Mr. ALAN SYKESasked the President of the Board of Education if he will state what are the reasons which influence the Board in refusing the request of the Cheshire education authority to be allowed to close the Kerridge Wesleyan school, having regard to the fact, as previously pointed out to the Board, that the school is, a small one with only about twenty-two children over five years of age on its books; that the authority has undertaken, with the consent of the Board of Education, considerable expense in improving and enlarging the premises of the Bollington council school, which was formerly a Wesleyan school under the same trustees as the Kerridge Wesleyan school, on an understanding with the trustees that the Kerridge school would be closed when the alterations in the Bollington council school were completed, as is now the case; that if the Kerridge school were closed every child attending it would have the choice of a council school, a Church of England school, and a Roman Catholic school within 1¼ miles of his home; and that the cost of maintenance of the Kerridge school has been for the last year more than £7 per child, which is out of all proportion to 842W confers on the neighbourhood; whether he will encourage local authorities to reduce their expenditure, especially if such reduction can be accompanied, as in this case, by greater educational efficiency; and whether, in view of these and other points laid before the Board by the education authority, the Board will reconsider its refusal to allow the school to be closed?
Mr. A. HENDERSONIn dealing with cases of proposed closure of small schools, the Board are bound to act in a judicial capacity, and by Section 9 of the Act of 1902 they are directed in determining whether a school is necessary or not to have regard to the interests of secular instruction, to the wishes of parents as to the education of their children, and to the economy of the rates. After careful consideration of the representations of the local education authority and the petitions against the closure of the school submitted by the managers and parents of children I attending it, who are all "infants" or children in Standard I., the Board came to the conclusion that the balance of advantage was not sufficiently clear to justify them in determining that the school was unnecessary. Subsequently the Board received a deputation from the authority, and wrote informing them that if they thought fit to renew their application in the spring it would receive further consideration upon its merits. Subject to the statutory limitation of their powers, the Board are, of course, anxious to encourage any reduction of expenditure which is accompanied by greater educational efficiency.