HC Deb 17 July 1958 vol 591 cc1572-82

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Sir G. Wills.]

10.31 p.m.

Mr. Eric Johnson (Manchester, Blackley)

I wish to turn to a subject very different from that which we have been discussing earlier today, namely, the question of the deferment from National Service of graduates with third-class honours degrees in mathematics in order to take up teaching posts.

This matters, of course, affects many schools, but my reason for wishing to draw attention to it is the immense difficulty which is being experienced by the North Manchester Grammar School in getting teachers of this subject. That school, which is in my constituency, has about 730 boys. It is the only grammar school in north Manchester. It has a very fine record in open scholarships and in public examinations. In fact, about one in five of the boys there go to universities. It has a sixth form of 140 boys and nearly 90 of those are taking science and mathematics. The school has a high reputation for teaching those two subjects.

As I understand the position—and my hon. Friend will no doubt correct me if I am wrong—as regards deferment from National Service of graduates who want to take up teaching posts, it is that those with a first-class or second-class honours degree in mathematics or science who are deferred, a scheme which has since been extended to cover those with a third-class or a pass degree in chemistry or one of the biological sciences and an ordinary or general degree in science.

For some reason or other, third-class honours graduates in physics and mathematics have to do their National Service. It seems to me to be rather a strange arrangement that a man with an ordinary degree in science, which would often include mathematics as a main subject, has his National Service indefinitely deferred, but that a man with a higher standard of third-class honours in mathematics is not deferred. One of the consequences undoubtedly is that teachers of the subject are almost unobtainable.

When it was known that I intended to raise the subject I received a letter from the headmaster of another grammar school pointing out that the teaching of physics and mathematics in his school was being seriously jeopardised by the call-up of a man with a third-class honours degree in physics. However, I think that I can best explain the effect of the Regulation by referring to the North Manchester Grammar School.

This summer that school is losing from its large mathematics department two men who take a high proportion of the sixth form work. Both men have second-class honours degrees. One of them has a particularly long experience in teaching. Both have gone to take up posts of greater responsibility. The headmaster has advertised several times for replacements. For one post he has not received a single application. For the other he received one application, but, unfortunately, the man had taken up another post before he received the headmaster's letter asking him to come.

The headmaster has written personally to the education departments and to the appointments boards of the universities, and the upshot of it all has been that he has been able to get one man with an ordinary degree in mathematics and science, but he cannot come to the school until next January.

Therefore the position will be that for the next term both of these positions will be unfilled, and it looks that one cannot be filled at all. Obviously the amount of mathematics taught in the main part of the school cannot be reduced and the loss will have to be borne entirely by the sixth form students in science and mathematics. To show what has been done in the school, in the last nine years the upper science sixth has increased in numbers from 13 to 50 and the numbers are still increasing slightly. In the lower sixth they have increased from 8 to 36. At the moment there will be about 30 to 35 science students in the upper sixth next year who will take mathematics as one of three "A" subjects in the General Certificate of Education; and another 10 or 12 will not only have mathematics, but will have it as a double subject, mathematics and theoretical mathematics, for two of their "A" subjects. The upshot of this will be that for the next term these boys will receive much less than half the attention they ought to have, and for the first term next year they will receive a little more than half.

There is one way out of this difficulty. The headmaster has heard of someone with a third-class honours degree in mathematics, with a certificate in education and an excellent report from his practice school. He has already been refused deferment, but in view of the very serious position at the school the headmaster thought it right to interview him in the hope that, if he were satisfactory, this decision could be reconsidered. He found that the man had suitable qualifications for the post that the school was trying so desperately to fill, but my right hon. Friend the Minister of Education, to whom the application was made in the first instance, felt that he could not make any exception in an individual case and that he could not make special representations to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and National Service for this man's deferment.

I am, of course, aware that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and National Service has explained the need for the present Regulations by saying that there is a serious shortage of graduates with third-class honours or a pass degree in physics and mathematics in the Armed Forces, and that obviously there is a greater need in the Forces for teachers of these subjects than for teachers of chemistry and biology. That may well be so. I have no idea to what extent these subjects are taught or needed in the Forces nowadays. It would be out of order for me to go into the subject of the education branches of the different Services, but I think that it is open to doubt whether the most efficient and economical use is made of teachers by putting some of them into uniform. It seems to me that the present policy will defeat its own object. If a knowledge of mathematics and physics is needed in the Forces, surely the right place to start learning these subjects is at school. If mathematics is not taught as well as it might be at school, because those who would be teaching it are in the Forces, surely the standard will progressively decline.

In any event, this source of supply of teachers for the Forces is likely to dry up when the call-up ends in 1960. I cannot agree that it is reasonable that a deferment should be granted to a man with a pass degree in science but refused to a man with a third-class honours degree in mathematics. I hope that I can persuade my hon. Friend to accept that point of view as being reasonable. If I cannot do that, may I try to persuade him that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Education is wrong in saying that exceptions cannot be made in individual cases. Surely, careful consideration should be given to every individual case in the light of the need wherever the need is greater at a particular time, rather than that we should try to stick to a rigid set of rules. I believe that, in the national interest, the case I have tried to make on behalf of the grammar schools is stronger than the case which can be made for the Services, and I hope that my hon. Friend will give it his sympathetic and favourable consideration.

10.41 p.m.

Mr. William Hannan (Glasgow, Maryhill)

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Manchester, Blackley (Mr. E. Johnson) for raising this subject and giving me a brief opportunity to add a word in support of the contention which he has advanced. I put questions on this very topic last February, and, in reply, the Minister was kind enough to let me have a copy of his first circular, in paragraph 5 of which are set out the conditions for deferment of men who have degrees from universities. I must confess that, coming from Glasgow, I was not too well acquainted with the degrees of English universities, but I know that in Scotland graduates with third-class honours degrees are looked upon very highly.

The position has been made very clear, I think, by the circular issued only this month by the Minister of Labour, in which the conditions are plainly set out. I quote from paragraph (iii): Indefinite deferment for school teaching may be granted to men with first or second-class honours degrees in science or mathematics, and also to those with a third-class honours or pass degree in chemistry or one of the biological sciences, or with a general or ordinary degree in science. As the hon. Member for Blackley has said, the matter seems mast inconsistent. Whereas a third-class honours teacher in chemistry, geology or one of the biological sciences is exempt, a third-class honours man in mathematics and physics is not so exempt. Is not that the position? As the hon. Gentleman pointed out, it may be that the Services must have their quota, but I would make this suggestion to the Minister. It has been mooted in the past that, because of the overall shortage of science teachers in schools, we should call upon men in industry to be seconded for a number of hours each week in order that they might go to certain schools and lend assistance. Would not it be more practical to use such men in the area adjacent to an Army unit, wherever they are, and so relieve men who have indicated that their bent and calling is to go into the schools?

In Britain's position today vis-à-vis the United States and Soviet Russia, in the production of science graduates and teachers and the emphasis there is in industry upon science, the importance of teaching in the schools is becoming more pronounced. We have had report upon report—the Appleton Report and others—stressing the need for teachers. I know that the Armed Forces must have their quota, but I ask the Minister to look at the matter again, bearing in mind that, unless we have more teachers in the schools, we shall cut off the source of supply, as the hon. Member for Blackley said.

In reply to my Question on 19th February this year, the Minister said: I am ready to look at the matter again … I agree that in this respect the position is not wholly logical, because the deferment and quota schemes were applied to industry before the different deferments for teaching were made by my Ministry".—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 19th February, 1958; Vol. 582, c. 1206.] For the Minister, a Scotsman, to agree that something was not quite logical was a great admission to make. What he was saying was not logical was that third-class honours graduates in mathematics and science are exempt if they enter jobs approved by the Minister, but are not so exempt if they are undergoing teacher-training courses, even if they are attending a university in order to take the degree of bachelor of education.

In other words, the cart is being put before the horse in this instance, and I should like to ask whether the Minister has given to this matter the further consideration he indicated in his reply. Having admitted that there is a certain amount of illogicality in the position, and as Scotsmen do not like illogical things to last for ever, has he altered his mind, or can he give hope that the present position will be altered?

10.47 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour and National Service (Mr. Richard Wood)

In replying to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mr. Hannan) I will try to be guile exceptionally logical, but, first, I should like to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Blackley (Mr. E. Johnson) for giving me the chance of making some statement on this matter. In the short time that I have been at the Ministry of Labour, I have gathered that it is a question that bothers quite a number of my hon. Friends and other hon. Members, and I have no need at all—although I was extremely interested to hear what my hon. Friend said about the difficulties, in particular, of the North Manchester Grammar School—to be convinced of the very serious difficulties which the teaching profession in general is facing at present.

If I may, I will answer my hon. Friend's questions as I go along, but first I should like to say a word in reply to the suggestion made by the hon. Member for Maryhill that it is illogical that graduates with third-Cass honours or pass degrees in physics or mathematics can be deferred for defence projects or the development of atomic energy but not for teaching. I am very frightened, indeed, to admit to him that there is any illogicality in it at all, but I must do so, and the reason for it is, as he suggested, the way in which the deferment scheme developed. I should like to say a little more about that in a moment.

As he knows, by 1953, I think it was, all science and engineering graduates could be deferred for defence projects and work connected with atomic energy but, as he also knows, the question of the deferment for teachers was not raised at all until 1956—three years later. By that time, the number of deferments was so large that the deferment for teaching, which the hon. Member would, naturally, like, could not be made available to all science graduates.

I should like to look rather more closely at the development of this deferment scheme because, in this, as in a number of other questions, a study of the history makes a little easier the understanding of the present. Incidentally, I would mention that for the benefit of hon. Members a note on the deferment scheme in general has been put by my right hon. Friend in the Library, and a copy has been placed in the Library of the other place. I think the hon. Member has already availed himself of it.

The deferment scheme for science and engineering graduates was originally introduced in 1949 in order to allow a few graduates of high calibre to be deferred for important work connected with the defence programme. That was the beginning of it. As it developed and as the years went by, there was naturally pressure to extend the scheme, and by five years ago, in 1953, indefinite deferment could be granted for any science or engineering graduate for employment on research or development work on designated defence projects. That is what I have already mentioned, and that included the development of atomic energy.

It was not, as I said, until 1956, three years later, that the scheme was first extended to civil employment. There were representations from the Education Departments; the matter was considered by my right hon. Friend's Technical Personnel Committee and indefinite deferment was then granted to science graduates, including mathematics graduates, with first or second-class honours for approved teaching posts in secondary schools. In the following year, in 1957, in order to try to help industry and other important work, indefinite deferment could be granted to graduates with first-class honours for any work which needed a degree in science and engineering.

The industry and the teaching profession rather naturally continued to press for greater relaxation—I make no complaint about that—and in respect of this year the Ministry of Labour made two more concessions for graduates leaving universities in 1958. The first was that the scheme which allowed first-class honours men an almost free choice of employment, was extended to men with second-class honours who had also taken a higher degree, and the other extension was that in addition to the men with first or second-class honours, those with third-class and pass degrees in chemistry or biology, and those, as my hon. Friend said, with ordinary or general degrees in science, were allowed indefinite deferment for approved teaching posts.

Before I consider the precise question that the hon. Gentleman raised, I should like to point out the effect which the arrangements already in force have in fact had. In 1957 there were available for National Service—that is, excluding the men with first-class honours who anyhow had a free choice of employment—600 young men with degrees in physics or mathematics and under one or other of the schemes which I have already mentioned, out of that 600, 370 were deferred. That includes 109 deferred for teaching in schools. Another 100 were medically unfit and, therefore, the Services in the end got 130 out of that 600 available. Therefore, if I may say so with respect, it is not quite true for my hon. Friend to suggest that all these people whom he thinks ought to be teaching are in fact in uniform. A great many have been deferred under one or other of these schemes. The 1958 figures are not yet available, but I understand that the number called up will be a great deal fewer than the 130 out of 600 called up in 1957.

The whole crux of this question, as my hon. Friend has reminded me, and as I think the hon. Member for Maryhill also mentioned, is the need which the Services have for these particular graduates in physics and mathematics. I need not remind the House that modern weapons have become increasingly complex. The Services are doing their own research and development on a great many of them.

The Army, for instance, needs graduates for its Atomic Warfare Establishment, and the Royal Artillery Rocket Regiment. The Air Force needs them for the establishment at Farnborough and guided weapon project teams, and, I understand, they are also needed by the Services in their education branches in order to try to train Regular soldiers in the principles involved in the operation and maintenance of these complicated weapons. There are other needs the Services have, and the number available to them is not really very great.

The reason for the discrimination between degrees in different subjects, physics and mathematics on one side, and the others on the other side, is the much greater need of the Services for men with degrees in physics or mathematics than for men with degrees in chemistry and biology. It is obvious that the need for the one is much greater than the other. Particularly as National Service, as we all hope, draws to a close there are a great many different interests competing strongly for the manpower available: the defence Departments and their contractors; industry, which rightly stresses the need to try to keep research and production methods up to date; those who are connected with nuclear power; the teaching profession, which naturally claims a very high priority for its work; and, lastly, the Services, the Cinderellas, beg to be left with the few men they need to meet their wants.

The job of the Minister of Labour is to try to balance the competing claims between all these varying interests. It is suggested that we are making it difficult for the schools to get the teachers they need. I require no convincing of the importance of increasing the number of teachers in science and mathematics. I am immensely conscious of the great difficulty which the schools are facing at the moment in trying to get these teachers. The Minister has already made very considerable concessions. There have been relaxations almost every year. Three hundred graduates were deferred last year for school teaching, and there are likely to be over 400 in 1958.

If we make it easier for the teaching profession, we make it at the same time harder for defence projects, industry, nuclear power and the Services. Therefore, the Minister's task, with the help of his Technical Personnel Committee, is to try to arrive at a decision which gives a reasonable share to everyone. These deferment arrangements for graduates leaving this year are the result of careful, if not painful, consideration. They are now in operation, and even if shown to be undesirable, it would be impracticable to alter them at this stage. They are not by any means immutable, they have been varied from year to year, and the Technical Personnel Committee reviews them at the Ministry's request in the autumn. At the next review the Committee will not only study the results of the present concessions, but will reflect on what has been said about them, and will undoubtedly bear in mind the considerations which both hon. Gentlemen put before me this evening.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at one minute to Eleven o'clock.