§
Amendments proposed—
Page 2, line 25, leave out 'as to' and insert 'of not less than 12 or more than 24 persons, of whom.'
Page 2, line 26, leave out 'of' and insert 'shall be,' and after 'and' insert 'other.'"—(The Bishop of Winchester.)
THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTERsaid he had put these two Amendments on the Paper mainly with the view of obtaining some information as to the character and responsibilities of this Consultative Committee. On the Second Reading he was unable to obtain the information, but he ventured to hope that before they were asked to pass this clause they would have more information as to this vague and shadowy body. At present there was nothing to indicate whether the numbers of the Committee would be five, or 100, or 500, whether its powers would be large or small. He agreed that the process of election, and the tenure of office of the members were questions which could wait, but he thought the House should know how many members the Committee would consist of, how it would be constituted, and how far the advice tendered was to be of a private and confidential character.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCILThe right reverend Prelate has inquired what would be the probable size of the Consultative Committee which it is proposed to constitute. I should say that the Committee would consist of about the number of members indicated in the right reverend Prelate's Amendment—namely, not less than 12, or more than 24. It has been left entirely within the discretion of the Board of Education or the Minister of Education to decide what the size of the Council shall be, but the number, of course, can be altered from time to time by an Order in Council. I should very much object to putting words into the Bill which would fix any exact number.
§ THE MARQUESS OF RIPONI would suggest whether it would not be advisable to appoint the members of the Consultative Committee for a limited time only. If their tenure is indefinite, they may get out of touch with educational feelings and wants, and become a sort of educational oligarchy.
§ Question put.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCILClause 4 provides that the Consultative Committee shall exist, as to not less than two-thirds, of persons representing universities "and bodies interested in education." As the right reverend Prelate (the Bishop of Winchester) pointed out on the Second Reading, this is an insinuation that the universities are not interested in education, and I propose to alter the clause so that it will read "persons representing universities and other bodies interested in education."
§
Amendment proposed—
Page 2, line 26, leave out from 'representing' to 'for' in line 27, and insert 'bodies interested in secondary education, and bodies interested respectively in elementary education, in rate-supported, and in Voluntary schools.'"—(Lord Colchester.)
§ LORD COLCHESTERcontended that Voluntary schools and rate-supported schools should both have their representatives on the Consultative Committee, and denied that this would lead to unnecessary friction.
§ EARL SPENCERBefore the noble Duke the Lord President of the Council replies, I should like to say that I strongly object to the Amendment. I consider that the words "and other bodies interested in education" cover the whole ground.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCILThe Amendment which the noble Lord has moved goes in the direction of defining by Act of Parliament the composition of this Committee, which I do not consider expedient. If you attempt to insert any more definite provisions in the Bill as to the composition of this Committee, it is quite certain that in another place, if not here, we shall have pages of Amendments on behalf of bodies who wish to secure for themselves direct representation on this Committee. The only way of escaping this difficulty is to leave the Board of Education and the Minister of Education responsible for the composition of the Committee.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn
§
Amendment proposed—
After line 31 insert (2) the advice so given by the consultative committee shall be recorded.'"—(The Bishop of winchester.)
THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, in moving this Amendment, urged that it was desirable that the advice given by the Consultative Committee should be recorded, as it would be out of the question, even if the advice given was confidential, that it should remain so.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYI do not know what view the noble Duke may take on this point, but I am strongly of opinion that such a provision should not be inserted in the Bill. I believe the effect of it would be disastrous. If we give the Consultative Committee this sort of power of recording their opinions, I shall have doubts as to the wisdom altogether of setting up the Committee. It would be entirely contrary to the object of the Bill as I read it, and I feel quite sure it would produce a state of discord in cases where there happened to be great differences of opinion.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCILFor some purposes, no doubt, the Consultative Committee will be part of the organization of the Department, and Minutes will undoubtedly have to be kept of its proceedings for those purposes, but I should very much deprecate the giving of the power proposed. I should object to the advice, any more than any other part of the Departmental proceedings, being published. It would be fatal to the utility of the Consultative Committee.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn
§
Amendment purposed—
Leave out clause 4, and insert 'it shall be lawful for the Secretary for Education to consult such persons experienced in matters of education as he may think advisable, with such remuneration as the. Treasury may determine.'"—(Lord Norton.)
§ *LORD NORTONsaid there was great danger of the Consultative Committee overruling the Minister, and of taking away the responsibility of the Minister to Parliament. It was the suggestion to the Commission on whose Report this Bill is founded, by various associations of teachers and headmasters. In his opinion, the associations of teachers were already exercising too great a power in their own special views and interests over the Education Department. He quite agreed that the Minister for Education should receive the advice of experts, but if the permanent Consultative Committee were to rule the actions and share the responsibility of the Minister, it would be a very serious matter. The Consultative Committee were proposed to have power to frame regulations for the register of teachers. This would be entirely in the hands of the Committee, would be discussed in Parliament as their regulations, and would in so important a point relieve the head of the Department altogether of responsibility. He thought the object desired could be obtained if the President of the Board of Education was allowed by the Act to consult authoritatively such persons experienced in matters of education as he might think desirable, in the same way as the President of the Board of Trade by the Conciliation Act consulted experts to settle trade disputes. This would be much better than having a 1099 gigantic, powerful, and permanent body by the side of the Education Minister which might overrule his decisions and would certainly relieve him of responsibility to Parliament.
§ EARL SPENCERBefore the noble Duke replies, I should like to say that I cannot go the length of Lord Norton in desiring altogether to throw out the proposal for the Consultative Committee. I am quite aware that there are considerable arguments in favour of what he has said. I should strongly deprecate anything being done which would materially affect the responsibility or decrease the responsibility of the Minister for Education, but I do not think the proposal in the Bill is open to that objection. The Lord President now has power to call experts to give him technical advice on any subject, but it would be impossible to remain in that position. There is a strong opinion existing among some of the leading educational bodies that a permanent Consultative Committee is necessary, and, therefore, I think the creation of a Consultative Committee is almost indispensable. At the same time, I am not quite satisfied with the form in which the noble Duke has put it, and I should like him to consider whether, in some way, a better form could not be adopted. I entirety agree that the inspection of schools and the framing of rules for the register of teachers are questions which should have reference to the Consultative Committee. I rather object to the permissive character of the second subsection of the clause, as, though it does not leave the Consultative Committee equal powers with the Minister for Education, I think it might lead in present form to considerable difficulty. I do not see why the second sub-section should not be omitted. I am strongly of opinion that no Minister for Education would deal with any big subject without having reference to those in touch with education. He could always do that without it being suggested in this Bill that he should do so, and I think the very fact of the presence of this sub-section would lead to difficulties, as the Committee would resent any action on the part of the Minister unless they had been consulted.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCILI understand that my noble Friend (Earl Spencer) would like to see the omission of the latter portion of the sub-section, "advising the Board of Education on any matter referred to the Committee by the Board," but I do not understand that my noble Friend would wish to limit the functions of the Consultative Committee to "framing, with the approval of the Board of Education, regulations for the formation of a register of teachers." Therefore, it would be necessary for my noble Friend, if he omits the latter part of the sub-section, to frame a comprehensive list of subjects which the Consultative Committee would be consulted upon. [Earl SPENCER assented.] Well, perhaps my noble Friend will consider between now and the Report stage if he can draft a list. I am inclined to think it would be better to leave the responsibility with the Minister of deciding for himself as to what questions he will or will not consult the Committee upon. With regard to the observations of my noble Friend (Lord Norton), I would say that all the discussions which have taken place since the Bill was introduced last year have shown that those who are professionally interested in the subject of education attach the greatest importance to the constitution of this Committee. As I stated in a previous stage of the Bill, there is a strong desire on the part of the headmasters of most of the principal Secondary schools, because of the advantages they consider it would be to secondary education generally, to come into relationship with, and under the inspection of, the Education Department. That desire was universally made conditional upon the constitution of such a Consultative Committee as we propose. There was also felt some apprehension that if they came under the control of the Department, without such a Consultative Committee being added, some attempt might be made to impose upon them a uniformity of system such as prevails in some foreign countries, which they strongly resented. The formation of such a Committee as this, which would necessarily be consultative upon such matters as the inspection of Secondary schools, seems to be an indispensable guarantee for the maintenance of their independence, and without this security the schools would not 1101 associate themselves with a Government Department. I think it would be extremely undesirable if, at the moment of constituting a new Board of Education, we were to omit such a provision, to which so much importance is attached by those who have any right to speak for a very large portion of the teaching profession.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn
§
Question put—
That clause 4 stand part of the Bill.
§ Motion agreed to.
§
On clause 5, Amendment proposed—
Page 2, line 35, after 'council,' insert 'nothing in this Act shall take away any powers of either House of Parliament with reference to schemes framed under the Endowed Schools Acts, 1869, and amending Acts.'"—(Lord Colchester.)
§ LORD COLCHESTERsaid he moved this Amendment in order to get an explanation from the noble Duke as to what the effect of the clause would be, and whether it was intended that schemes made under the Endowed Schools Act would be Orders under this Bill.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCILThe Orders to which this clause refers are the Orders mentioned in the Bill in clause 2; that is to say, the Order as to the transfer of the powers of the Charity Commissioners to the Board, and the order for the transfer to the Consultative Committee. These are the Orders to which the clause refers, and it provides that they shall be laid before Parliament for not less than four weeks during which that House is sitting before it is submitted to Her Majesty in Council. The Bill does not make any alteration in the procedure for making schemes by the Charity Commissioners or the Endowed Schools Commissioners, except that it places for certain purposes the Education Department in the place of the Charity Commissioners, but the schemes to which the noble Lord has referred will have to be submitted to Parliament in exactly the same way as they are at present.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn
1102
§
Amendment proposed—
Page 2, line 35, after 'council,' insert 'and shall not be so submitted if either House address Her Majesty against it.'"—(The Archbishop of Canterbury.)
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYMy Amendment provides that the draft of any Order made under the Act shall not be submitted if either House addresses Her Majesty against it. I think that such an Order in Council as might be made under the clause is one which ought to be under the control of either House of Parliament, so that, before being finally ratified, it should be open to either House to discuss the exact form which it should take.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCILThis clause has been inserted into the Bill for the precise object which the most reverend Prelate appears to have in view. The clause has been inserted so that both Houses of Parliament may have the opportunity of discussion in regard to the Orders, but what the most reverend Prelate proposes is, that either House shall be able to exercise an absolute veto upon an administrative act of the Government, and to that I am utterly unable to agree.
§ Question put.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§
Question put—
That clause 5 stand part of the Bill.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ Clauses 6, 7, 8, and 9, agreed to.
§ Bill reported, with Amendments, to the House, and recommitted to the Standing Committee, and to be printed as amended.