HL Deb 25 April 1967 vol 282 cc441-52

3.5 p.m.

LORD WADE rose to ask Her Majesty's Government what consideration has been given to the influence of education as a cause of international misunderstanding; and in particular whether they will urge upon UNESCO the need for a programme, in addition to its Literacy project, designed to lessen the nationalist bias in history text-books and to encourage a sense of world community. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg leave to ask Her Majesty's Government the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In drawing attention to the influence of education as a cause of international misunderstanding and the need for encouraging a sense of world community, I have set myself a somewhat formidable task. Perhaps it would have been more respectful to educationists if I had referred to the help which education can give to international understanding, rather than used the words that I have, but I shall explain my reasons for framing the Question in this particular form.

In some respects the subject is more suited to an hour's lecture than an Un-starred Question, and bearing that in mind I shall restrict my remarks to certain specific points rather than attempt to cover the whole field. But I do not wish to limit the scope of this debate in any way. I am very pleased that so many Members of your Lordships' House have indicated a willingness to take part in the debate, and I shall listen to what follows with great interest. I am sure I shall learn much more than I can impart. I shall certainly look forward to the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Beswick, who is to reply on behalf of the Government. I hope the subject is one which will be regarded by Her Majesty's Government as of some importance, although no one would suggest that the problem is one that can be solved by Britain alone.

Now in framing my Question I have directed attention in particular to the work of UNESCO for it seems clear that this subject comes within the aims and objects of that organisation; and at the outset I should like to say a word or two about United Nations Agencies. The United Nations is very much under criticism at the present time. Some of this criticism may be justified, some may not be. One does not hear very much about the successes of the United Nations. But the fact that the United Nations consists of representatives of independent sovereign States is bound to be a limiting factor. In so far as there have been failures, I think they have often been due to an attempt to do too much. But, whatever one's views may be about that, it would be a great mistake to minimise the importance of the United Nations Agencies. They are doing extremely valuable work—and I think that applies to UNESCO. If I am critical, it is not because I disapprove of the work of UNESCO but really that I am not entirely satisfied with the priorities.

Britain, as a member nation, has, of course, a share of responsibility. If that were not so, I imagine that I should have been unable to table this Question. There is some ministerial responsibility, if for no other reason than that Britain is a contributor to the United Nations and to its Agencies. I have been studying the figures, but I will not quote them at any length. if they are incorrect, no doubt the noble Lord, Lord Beswick, will put them right. In 1966 Britain contributed £27½ million to the United Nations, compared with £34 million in 1965. Of this £27½, million, £566,000 was for UNESCO, the United Nations Agency which must be regarded as having the specific task of encouraging a sense of world community. I think it is worth recalling that the preamble to UNESCO'S constitution contains these words: That since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed". This phrase, I understand, was coined by a much revered Member of this House, the noble Earl, Lord Attlee. When one comes to examine the UNESCO budget, one finds that 38 million dollars are devoted to education for a two-year period, 1967–68; and of this only 314,000 dollars are dedicated for "education for international understanding." This is to meet the cost of a very small department of UNESCO faced with the tremendous task of encouraging a world perspective in education. It is sometimes said by the critics: "Of what use can UNESCO be with its emphasis on education and culture when 700 million people in the world are illiterate?". It was to meet this kind of criticism that the literacy project was launched as an experiment in 1965, a project to which Britain is contributing. I do not for one moment wish to belittle the value of the project, but it would be ironical if, as a consequence, more young people were enabled to read history that is biased which, instead of improving international understanding, tends to encourage an excessively nationalistic outlook.

The ability to read and write, coupled with improved means of communication, does not necessarily bring about a more objective view of history or a fairer view of current affairs. All over the Middle East and in many parts of Africa people are listening to their crystal sets and in many parts of the world Government-controlled radio stations are pouring out abuse. There are, of course, some notable exceptions, such as the B.B.C. Overseas Service, but modern methods of communicating information are tending to facilitate the dissemination of hatred. It may be that the history books are less blatant but the effect may be more insidious, since young people are assumed to accept what is contained in the history books as a presentation of facts. Of course it is very difficult to assess the comparative influence between the spoken word passed on from parent to child, and the effect of the radio or of teaching in school. But what is taught and read at school must have have some influence. I think there is still some truth in the words of Anatole France, "History teaching may be teaching for war".

First of all, one must try to get at the facts. Thanks to the Ford Foundation and the Nuffield Trust, a study of American and English secondary school history textbooks has been carried out. The outcome of that is an extremely interesting book by R. A. Billington entitled The Historian's Contribution to Anglo-American Misunderstanding. Another valuable study, a kind of pilot project, has been carried out by the Educational Advisory Committee of the Parliamentary Group for World Government. I am a vice-president of that body, and I have been a member for many years; but I am not a member of the Educational Advisory Committee and therefore I think I can commend this work without immodesty.

The Committee, of which Sir Edward Boyle is chairman, made a special study of history textbooks used in schools in Cyprus. There is a comparison between the history taught to Turkish-speaking children and that taught to those who speak Greek, the Cypriot language. The main theme in the history books of the Greek-speaking Cypriot children is the villiany of the Turks. I must not take up too much of your Lordships' time with a great many quotations, but may I quote from a book written by the General Inspector of Middle (that is, Secondary) Education, Mr. K. P. Georgiades. It is the 1960 edition, and is still being. used. He tells us that after the fall of Ammochostos in 1571, the Cypriot hero, Bragadinos, had his ears and nose cut off by the Turks. The book continues: In this wretched state they carried him off to the Square of Public Executions, stripped him, and when they had bound him to the ignominious pillar, flayed him alive. He breathed his last when the knife of the executioner reached his waist. But even when he was dead they had no respect for him. When they had cut off his head they took the skin. stuffed it with straw, dressed it in his clothes and carried it round as a laughing stock through the whole city and afterwards to Syria and to Asia Minor too. Such was the end of the hero of Ammachostos and such was the conduct of the conqueror. A similar account appears in the history books of the primary schools.

I cannot find any similar account of this particular incident in the Turkish textbooks. In fact, there is comparatively little reference to Cyprus in the Turkish school books, but I noticed that the history textbooks used for Turkish children in the 12 to 15 years age group contain this statement: Our ancestors never attacked others unless they themselves had met with wrong or aggression. The sole reason why they won great wars was that they always had right on their side. Your Lordships may smile at this expression, but it is not confined to Turkish history books. I must admit that the general impression I gained when I was at school was that the English won nearly all the wars and that England, later Britain, always had right on her side. Perhaps the harm lies not so much in the belief that one's own country is right as in the implication that there is something positively evil about the activities and motives of other nations.

Returning to the book used by Greek Cypriots, I give an example from it of the view of the English. Part VII of the history textbook, 1964 edition, used by the Greek Cypriots for children in the 11 to 12 age group deals with "The Administration of the English in Cyprus". The readers are told that in 1939: … on the outbreak of war many Cypriots responded to the call to 'fight for freedom' alongside the English with the hope that the English would, when victorious, grant them freedom … They hoped in vain. The books refers to the "unethical way" in which the English behaved, and later refers to a Member of your Lordships' House. It says that after the demonstrations against the Greeks in Istanbul: General Harding was sent to Cyprus as Governor in order to terrorise the Cypriots. I told the noble and gallant Field Marshal that I was going to quote that sentence, and he said that he was very sorry that he could not be here to listen to the debate this afternoon.

It would be interesting to know whether the Foreign Office have anyone responsible for collecting information about what is taught about Britain in the schools in different parts of the world. I think it would be very helpful to the British Council to have this information. I do not think that anything is done in that respect. In any case, it would be a little outside the scope of this debate and I mention it merely in passing.

My Lords, I endeavoured to collect such information as I could. Of course, I am aware that cultural activities are part of the functions of UNESCO. I think that one of its great successes has been the Nubian campaign launched in 1960. As noble Lords are aware, some of the great temples of the Nile have been saved as a consequence, and UNESCO is to be congratulated on the part it played. It is a little ironical that in the same period since 1960 the textbooks in Egypt were being re-written in order that the children there should learn history more in conformity with the views of President Nasser, at any rate about current history.

I think, my Lords, that in the next ten or twenty years there may be a good deal of this re-writing of history: whether it will be for the better or for the worse remains to be seen. In most of the former colonial territories textbooks have been written by Europeans for Europeans. Even to-day in the bookshops in Morocco you find the same textbooks as, say, in the Lycée in Bordeaux, and there is great difficulty in changing because of the cost of publishing books. But I think there may be a reaction from books being too biased one way in that they may become too biased the other way; and there are educationists who recognise this danger. I would commend the West African Examinations Council, who are pursuing a very enlightened policy and deserve all the support which can be given. However, I expect strong pressures in the coming years.

We have already seen some examples of this. There was the attempt at rewriting history in Ghana during the Nkrumah regime, and some of the history, I must say, seems to me to be fictitious. In Guinea a very slanted view of history appears in the new textbook, of which I have a copy here, published by the Ministry of National Education. The contents bear resemblance to the books in Cyprus to which I have referred, but in this case the villains of the piece are the French, instead of the Turks. In Mali a new history of the country has been written, and I think the striking fact about that is what it omits. It certainly could not be called balanced. It is interesting to note that Guinea and Mali are two of the countries which are to benefit from the literacy project, and of course Britain is contributing to this.

My Lords, I welcome the idea that more people should have the opportunity of reading and writing—that is all to the good. But are we giving sufficient thought to what they will read when they become literate? There is an ever-increasing demand for education, and I was most impressed with this when I was in West Africa; but education will not necessarily increase international understanding. Of course, history can never be entirely objective. No historian can be completely objective, and I am not suggesting that we should have one universal history book for everyone to read everywhere—that is a horrible thought. But it is a matter of degree.

For example, consider England and France. What British children are taught is very different from what the French children are taught; and ought we not to be considering that at the present time, when we wish to improve Anglo-French relations? The aim should be to iron out some of the worst distortions and to try to create what Senator Fulbright called "a perspective about the world" and "the ability to see the world as others see it". Surely, this is a realm in which UNESCO could help, and I should like to see European countries taking the initiative, because, after all, European countries have been responsible for a good deal of distorted history.

At one time, my Lords, UNESCO did show a lively interest in this subject. There was a book written by Professor Lauwerys, published in 1950, entitled History Textbooks and International Understanding, but this UNESCO activity seems to have been allowed to run down. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Beswick, will have something to tell us about that and what is happening at the present time, but it leads me to ask about this very small department of UNESCO to which I have already referred. I understand that they have a staff of only three, and they are faced with this tremendous task of encouraging a world perspective in education. Could not Britain join with any other country which is concerned about the matter in trying to get this small department expanded? I think it is a mistake to dismiss the whole idea as hopeless just because the winds of nationalism are blowing so strongly.

Then, again, I should like to ask the noble Lord, Lord Beswick, about the United Kingdom National Commission at UNESCO and what it is doing in this field. Is it being hampered by lack of funds? There was a very useful sub-committee under the chairmanship of Dr. Raymond King which did some very valuable work in the early 1950s in reviewing text- books, arranging conferences and exchanging information; for example, in the exchange of information about textbooks between Britain and India and Britain and Russia. This subcommittee was disbanded in 1963 and I should like to know what was the reason for that. Surely, it is through quiet and conscientious work of this kind on the part of educationists that progress can be made. The aim, of course, is to get a more balanced view of history, which is an extraordinarily difficult thing to achieve; to achieve the ultimate aim of some form of World Government or World Authority is infinitely more so, and heaven knows when we shall achieve that! But one pre-condition of success is the building up of loyalties which extend beyond national boundaries, and I believe that education can help. There are, as I say, educationists who are concerned about this matter and I hope that may be encouraged.

To conclude, my Lords, may I say this? I have referred to Governments and to teachers, but there are also the young people. We tend to think of them as protestors. It is, of course, natural for youth to protest; but there are young people who will respond to ideals, who realise that national loyalty must be balanced by a wider loyalty and who, though perhaps not using the same terminology, would agree that "it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed".

3.28 p.m.

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Wade, has put us all in his debt by asking this Question and giving us an opportunity to consider an interesting proposition in the more limited form in which the Question is put; and also of making some reference to the work of UNESCO, because this proposal of his falls naturally within the competence of UNESCO. The noble Lord, said towards the end of his speech that he had the impression of a run-down of interest in UNESCO about the question of the removal of causes of misunderstanding in the sphere of education since, I think he said, 1950. I am not sure that this is altogether true. For example, in 1962 UNESCO supported the educational conference of Asian studies organised in Liverpool under the United Kingdom National Commission. As one might expect, this conference showed how very little was known, or was being done, in this field, and it did prove useful.

There is no doubt that a great deal more could be done to remove the causes of misunderstanding, but the important thing to my mind—and in this I would entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord Wade—is to get the priorities right. There are such tremendous problems facing UNESCO, on so wide a scale and with such comparatively small resources to deal with them, that the first and most important thing to do is to see that these resources are applied to the best advantage.

I believe that UNESCO was right when in 1960 it decided that top priority should be given to education. Education features first in its title, and it should feature first in its policy. If I may remind your Lordships, this was largely due to the case made at the General Conference in that year by my noble friend Lord Eccles who, jointly with the representative of India, spoke of the difference in educational provisions in different countries as:

the greatest and the most dangerous of all international inequalities ". He gained acceptance for his proposal that education should have priority in UNESCO'S policy.

Within the field of education UNESCO has concentrated its effort—rightly, I believe—on the developing countries. While we are arguing about a higher school-leaving age—indeed, discussing how it should be put into effect—we should remember that 50 per cent. of the world's children do not go to school at all. While we are asking for more money for adult education, we should remember that 40 per cent. of the world's population can neither read nor write. While we talk about teacher shortage when our classes exceed 30 or 40 pupils per teacher, as the case may be, we should remember that in many countries of the world there are teachers who themselves have not had any teaching beyond the primary stage.

Here surely is the first priority, and UNESCO has begun to tackle it. Since 1962, 20 secondary teacher-training colleges have been set up in Africa by 17 different States with UNESCO aid. In Latin America, 380,000 primary teachers have been trained between 1957 and 1965. And in the next five years UNESCO member States in Asia, Africa and Latin America will train 2½ million more primary, and nearly one million more secondary school teachers. I believe that this is the top priority. The teachers come before the textbooks. Textbooks can put various glosses on history, it is true, but if there is the right teacher he can put the textbooks into perspective, and if we get the right teachers, we shall get the right textbooks.

But there are other ways in which both UNESCO and the Government could contribute towards the end which the noble Lord, Lord Wade, has in mind, and on which I am sure we are all agreed. One admirable UNESCO project, which certainly does not cost much money but does a great deal of good, is the associated schools project, in which schools in various countries of the world exchange letters, ideas and information. Exchanges of all sorts take place between them, which can only lead to greater understanding. It embraces nearly 500 schools in 54 countries. Another scheme run by UNESCO is the gift coupon scheme, by which schools can contribute directly to helping people and organisations in overseas countries by means of gift coupons.

A third current scheme, which I would suggest might be able to help in the field of history, the UNESCO source books. The first book, on science teaching, has sold 400.000 copies in 22 languages and editions in nine more languages are in preparation. The second, on geography teaching, was published in 1955, and others are in preparation on mathematics, biology, chemistry, and health in schools. I would suggest that a source book on history might be able to achieve some of the aims that the noble Lord, Lord Wade, has in mind, in suggesting to teachers that they should make independent judgments on the textbooks they receive and seek to use them for further international understanding.

Another suggestion is that maybe the Government could consider sparing a little more money for the Council for Education in World Citizenship. For many years the C.E.W.C. has done an excellent job in our schools. But the rate of Government grant has fallen from £1,000 a year in 1954–55 to £500 in recent years. Although it has been increased to £950, £450 is tied to the appointment of a part-time field secretary, so that on the whole grant has fallen. Possibly here is a field in which a little more generosity could be shown.

If I may stretch the Rules of Order a little, I should like to say something about the other sides of UNESCO'S work. Specifically the Motion refers to the educational side, but I think that it would be a pity if we were to get the idea that UNESCO paid attention only to the educational priorities and not to its scientific and cultural work. After all, we in this country have a particular interest in UNESCO, because it was in London in November, 1945, in association with France, that the first conference was held which resulted in the setting up of the Organisation. The importance of UNESCO can be seen from the fact that it now has a membership of 120 nations and has given service to the cause of peace for 21 years this year. Of its total field programme of some £29 million education takes about £11½ million, and this is closely followed by science with something like £10½ million.

It was in 1964 that UNESCO decided to give equal priority to science and education. This was a natural corollary to what had passed. UNESCO had started teacher-training colleges and other initiatives in member States, but clearly was not capable—nor was it the right instrument—of continuing to run them. It could start them, but it then had to hand them over to member States. And if these States were to run their educational priorities correctly, they had to develop economically and scientifically. So in 1964 UNESCO decided that its scientific activities should take equal priority with its educational policy, and soon after its teacher-training schemes came into effect there followed schemes for training scientists and technologists in the developing countries.

Of the 69 science projects that are now taking place under UNESCO, 43 are in the realm of technical and technological education, covering 32 different countries. The Governments of those countries have contributed over £50 million towards them, and the United Nations Special Fund £17 million. Another scientific project which caught the headlines was in the International Geophysical Year of 1957–58, in which 70 nations collaborated in a major project of studying our planet.

The third branch of UNESCO activities is the cultural branch. As the noble Lord mentioned, the most spectacular effort in this field was the Nubian campaign, which has been successful in preserving the treasures of the Nile Valley. But, at the same time, much practical work is being done, equally in line with what the noble Lord has in mind, on such subjects as the removal of racial prejudice; and recently there has been a major project on mutual appreciation of Eastern and Western cultural values.

In conclusion, I would say again that we are grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Wade, for giving us this opportunity of discussing his Question, and particularly of paying tribute to some of the work that is being done by UNESCO. I hope that perhaps on another occasion we may have an opportunity of discussing the work of some of the other United Nations Special Agencies. One practical achievement of which I can assure the noble Lord is that the United Nations Library now know that your Lordships' House has a Library, whereas I have discovered that before they knew only of the House of Commons Library. I very much hope that other practical results will follow from the noble Lord's most interesting Question.