CO129-603-2 Education Department- revised grant code 5-4-1948 - 6-1-1949 — Page 125

125

(i)

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

That under the present Code the Government fixes the teachers salaries and therefore the School Managers have lost freedom of action. (Sec para. 3 of (2)).

That the School Managers under the present Codo may not make unlimited school charges additional to tuition fecs but are limited to extra charges of not more than 50% of the tuition fees and that this limitation reduces them to figurehends.

(Note:

These extra charges or 'subscriptions' aro not offset against approved school expenditure but are used by the school to defray the cost of sports, medical services, library, and the half cost of major repairs and equipment which has to be found by the school.) - Sec para. 4 of (2).

That under a Block Grant and with froodom to charge what foos thought fit the cost to Government might be somewhat reduced. Sce Para. 5 of (2).

That the present regulations of claiming for grants for building repairs and new equipment whereby estimates and prices have to be submitted in advance and approved by the P.W.D. are unduly oppressive.

That minor regulations made by Government under its present powers of control conflict with desirable clasticity of school management.

Nearly all the five points above are answered in two lotters attached (4) from the Managers of the two L.M. S. Grant Schools, and (5) from the nine Catholic Grant Schools. The letters show that these 11 of the 16 Grant Schools do not desire change from the present Grant System to any Block Grant System.

The suggestion of a radical revision of the Code along the lines of a Block Grant was discussed at a meeting of the Grant Schools Council on 7.5.48 and among other resolutions passed was a resolution passed by a large majority in favour of retaining the present Code with the recently suggested minor amcndments. Sce (6) attached.

The same question as to whether or not any Block Grant System or radical rovision of tno prosent Grant Codc was desirable was then put to the Board of Education, and after full discussion the following motion was approved:

"In the opinion of this Board there should be no

change in the structure of the existing Code apart from minor amendments that may be necessary to effect smoother working".

The Board also passed a motion as follows:-

"It is the opinion of this Board that it is not desirable to raise feus in Government Schools"

The argument in favour of a Block Grant was still pursued by Bishop Hall in his letter (3) which stressed again his desire for loss grant and more freedom from financial control and made rough suggestions for calculating a 'Block Grant'.

2

/Against