HL Deb 12 August 1904 vol 140 cc377-84

House in Committee (according to order).

Clause 1:—

*LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY moved to insert words providing that the powers given by the clause to the Board of Education on default of the local education authority should only be exercised "after forwarding a statement in writing of the alleged default to the local authority, and considering any statement the local authority may submit in their defence, and hearing any evidence the local authority may desire to submit relevant to the charge." If the local authority were to be placed in a criminal and penal position there should be securities for justice. Even in the infernal regions they were told Castigatque, auditque reos,

Bill; we have take it up; and I ask your Lordships to real the Bill a second time on the grounds I have stated.

On Question, whether the words proposed to be left out shall stand part of the Motion, their Lordships divided. Contents, 30; Non-Contents, 9.

the judge chastised, but he heard. By this Bill they were taken to a lower depth than the realms of Pluto, and the judges castigated where they did not hear.

Amendment moved— In Clause 1, page 1, line 9, after the word 'school,' to insert the words 'after forwarding a statement in writing of the alleged default to the local authority and considering any statement the local authority may submit in their defence, and hearing any evidence the local authority may desire to submit relevant to the charge.'"—(Lord Stanley of Alderley.)

THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND PRESIDENT OF THF BOARD OF EDUCATION (The Marquess Of LONDONDERRY)

My Lords, I dealt yesterday at considerable length with the question raised in the noble Lord's Amendment. I do not know why the noble Lord likened the local authorities to criminals. I can assure him we have never regarded them in that light at all. We contemplate the local authority as declining on the ground of conscientious scruples to put into force an Act, the administration of which is imposed upon them, and the Board of Education will not put its powers under this Bill into force unless it is absolutely necessary. But if the Board of Education is to wait until it has been able to communicate and take counsel with the local authority, I think the time at which the Board of Education could act would be very distant indeed. The object of this Bill is to enable the Board to act decisively and quickly where necessary. If this Amendment were passed it would be impossible for us to act decisively. As I stated yesterday, Mr. Lloyd-George has pointed out that it will be quite possible for the local authority to postpone answering correspondence for three months. We cannot accept an Amendment which exposes us to such risks. The noble Lord said yesterday that the Act of 1870 provided that before declaring a board school in default the Board of Education should hold a public inquiry. I have looked up that Act, and I find that in Clause 63 the words are— The education authority, after such inquiry as they think necessary. … so that we are not in this Bill going contrary to the provision of the Act of 1870. I repeat that our great object is to deal with these matters quickly and to avoid correspondence with authorities who on more than one occasion have declined to answer our communications.

* THE MARQUESS OF RIPON

desired, as one of the authors of the Act of 1870, to say a few words on the point raised. The Act of 1870 gave very large powers for dealing with school boards in default, but it especially directed that there should be in each case an inquiry. He could not understand why the noble Marquess now refused an inquiry. He thought that in all such cases an inquiry ought to be held. By the Act of 1870 the extent of the inquiry was left very much to the Education Department. As a general principle he did not think it desirable to entrust unlimited powers of any kind to a public Department. He thought all Departments ought to act, and especially in a case of this sort, where they were going to take a strong step in regard to public bodies, on broad judicial principles. One of the first of those principles appeared to him to be that they ought to inquire into the facts. No doubt the noble Marquess and the officers of the Board of Education had made up their minds that in the case of a number of county councils in Wales the Act had not been properly carried out, but that opinion rested, of course, upon general statements, and had not been the result of careful inquiry in each particular case by the Board. He thought such an inquiry necessary, and he would be very sorry if the Amendment were negatived.

* LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY

said that, though the noble Marquess objected to the use of the word "criminal," he certainly in his speech treated the local authorities as criminals or as defendants against whom a judgment for money was asked, and civil defendants were entitled to be heard. before judgment was given against them. It was useless to divide, and the Amendment would have to be negatived.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

* LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY

then moved to leave out the words in Sub-section 2 providing that the sums paid by the Board of Education under the Act should be a debt due to the Crown from the local education authority, leaving only the words standing that these sums might be deducted from sums payable to the authority on account of Parliamentary grants. The clause as it stood apparently put the Crown in the position of a judgment creditor, and he desisted to know what the powers of the Crown in such a position were. He thought it would be sufficient if the powers of the Crown were limited to dealing with the Treasury money. What was covered by the reference to Parliamentary grants in the Bill was a more difficult question than it seemed. He did not believe it would cover the special aid grants.

Amendment moved— In Clause 1, page 1, line 23, to leave out from the word 'Act,' to the word 'may' in line 25.'"—(Lord Stanley of Alderley.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

My Lords, the words proposed to be omitted are essential to the working of the Bill. The Board must not be confined to using one method only in cases of default. Holding back some of the grants may or may not be the most convenient way in which the Board should deal with the situation. The duty which they will be performing under this Bill in any given place will be the duty which should have been performed by the local authority. The Board will, ex hypothesi, merely be paying expenses which the authority should have paid. The money is, therefore, essentially owing to the Crown from the local education authority; it is important that this should be properly recognised and the words "debts due to the Crown" represent this fact. It is the fashion to call this Bill a "coercion Bill," and to say that it is coercing the authorities into doing their duty. It is not so. The Board are going to carry out a duty which the authority declines to carry out. But the Board must obviously have for this purpose the moneys which the authority has received from public funds as a trustee for doing those duties, but which the authority stubbornly refuses to put to the uses for which the public provided them.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

* LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY

then moved to amend the clause so that it should not be retrospective. He thought people had a right to be judged by the law as it existed at the time of their alleged offence.

Amendment moved— In page 2, line 2, to leave out the words whether before or.'"—(Lord Stanley of Alderley.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I am afraid it is impossible to accept the Amendment. I dwelt at considerable length yesterday on the fact that the efficiency of a certain number of non-provided schools in Wales had been maintained owing to the generosity and patriotism of the managers. In the case of many of these schools the managers have paid out of their own pockets the money for the maintenance of the schools and this should be repaid by the local authorities. In other cases, teachers are unable to obtain their salaries, and my hon. friend Sir William Anson quoted a case in the House of Commons in which it was impossible for a teacher to go away for her annual holiday because her salary had not been paid. It is therefore necessary to make the Bill retrospective, for otherwise these people would be defrauded of what belongs to them.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 1 agreed to.

*LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY moved a new clause which he said was copied from the Education Act of 1870. providing that the Board of Education should cause to be laid before both Houses of Parliament in every year a special report, stating the cases in which they had made any order under this Bill during the preceding year and their reasons for making such order. The object of the Amendment was to secure that in all these cases where authorities in default had been dealt with by the Board of Education the Board should report fully to Parliament.

Amendment moved— After Clause 1, to insert as a new clause, 'The Board of Education shall cause to be laid before both Houses of Parliament in every year a special report stating the cases in which they have made any order under this Act during the preceding year, and their reasons for making such order.'"—(Lord Stanley of Alderley.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

My Lords, the Board will publish reports from time to time as they invariably do with regard to important matters affecting education, but it would be impossible for them to report—as they are asked by this new clause to do—on every action of theirs affecting such small matters as salaries, coals, and the hundred and one other subjects dealt with in the administration of the Act. I am not in the least desirous of concealing or keeping anything back, and I am sure that if what appears to be the slightest act of injustice is done by the Board of Education to any of the local authorities of Wales it will be brought under the notice of Parliament by some of the ardent and active representatives of Wales.

THE MARQUESS OF RIPON

expressed surprise that the noble Marquess had rejected what he could not help feeling was a very reasonable proposal. As the Act gave special and peculiar powers to the Board of Education, surely it was not unreasonable to ask that the Board should let the public know from time to time how it had used those powers. This would not interfere in the slightest degree with the powers which the noble Marquess desired to have, and he could not think that the staff of the Board was not sufficient to enable these reports to be drawn up.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The Board are prepared to issue reports from time to time, but in view of the enormous amount of extra work which the Act of 1902 has entailed, it is desirable that the demands should not unnecessarily be increased by compelling the frequent presentation of returns on most trifling details. I repeat that the whole of the local education authorities are in touch with their representatives in Parliament, and if there is any grievance, no matter how small or trivial, that grievance will certainly be brought up in Parliament.

THE EARL OF CREWE

expressed surprise that the noble Marquess should be unwilling to make this very small concession. These powers were of an exceptional character, and in accordance with precedent a Return should be made. The noble Marquess had stated that it was hardly fair to expect the Board of Education to go in its reports into every kind of detail, such as teachers' salaries, coal, and so on. The noble Lord who had moved the Amendment had not asked that these particular details should be mentioned. What he wanted was a formal report of the kind which the noble Marquess indefinitely said would be delivered from time to time. The difference, therefore, between his noble friend and the noble Marquess seemed to be so slight that he thought it would be worth while for the Government to make this concession. He had no doubt that if the noble Marquess persisted in his refusal a Motion would be made at an early date next session asking for a report of this kind.

* LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY

asked whether the noble Marquess would undertake that in every case where action was taken by the Board of Education under this Bill an official letter should go to the local authority informing them of the action of the Board and its cause.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I have no objection whatever to that. The difficulty is not in regard to the Board writing to the local authority, but in regard to their getting a reply from the local authority.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 2 agreed to.

Bill reported without Amendment. Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

Forward to