Schools : eighth report from the Select Committee on Estimates together with the Minutes of Evidence taken before Sub-Committee E and Appendices, Session 1952-1953.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Estimates
Date:
1953
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Schools : eighth report from the Select Committee on Estimates together with the Minutes of Evidence taken before Sub-Committee E and Appendices, Session 1952-1953. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    41/256 (page 21)
    17 December, 1952.] [Continued. slightly higher investment for 1953 than we had for 1952, and we have asked for more again both in 1954 and 1955. Whether we shall get what we ask for I cannot tell you. 230. So that the deficit indicated here is not likely to work out in these figures, but you will still have the problem of teaching the youngsters for whom you have not got enough buildings?—Yes. 231. What would be the policy?—What we would aim at doing is not assuming the deficit should go on increasing as shown in this table, but we shall still have a deficit, and you are asking how we are going to cope with it? 232. Yes?—I think it can only be by crowding up. (Mr. Rodger.) We are carry- ing the deficit at the moment, not com- fortably. We could continue to carry it. 233. It means the figures of over-sized classes would go up a bit?—Not if the deficit does not increase. If the deficit remains at its present size the over-sized classes would not necessarily grow. Chairman. 234. Paragraph 4 and what follows on that page seem to me to be very, very seri- ous. In the first place you say in para- graph 4 that as a result of the capital in- vestment allocation “‘ much less than would be desirable has been allocated to build- ings for technical education”. You say there is little need be spent on building for the training of teachers, and then you go on to say no expenditure whatever is being incurred on six items. I wonder first of all if you could tell us what the restriction in building for technical education means, what disadvantage that is or what danger is in that. Have you cut out what is absolutely vital and — essential?—(Sir William Murrie.) 1 think the position is, so far as the technical colleges provided by local authorties are concerned, they have not been putting forward many proposals of that kind because they themselves have recognised that their first job, or their most urgent job, is to provide for those children who otherwise would not have had a roof over their heads. We. have not felt able to press them to do more in the way of the provision of technical colleges because we realise that they have their hands full with the other problem. Chairman.] Is the provision for technical education very inadequate in Scotland? Mr. Malcolm MacPherson. 235. I think, Sir William, you would agree general opinion would be that it Is. Scotland is behind England in technical education, or at least the recent advances have been less?—I have not been there long enough to be quite sure about the answer to that, but we could certainly find out. I do not think it is behind in the higher ranges, in places like the Royal Technical College in Glasgow, for example. Mr. Malcolm MacPherson.) Not in quality, but in the amount of provision | should think it is. Chairman. 236. You say “much less than would be desirable”. I am trying to find out what is desirable and what is necessary and whether your provision is really very, very inadequate, and you and your colleagues. can tell us about that, whether that is so. Have you been obliged to restrict tech- nical education?—I do not think we have ever restricted a technical education pro- posal. It is simply that we think more could possibly be done about technical education, and if there was not this other urgent problem of providing for the children who have to be in school, we should, I think, be pressing local authori- ties to put up proposals, and no doubt they themselves would be putting forward pro- posals more freely. I cannot say we have actually turned down proposals for tech- nical education. (Mr. Rodger.) I cannot recollect a case of turning a proposal down. Mr. Malcolm MacPherson. 237. What about technical institutions not under the control of local authorities? —(Sir William Murrie.) I mentioned the Royal Technical College in Glasgow, which is a Central Institution and has a Board of Governors. They are an excep- tion to what I have been saying, because they are going on with a very big scheme of development. 238. In that case they would be under the University Grants Committee and not under the Department?—It is partly under the Grants Committee and partly under the Department. They get some of the money from the University Grants Committee and some from us. 239. But there are a fair number of other institutions for which the Department is responsible and in which one would imagine the present economic and indus- trial situation generally would call for expansion of technical education facilities? —I think the Heriot-Watt College in Edinburgh is also building at the moment and expanding. J am not seriously con- cerned about those Central Institutions. I think they are developing as fast as one could reasonably expect. It is the lower level of technical college that does give one more concern. Mr. Malcolm MacPherson.] That would be where there is the biggest contrast between the English and the Scottish situation. Brigadier Peto. 240. The difficulty appears to be mainly through the lack of capital investment. The brake has been put on the technical schools