§ 32. Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas Mooreasked the Minister of Education what plans she has in mind for increasing the number of certificated school teachers so that the size of classes may be reduced; and how she proposes to deal with the growing shortage in mathematical and science teachers.
§ Miss HorsbrughMy plans provide for an increase in the number of teachers employed in primary and secondary schools at the rate of between 3,000 and 4,000 a year, but during the next few years the school roll will be increasing so rapidly that this increase will not suffice for any general reduction in the size of classes.
On the second part of the Question. I cannot usefully add anything to the reply which I gave a fortnight ago to my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, North (Mr. C. I. Orr-Ewing).
§ Sir T. MooreDoes not my right hon. Friend realise that school teachers are human like the rest of us, that they want to marry and breed like the rest of us, and that the crux of the whole problem is an adequate salary, which they have not ever had?
§ 37. Mr. Mulleyasked the Minister of Education if, in view of the fact that she recognises a married student's parents-in-law in order to pay him a reduced 641 grant, she will amend her training of teachers' grant regulations, in order to recognise his marriage for grant purposes.
§ Miss HorsbrughNo, Sir. It seems to me reasonable to pay maintenance grant at one rate to students living with parents, relatives or friends, and at a higher rate for those who are living in a college hostel or in lodgings run on a business footing. While this principle is applied to students generally, I could not properly make an exception in the case which the hon. Member has in mind just because the student is married.
§ Mr. MulleyWill the right hon. Lady not look again at this case? It seems clear that if this student was living at the same address, unmarried, he would be receiving a grant of £215, but because the Minister is not able to make him a marriage grant on behalf of his wife and family it seems very unreasonable that his grant should be reduced by £50 because the people he is living with are his relations-in-law. Does the right hon. Lady really think that a married man, his wife and child can subsist on £165 a year and also pay the necessary expenses for his college education?
§ Miss HorsbrughIf the hon. Gentleman will read the answer I have given, I think he will find that it meets all the points he has put in his supplementary question.