SCHOOL BOARDS' EXPENSES BILL. (Hansard, 27 July 1897)

§ *LORD NORTON
moved to leave out "now," and add at the end of the Motion "this day three months." He deprecated the proposal of the Bill, which was to allow any three members of a School Board to hold conferences, the expenses of which would be put upon the rates. Not only that, but they might make an annual institution of these meetings He believed that the secret of the success of the country lay in its distribution of self administration, but unfortunately the tendency of the different boards and councils was not to attend to their business as executive bodies but to turn immediately to talking and discussing. Every body, it seemed, must make itself a little Parliament. That this tendency was growing was shown by many instances such its the school teachers forming themselves into a guild, told even the Inspectors of the Education Department debating within the walls of their office. What was almost new in this Bill was the proposal to charge the expenses of these conferences upon the public taxation. As it was the charges made by the School Boards on the rates were increasing with rapidity every year, and now they were to have power to make a new kind of charge for discussions of the business assigned them by Parliament. It might be asked why School. Boards only should have this privilege, and not managers of Voluntary Schools also. The School Boards had got a Government Bill which had slipped through without anyone knowing anything about it, and if similar bodies could get voting power enough to get themselves attended to by the Government they would take the hint given them by the Bill. The expense to the rates was not so mischievous as the principle. They did not know the liabilities they were incurring from day to day while secret official conferences were going on. It was detrimental to the public service that these bodies 1207 should be perpetually conferring secretly, "and sharing with the Department the responsible authority of Parliament. They did not know how far these administrative bodies warped the judgment of Government, and trenched on the functions of Legislatures. It was useless to hope to extinguish this Bill this year. But he was glad of the opportunity of calling attention to the Bill, for he was perfectly certain the secret of success of the Bill in having reached the present stage was that none of their Lordships and none in the other House knew anything about it.

*THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY (Lord JAMES of HEREFORD)
said his noble Friend the Lord President had asked him to express the hope that the House would allow the Bill to proceed. The Bill had passed every stage in the other House and he was not aware that Government Bills slipped through as his noble Friend suggested without being subjected to criticism. The noble Lord had drawn an exaggerated picture of extravagance. The whole of the expenses that could be incurred under the Bill was probably not more than that of three persons attending a conference once a year. Similar power had not been conferred on Voluntary Schools because they had the power already. They could pay these expenses out of voluntary funds without any statutory enactment. But in the case of rates regulated by Parliament even a small sum could not be paid out of the rates without a Bill being introduced. In the opinion of the Education Department, these conferences were of great utility, and the expense was infinitesimal.

§ VISCOUNT KNUTSFORD
said he was in favour of the Bill and of the conferences too. School Boards could not send more than three representatives to a conference, but in the Bill there appeared to be no limit of the number of conferences to which they could be sent in a year. It should be provided that no School Board should make any payment under the Act for more than one conference in a year. Unless there was some such limitation a School Board could send representatives to 10 or 15 conferences in a year.

§ * LORD JAMES OF HEREFORD
said the point should be considered. Hitherto, 1208 he believed, there had been only one conference a year. The Education Department, however, had full control over the expenditure of School Boards.

§ EARL FORTESCUE
hoped the House would bear in mind that this was not a desirable time to increase the burdens of the ratepayers, inasmuch as through a large part of the country the real property on which alone the rates were a burden had enormously depreciated in value. It was not undesirable that the House should interfere for the protection of the ratepayers who were also taxpayers from additional burdens—he did not say for purposes absolutely undesirable, far from it, but which did not seem so urgently required as to justify the imposition of additional burdens on the kind of property which had been particularly depreciated in value. How it should have passed the House of Representatives which was generally pretty vigilant in protecting the pockets of the people, or at least had the credit of being, he could hardly conceive. But as School Boards had now ever since 1870, somehow or other managed to get on more or less well, frugally or extravagantly as the case might be, it did not seem unreasonable that they should continue for one year longer to discharge their duties, without imposing this additional burden through a great part of the country on a deeply suffering interest. ["Hear, hear!"]

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
said he felt some doubt whether the Education Department had power to limit the number of conferences for the reason that the enacting part of the Bill said "the reasonable expenses of the Members of the Board may be paid in attending any conferences." There should be power to limit the number of conferences, and so check any undue expense.

§ LORD NORTON
said that as the matter was to be considered by the Report stage of the Bill he would withdraw his Motion.