LORD MONK BRETTONrose to ask the Lord President of the Council whether, with reference to the Regulations of the Board of Education on the subject of grants in aid for buying sites and building training colleges, he could make any statement with regard to grants in aid for the building or purchase of hostels in connection with existing training colleges.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, in the regulations to which I refer a grant of 75 per cent. is made in respect of all capital expenditure incurred by the local authorities for the provision of sites and buildings for training colleges, subject to certain conditions to which I need not now refer. It appears perfectly plain-sailing, but the fact that the regulations are not without a pitfall is shown by the experience of an education authority in which I am interested. The County Council of East Sussex had to arrange last year to provide this year for the training of forty teachers. Forty teachers are a very uneconomic number to train, because it is as expensive to provide training college accommodation for forty as for eighty teachers. Therefore the best thing they could do was to amalgamate with somebody else, and this is what the County Council of East Sussex endeavoured to do.
There exists at Brighton a training college which the education authority 223 believes to be one of the best institutions of its kind in England. They accordingly went to this college and made arrangements that the college should take the forty teachers and train them, whilst they were to be lodged in an hostel near by. For this purpose the college authorities were induced to spend money for the accommodation of the teachers, and the education authority went to the expense of acquiring a building in Brighton for the purpose of a hostel. It never occurred to them for one moment that this arrangement would not come under the grant of 75 per cent. in respect of all capital expenditure for training colleges. Owing to certain action by the Board of Education last year, the county council began to suspect that possibly hostels might not be covered by the regulations. They therefore wrote to the Board of Education and received an answer in the negative. There would, they were told, be no grant under the regulations for hostels. This was very disappointing to the county council, who had spent the money of the ratepayers and also induced the college authorities to spend money in this matter.
Then, in another place, Sir William Anson asked a Question on the subject and was told by Mr. Birrell—this was in December—that the Board of Education were seriously considering the giving of grants in respect of hostels. Nothing more happened for three months, during which time the county council were on the tiptoe of expectation. In March another Question was asked in the House of Commons, this time by a member of the noble Earl's own Party, and Mr. McKenna, in reply, said the Question was under consideration. Another month has elapsed. The matter has become a very serious one to the local education authority, who have been misled by the regulations. They do not know whether they are going to get their grant or not. The curriculum for teachers begins in September, but teachers have to be engaged in the beginning of the year. Consequently all these months at the beginning of this year have been lost.
I would lay stress on the great inconvenience caused by this delay, and I wish, in conclusion, to assure the noble Earl that this education authority did not go to this particular training college on any religious grounds whatever, but because 224 they believed it to be the most efficient, the most economical, and the best way of providing this training. If the noble Earl cannot give an Answer now, I do appeal to him to endeavour to let us know the decision of the Board of Education at any rate before the Whitsuntide recess.
§ * THE EARL OF CREWEMy Lords, the point which the noble Lord opposite has raised, with particular reference to the East Sussex County Council, is one of no small importance, and it is one, of course, which cannot be decided by reference to a special instance, however greatly aggrieved a particular local authority may consider itself to be by the incidence of the law. The noble Lord stated what the circumstances were, and he used only one phrase to which I must take exception. He said the County Council of East Sussex had been misled by the regulations. I think that was scarcely a fair phrase to use, because it clearly would have been open to them, if they had any doubt as to the interpretation of the regulations—and I think it can hardly be disputed that there was, at any rate, a possibility of the law being as it is declared to be—to ask the Board of Education what the regulations meant before incurring this expense.
We are very sorry that this case should have occurred and that inconvenience should have been caused to the East Sussex County Council, and I fully accept what was stated by the noble Lord, that in this particular case the matter was simply one of administrative convenience and that the difficult religious question did not enter into it. But I must remind the noble Lord that as a matter of fact these questions do arise in a great many other cases, and the whole question of whether support ought to be given out of public funds to these hostels is one of not merely considerable difficulty, but one which, I am afraid, is likely to give rise to some controversy.
Perhaps I may just give the House a brief history of what has passed, and an account of the present position. The noble Lord is aware that in the Regulations of 1905 building grants were given to training colleges, but only to the amount of 25 per cent., and those were limited to the site or such buildings of a college as were required for residential 225 purposes. In 1906 the grants were increased to 75 per cent. of the whole cost of a residential college as well as a day college; but those grants were restricted to colleges provided by the local authorities. There are three reasons which have actuated the Board in giving grants for the residential work of training colleges as well as for their more purely and strictly educational work. In the first place, we desire to encourage local authorities to combine for the provision of training colleges, and that, of course, means that a considerable number of the students in such a case must live away from home. In the second place, we consider that corporate life—an important element in education—can only be secured in a residential college, especially for such students as are under consideration in this particular matter; and, in the third place, so far as rural areas are concerned, it is in a residential college, and a residential college alone, that the only possible system of training can be given. Those considerations, as the noble Lord will see, do tell in favour of making building grants to hostels as well as to residential colleges.
But there is another side to the question which specially appeals to some people. Some people say that, after all, a hostel may be nothing more than a mere boarding establishment, and that all those advantages which I have mentioned relating to the corporate life of the community therefore do not apply in such a case. On the other hand, of course, if a building grant were provided I fully admit that the Board of Education could secure that such hostels that were aided were organised on proper educational lines. There is also this to be remembered. Home training colleges are organised as departments of Universities or University colleges. These are invariably day colleges, and satisfactory provision for the students attending such colleges can really only be made by means of hostels. That is especially desirable in large cities, and it is important that supervision should be exercised over the lodging of students. Those are further arguments in favour of extending the scope of the building grants to cover hostels.
On the other hand, it is maintained by some, and no doubt there is considerable force in the argument—which, of course, tells against giving the building grant—that the work of supervising 226 that side (the recreative side) of the life of the student is work which is particularly well done by voluntary agencies; and, as a matter of fact, in connection with several Universities and also University colleges, the halls of residence which have sprung up of late years have been conducted as a rule by private individuals licensed by the University authorities, and are carried on on denominational lines. I think it must be assumed that it would not be possible for the State to give building grants in aid of hostels provided by voluntary authorities, because, as the noble Lord will remember, it has already been decided that the building grants to training colleges are in future to be confined to those provided by local education authorities.
That being so, I am inclined to think that many people will be of opinion that it really is better for the State to leave the local education authorities and the voluntary bodies to act as, I hope, friendly rivals, but as rivals on equal terms so far as providing hostels are concerned, rather than to give the hostels provided by the local authorities the advantage of a building grant. That is an argument which I have no doubt will appeal to a great many people. On the other hand, it is doubtful if the supply of hostels is likely to be provided in due time by voluntary agency. It is also, no doubt, true that the kind of hostel which is most likely to be provided is pretty sure to be run as a denominational hostel, and that therefore there might be students who would desire to reside in an undenominational hostel and that local authorities would be unwilling to provide such undenominational hostels unless they were helped by Government grants.
§ * THE EARL OF CREWEThat applies to this particular case, but not to every case, and we are obliged to look at the position all over England. I have endeavoured to summarise the arguments for and against, and I think your Lordships will agree that the matter is by no means an easy one to decide. I can assure the noble Lord that there has been no undue delay. The Board still has the 227 matter under consideration. I am afraid I cannot at this moment make any announcement to him as to the time at which the decision of the Board will be reached, but I can assure him that, in consequence of the question which he has put and of the undoubtedly hard case brought forward, I will endeavour to hasten the matter, in order that I may be able to give him a definite Answer as soon as possible.