HL Deb 20 March 1903 vol 119 cc1376-81
THE LORD BISHOP OF SALISBURY

My Lords, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he will inform the House in how many cases schemes have been presented to the Board under Section 17 of the Education Act, 1902, providing for the appointment of persons nominated or recommended by a body called "The Free Church Council," or any similar non-educational religious body; and further if he will inform the House what is the policy of the Board in dealing with such provisions. Perhaps it would save trouble if I say a few words in regard to the attitude which I take in this matter. I am one of those who entirely welcome the Act of last year. I am very thankful, particularly, for that part of it which unifies the whole of the education throughout the country, and I am very glad, also, that we are to have local Committees consisting of representatives of the ratepayers, and, in many cases,, representatives also of other bodies which, in the wording of the Act, are interested in education and acquainted with the needs of the various kinds of schools in the area over which the council has jurisdiction. I should also like to say that I speak to-night, not as representing the Church of England, but from an educational point of view. It is most important that these persons should be the strongest men and women that can possibly be found in the locality, that they should be able to hold their own, and should be subject to no suspicion of partisanship. It will be extremely difficult, in many of our local councils, to carry on this business of education if there is any half-heartedness at all in the persons who come from outside. We have, then, to look to the Board of Education for protection in regard to the choice of these persons. The Board of Education have to approve the schemes of the local councils, and unless they approve them I presume the schemes have to be returned to the councils and amended. No doubt a great deal of negotiation has been going on with the Board of Education on points of this kind.

I have found out somewhat accidentally that there are numerous cases in which a body called the Free Church Council is asked either to nominate or to recommend persons on these Committees. I do not in the least wish to attack the Free Church Council. It has some very admirable principles, and I have no doubt that a great deal of its work is excellent. I have read the last report of the National Council of Evangelical Free Churches, and I find in it much with which I agree. Its social work is no doubt of an agitative rather than of an administrative kind, but it is a body which is worthy of respect as a voluntary society of our follow Christians. The question, however, is not "Does it do good work in some respects?" but "Is it educationally competent for the particular business which, I understand, it is to be called upon to do in numerous centres throughout the country?" Now, if we take the work of the Free Church Council, which of course is the federation of all the other similar councils in the country, and is, I believe, of exactly the same type,, we find that it corresponds to what is being done in the Church of England by the Church Army, by the Board of Church Defence, and by, I should say, the English Church Union, that is to say, it is agitative and not administrative work, ft is doing its best to enlighten public opinion on religious subjects, and to promote different measures, but it has no knowledge of education as a body. It does not profess, indeed, to have anything to do with founding schools, and it is not part of the: business of the National Council to build schools, or to assist financially any such enterprise. I find those words in their own report. Then what is its interest in schools? It has an interest, no doubt. That interest was shown very forcibly by the opposition which was raised, to a very great extent, by the National Free Church Council to the measure which was carried last session, and that opposition is expressed in the report for 1902 in strong and trenchant language. I do not say that the language is excessive or abusive—I do not wish in the least to be guilty of exaggeration—but I do say that it does not show any sympathetic interest in the working of the Act. It shows, on the contrary, that the Free Church Council, as a body, is entirely opposed to the principles of the Act. I therefore felt that it was fair, in no spirit of opposition to the employment of Dissenters upon this work, to ask the question which stands in my name. On the contrary, I very much desire that loading Nonconformists of every school should be upon these educational authorities, and that we should have the benefit of their knowledge and experience, but not that men should be appointed who are opposed to the successful working of the Act. I should like to ask the noble Marquess whether it is the opinion of the Board of Education that this body is likely, either in its national form or in its local councils, to appoint persons of experience in education and persons who are acquainted with the needs of the various kinds of schools in the area over which the education authority acts.

LORD BURGHCLERE

Before the noble Marquess answers the question I would venture to ask him whether the right rev. Prelate has given an accurate interpretation of the Act. The right rev. Prelate dwelt very strongly on the words "persons of experience in education," but he omitted the words which immediately precede them, "of other bodies." There is nothing which indicates that the body is to be primarily of an educational nature.

THE LORD BISHOP OF SALISBURY

I asked the noble Marquess whether he thought this body was likely to appoint persons of experience in education.

LORD BURGHCLERE

Yes, but the right rev. Prelate dwelt very much on the words "persons of experience in education," and omitted to mention the words which precede them. It is not necessary that the bodies referred to should be educational bodies. I would call the attention of the noble Marquess to a case which, I am informed, has occurred at Burnley. The council proposed in their scheme that there should be two members of the Voluntary Schools Association and one member of the Free Church Council. The Board of Education in their reply recommended that one of the members of the Voluntary Schools Association should be struck out and that they should leave out altogether the person to be chosen from the Free Church Council on the ground that that was not primarily an educational body. I venture to assert that in taking that action the Board of Education were acting ultra vires. would point out to the right rev. Prelate that the Free Church Council takes a deep interest in education, as he himself showed by referring to the action they took with regard to the Education Bill of last year; and I venture to think that if undenominational schools are to be represented at all in many districts the Free Church Council is certainly the body which ought to be consulted as to the person to be nominated.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (the MARQUESS of LONDONDERRY)

My Lords, the right rev. Prelate has asked me a question of which I do not in the least complain. Indeed, after the remarks of the noble Lord who has just sat down, I am extremely glad of the opportunity of explaining the position which the Board of Education desire to take with regard to the administration of the Act of last year. Nineteen schemes seem to have been submitted to the Board containing proposals for the representation of the Free Church Council on the Education Committee. In dealing with these and all other provisions as to the composition of Education Committees the Board have consistently endeavoured to secure that every Committee shall comprise, in accordance with the Act, persons of experience in education and persons acquainted with the needs of the various kinds of schools in the area. In the particular case which, as I understand, the right rev. Prelate has had specially before him, it seems that there are no associations or bodies representative of Nonconformist schools. Therefore, as the town council scheme provides for the inclusion on the Committee of two members representative of Church of England schools, and one representative of Roman Catholic interests in education, it would seem strictly in accordance with the spirit and intention of the Act. and with the consistent policy of the Board of Education in administering the Act, that some convenient means should be adopted for securing the representation of Nonconformist interests also on the Committee. As a rule, where a council has included in a draft scheme a representative of the Free Church Council, the Board have felt that some 'representation of the managers or associations of Nonconformist elementary schools would have been preferable and more in accordance with the terms of the Act as to persons acquainted with the needs of the various kinds of schools. But, in reply to this view, whenever the council have expressed the r opinion that the object in view was best attained by a representation of the Free Church Council itself, the Board have raised no objections, and the schemes have been published accordingly.

The Board have endeavoured to be absolutely impartial and judicial in these matters, and to hold the scales evenly. The Board have always given the greatest consideration to the views put forward by the local authorities. It would be impossible for the Board in a city like Salisbury to ask for a religious census. As long as the different denominations seem to be honestly represented, the Board have accepted the scheme, although in certain circumstances they have asked for reasons why certain representatives had been placed on the Committees. We have never thought it right in any way to oppose the proposals submitted to us in those schemes. The right rev. Prelate states that there should be placed on these Education Committees the strongest men and the strongest women. I do not think the Board of Education can decide who are the strongest men and the strongest women in a district; that must be left to the discretion of the local authorities. The speech made last night by my colleague Sir William Anson, in which he declared that we wish to be absolutely impartial in the matter, and not to dictate, but only to make suggestions to the education authorities, entirely expresses the policy of the Board of Education in this matter. We leave to the education authority the right to discriminate as to the representatives of the various bodies they submit to us, and so long as we consider they are not acting with any injustice to any other body we shall continue to accept their schemes. The noble Lord opposite drew attention to an alleged injustice in the case of Burnley.

LORD BURGHOLERE

I did not say it was an injustice

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I understood the noble Lord to say that the town of Burnley was unjustly treated.

LORD BURGHCLERE

I am not authorised to speak on behalf of Burnley. I merely called attention to the case.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The noble Lord stated, I think, that Burnley submitted their scheme to us, and that we did not accept it.

LORD BURGHCLERE

My information was that Burnley submitted a certain scheme, and that the Board of Education suggested alterations.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

That is perfectly true, but what happened was this, that when the Burnley authority did not accept the suggestion of the Board of Education, we did not enforce it. Therefore I do not think that we have done any injustice to the town of Burnley. At this late hour I do not think it is necessary for me to go further into the question, but I would repeat that it is the desire of the Board of Education to administer the Act with absolute impartiality.

House adjourned at twenty-five minutes past Seven o'clock, to Monday next, Eleven o'clock.