.

Mr. R. Morģan

Is the hon. Member referring to Clause 22, Part I or Part II?

Mr. Cove

I understand that the Deputy-Chairman has allowed a discussion of the principles involved in the whole of the Clause. It is perfectly clear that the Clause does now allow an escape, if you like to put it that way, from public control. I hope the Minister will therefore look at this again and see if he can meet us. It is the same thing running through the whole business. Public authorities are being squeezed out and are not getting the standing and control that they had, and I hope the Minister will look at this again.

Mr. Butler

I really think that this situation is not quite so serious as hon. Members imagine, because of the reference to the rules of management or articles of government of the schools, which are saved by the deliberate expression "saving them" included in the section. The general principles of the control of secular instruction, some of which I adumbrated in my original speech, will apply to all types of secondary education, and, therefore, to the extent that I have still to acquaint the Committee with the contents of those general principles, the hon. Member need not get unduly depressed, and, therefore, there is not so big an issue in this as he may imagine.

I am in the hands of the Committee. If they will accept from me that we cannot fully appreciate the full significance of this until we have clearly in mind the content of the general principles, then I think it would be unnecessary to have a long Debate on this question at this stage. If, on the other hand, the Committee wants to consider the matter at greater length, I think the Government should not initiate a long discussion at this hour and I would not press the matter. We have made considerable progress and are more or less up to our schedule, and therefore the Government do not wish to press the Committee. If they can accept from me that there is a great deal of work to do on the next Sitting Day, if we are to keep to our schedule—we have got approximately half-way already—I think we may not press the Committee for any further work now. If they will accept from me that this is really a matter to be more fully explained when Members realise the contents of the general principles, perhaps the hon. Member will not press the Amendment. The ideal course for the Government would be that this Amendment should not be pressed, and that we should get this Clause under the general umbrella of what I said earlier.

The Deputy-Chairman

On the point of Order, I should point out that this would be, strictly speaking, irregular.

Mr. Cove

I would not like to allow this Clause to go through without some further discussion, and I think it would facilitate business if we had further discussion. It does raise important issues, and I should be glad to discuss them at some convenient time.

The Deputy-Chairman

May I suggest that a way out of the difficulty would be that the Amendment should be withdrawn, and then a full discussion could take place on the Question that the Clause stand part of the Bill?

Mr. C. Davies

That is what I was going to suggest. If we could dispose of the Amendment and have our general discussion on the next Sitting Day, on the Question "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," I think it would meet with general approval.

Mr. R. Morģan

Should we have a chance of discusing Sub-section (2) under the promise given?

Mr. Butler

That would arise on the Question "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Messer

There is very deep concern about this. There is a fear that the attempt made by county councils, who have done their best to unify education in both direct-grant and aided schools, may be weakened, unless there is an Amendment. Do I understand that if the Amendment is withdrawn and we discuss the Question on the Clause standing part, the right hon. Gentleman will be prepared to make an announcement?

Mr. Butler

I do not like the word "announcement." I will be prepared further to clarify the situation, but I do not think I can do it now. It is on the Question "That the Clause stand part of the Bill" that I can best do it.

Sir J. Lamb

I think this does want further clarification, and, on the promise given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again,"—[Captain McEzeien.] put, and agreed to.

Committee report Progress; to sit again upon the next Sitting Day.