Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  


    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 27, No. 14. 1964.

Washday and the Precedent

Washday and the Precedent


Your leading article "Washday Fuss Unseemly" bristled with half truths and curious conclusions. To seize on just one; you said that "a further undesirable precedent set by the incident was that of political interference in educational matters." Mr. Kinsella can be accused of nothing of the kind. He was following a number of precedents involving such "interference" from both parties. Indeed, when the education system is State-run from kindergarten to university, is it "interference" or just the legitimate exercise of ministerial authority? A minister who failed to interfere would probably be accused of the gravest negligence.

There is no firmer precedent that I could quote than one set by Mr. Kinsella's predecessor-but-one in the National Government, the Hon, (now Sir) R. M. Algie. On assuming the office of Minister of Education in 1949, Mr. Algie immediately withdrew the journal "Education." which was issued free to teachers. It was a lively journal brought out, like "Washday at the Pa." by School Publications and printed by the Government Printer. Mr. Algie considered that it was a too-radical publication, subverting the teaching profession and as there had been a "decisive mandate against radicalism" in the election, he felt he was quite justified in withdrawing it.

The decision was a purely Ministerial one. Deputations—one led by Victoria academics—were told that the Minister had made up his mind and that was the end of the matter.

Mr. Kinsella must surely have felt confident with such a stand from a previous National minister behind him. I am etc.,

R. W. Heath