Education (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill
Tuesday, May 02, 2000
and, thirdly, an annual report which seems to be the appropriate way of informing the Permanent Secretary and that is if a particular issue arises in which he has to get details of the Minutes.
In clause 19(1)(g), I agree, I think it was Sen. Jagmohan who suggested that other services should be added. I do not know why “water and electricity” is singled out and not other services like garbage collection, security and so on. I would like to see added onto this list another requirement. I think that where one has strong past pupils’ associations that have served many schools very well, that due recognition should be given to the presence of these associations. So, I would like to suggest that there be a subclause “(r)” which says, “by liaising with any past pupils’ association.” I think a bit of attention should be called to them by the regulations.
Mr. Speaker, with respect to membership which is clause 3(1)(b), first of all, I note that the number can be less than nine plus the Principal—if I am reading that clause correctly—in which case, with respect to the quorum, I would suggest that should be altered to read: “fifty per cent” or “fifty per cent plus one of the number”. Again, this list of members does two things because they are itemized separately. It thus pins the Minister down and reduces the flexibility of the persons that might be appointed, except for clause 19(1)(b)(v) in which four persons can be taken in the Minister’s discretion.
I suppose it is important to have these other persons designated. I would like to see the past pupils’ association have more than one representative even if it means increasing the total number on the board. So I would certainly say there “at least two.”
Mr. Speaker, as I say, the problem with the way that it is worded puts the emphasis on a community organization and this is not appropriate for schools that tend to have the whole country as their catchment area. The only way around, I can see, this one is the fact that clause 3(1)(b) says, “drawn from”. So that means the Minister does not need to in fact appoint people from each of these categories. It might be appropriate in that case to increase the number under clause 3(1)(b)(v) which gives the Minister some discretion. It does not mean that all have to be appointed. So even if one increases—as I am suggesting—the number under 3(1)(b)(v) and the number under clause 3(1)(b)(iv) because of the way it is worded, the Minister does not have to appoint all of those persons, so the numbers