Jennifer Lee
Singapore
“May I therefore ask the Minister if he will review the tax relief for the CPF top-up for non-working spouses, the conditions of which are currently set, I believe, too late and too low with a view to recommending the removal of the age and prior earnings qualifications? Negative Income Tax”
“Can we take customisation of the system one step further from streaming as we practise it now and look at how we can teach and assess these students, ie, do it all together in a review of that?”
“Secondly, increase opportunities for them to foster understanding and bonding across racial and socio-economic classes through the mixing that is possible in the period of National Service. This concurrently enables them to widen their own network of friends and colleagues into the future.”
“As we have been saying with regard to means testing, we would like to target Government subsidies to those who need it. The $50 to $200 deposited into the Medisave accounts of those over 50s, who need it will, I can assure you, not be enough.”
“They have totally no say in what their spouses do with their own CPF balances and, particularly, after the withdrawal age of 55. I am happy, therefore, that the Minimum Sum will need in future to be topped up before withdrawal is allowed so that at least that amount of money is not unthinkingly spent on pursuit of immediate gratifications…”
“Could I ask the Minister? Obviously, there is so much mismatch - there is a queue, there are vacant flats. Would HDB, in fact, be doing a review? Because the Minister is saying that right now there are certain criteria and because of that, we do not accommodate a lot of people. But it would appear that there is quite a need out there.”
The complete record
Every one of 199 lines we hold for Jennifer Lee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 4.
“Sir, I was chatting recently to a young woman. She was telling me about her family. It is a very typical Singaporean family, a family of five - mum, dad, two children and grandma. Mum and dad are both 50, "O" level holders, both working. She is a graduate, about to get started to work. Her youngest sister is about 20 and is in university. They live in a HDB apartment, for which there is a loan, still being paid over the next 10 years or so. The family income is about $4,000-plus. They are a happy family and life has been very comfortable. Dad is your true-blue solid Singaporean, very appreciative of how he has seen life improve over the years. It puts a human face to the recently published Census 2000 report. The family sits squarely in the 50-60th percentile of average household incomes. Mum and dad are also your typically asset rich, cash poor Singaporean couple. There is very little in their CPF balance and they would not be saving very much between now and retirement. There is not much left over monthly, with putting the younger daughter to university, plus some additional expenses for medication for dad who had an angioplasty done a few months ago. Presumably, the daughters would make some contribution to mum and dad after they started working, even after they get married and start families of their own. Apart from this presumption, mum and dad's financial planning for retirement rests entirely in converting their apartment they live in into funds to see them through their retirement years.”
“If the difficulty for women is in the juggling of responsibilities, it will surely be less difficult to persuade them to make that commitment in this case. Possibly not more effort has been made to recruit more women NMPs because of the ambivalence that even Members of the ruling party have with regard to the scheme. But since the scheme exists and has been found to be useful in the past 10 years, why not use it to even better effect to bring more women into the political arena? Look for women architects, women accountants, businesswomen, women unionist who will not only represent their professions or sectors, but would also bring diversity of more women's views into the discussions in this Chamber. I hope the Prime Minister will give consideration to my suggestions.”
“Indeed, in the past, some women groups and individuals have submitted lists of names but they have had little subsequent feedback on whether they were put to any use. Indeed, the Business Times published a list of some 200 names on International Women's Day in 1998, but we do not know if anyone, with decision-making authority, gave it more than a cursory glance. In our current environment, when we are constantly reminded of the need for diversity of ideas, views and perspectives, and of the need for talent, to the extent that we scour the world for it, surely it is worthwhile to expend some additional effort to ensure that we are fully mining the human resource and potential that resides in a whole half of our own population. Finally, before I end, some quick short words on women in politics. I have just two quick suggestions to make on increasing the participation of women in Parliament. Firstly, to avoid the triple whammy for women of family, career and politics, besides the extended search now to include single women, who presumably would have to deal largely with career and politics, why not homemakers who would have only family and politics on their plate? There are many able women who have opted to be homemakers and they should not be dismissed in considering candidates. In fact, I believe Dr Aline Wong, in her capacity as Chair of the PAP Women Wing, had already made the suggestion a couple of years ago. Secondly, more efforts should be directed to persuading women to participate through the NMP scheme. The commitment is for two years only, in the first instance, and there are no constituency responsibilities.”
“Secondly, current senior management, being largely filled by men, the names that first come to their minds, when vacancies open up at senior levels, are those of people they associate with, went to school with, did NS with, played golf with, and are generally comfortable with. All men, of course. There is no malice in this. This is just the natural consequence of historical circumstance. But what is needed, therefore, is a much more deliberate effort to search for women candidates for every vacancy and conscious effort to look out for, recognise and overcome traditional biases in the selection process. Certainly, as the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for MCDS, Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon observed at an International Women's Day event last week, women must also play their part and be willing to step forward to grasp opportunities that do present themselves. But in this instance, talking about board positions and not about political office, I expect that they would not be averse to respond positively to such opportunities. Australia has some interesting experiences to share. Australia has 24% of women in their Parliament, and 30% women on Government boards and bodies. It has achieved this through a concerted effort to put more women in senior positions, including an early warning system which identifies high calibre women candidates early in board vacancy processes, and in an executive search programme for women participation on these boards. Their experience also indicates that simply having a register or a list of names of suitable women is not enough to make a difference. It requires a conscious push from the Minister in charge of the respective agencies to result in significant increased female appointments.”
“Sir, there has been some renewed interest of late in the possibility of more women being fielded in the next general elections. So it seems like a good time to bring up the subject of better representation for women. May I state upfront that this is not engineered as a means of hinting to the Prime Minister on my availability. In fact, I would like to talk mainly about better representation of women in non-political office. More women in Parliament is actually the far end of the spectrum of better representation of women in senior positions in all areas of public service and the public sector and, in fact, in the private sector. The Government has little to say in private sector companies' management and governance appointments. But it is fully in charge of its own recruitment, selection and appointment processes to senior positions in its Ministries, National Advisory Committees, statutory boards and GLC boards. We have, to date, one woman Permanent Secretary, one woman CEO of a statutory board and 8% representation of women on both the statutory boards and the GLC boards. I think in Singapore, in this IT day and age, we can do considerably better. Let me say that I am, by no means, asking for quotas to forcibly inject women into positions they are not competent to fill, or to ask for any deviation from our policies of meritocracy. There are enough competent women in Singapore out there to more than adequately fill significantly more than those 8% of board positions. The problem is that, firstly, many of our good women out there keep a very low public profile.”
“Are these institutions able, at this point in time, to rise to the challenge of undertaking to provide these new services? Will this move unwittingly result in retarding the speed of growth of step-down care services? The Minister moves with his usual relentless efficiency. One is just concerned whether the VWO sector is able to keep up with him. The Inter-Ministerial Committee on the Ageing Population has recommended, in its report, that MOH and MCDS review the present division and responsibilities for health and social care services to ensure that planning and development of these services, will facilitate the service providers who want to look at providing community-based services and in the future development of more holistic models of eldercare. May I ask the Minister if there has been any progress in this area?”
“Sir, it has been a little over a year since the Ministry of Health introduced revised funding principles for nursing homes, in which the homes are required to utilise at least 80% of their bed capacity for category 3 and 4 patients who need a higher level of nursing care and the new category 1 and 2 residents, that is, those needing a lesser level of care and assistance would not qualify for MOH's subsidy. While the principle behind this move to ensure the appropriate utilisation of nursing home resources is certainly correct, there is cause for concern for the care delivery system for these frail senior citizens is currently not yet well-developed to provide adequate support and assistance to these elderly persons and their families. In other words, are there currently any other affordable residential institutions that are able to accept the new category 1 and 2 patients, or is it the intention that they should be looked after at home? If they should be looked after at home, are there enough agencies, I would expect essentially VWOs, currently providing home healthcare services, available to assist families to cope with this responsibility? May I ask the Minister if he would give us an update of the situation with regard to whether there have been cases during the past year of category 1 and 2 patients who have had difficulties finding placement. With regard to home healthcare services, are there other present services we thought would be sufficient, if not, what initiatives have been put in place to encourage more providers to come forward? I believe a new funding framework has been or just about to be put in place which seeks to fund step-down care through approved community hospitals and nursing homes.”
“But I would encourage it to be more aggressive and pump in the resources early, to jump-start the effort so that we can get to the critical mass of industry players and participants to really make the difference. And to support and, in fact, encourage arts groups in its review and approval of grants, that they should factor in in increasing the amounts needed to start moving artistes and arts professionals' remuneration towards levels that are necessary to make careers in the arts more viable. Could I also pick up on Mr Chew's point on concern about regulation in the view of the more liberal and some controversial and possibly provocative programmes that we have been seeing lately? I do understand that, given our very varied and diverse community, this would be a concern. I know that currently, there is a review going on as to how the arts should be licensed and regulated. I would argue very strongly to keep in fact the regulating body and the funding body separate because, otherwise, it is going to be extremely difficult. You are going to get tied up in knots as to what you should be funding, as an agency promoting the arts, and what you need to be taking care of, in terms of sensitivity to our communities.”
“It seems that, apart from a few in senior positions in the big very well established groups, either you need to have very supportive and understanding parents who will allow you to live with them, probably well into your geriatric years, or you have still to be working part time in the arts and sustain yourself in another day time job. Because, historically, the arts group has been functioning in this manner. From our days of a completely amateur community in the arts, the operating budget all this time has been built on a base of token salaries and allowances. They are caught now in a bind. How can you justify quantum leaps percentage-wise in your manpower costs in putting up programmes? The groups are very appreciative of the additional funding they have been getting lately. But much of it is going to more programmes and activities and very little to adjusting salaries and allowances to anything even close to what would be needed in the longer term to make any difference in growing a core of full-time professionals in the arts, which is what you are going to need if you want to build that group in the industry. In this context, and from the perspective of supporting most wholeheartedly what NAC is seeking to achieve, I must say that it must be a very tough task to develop a global city in the arts with an annual budget of $32 million which is what the NAC has for FY 2001. I also notice that the projected increase in next year's budget is only about $3 million in operating budget. When you look at the $50 million over five years that has been set aside for the Renaissance City initiatives, this seems rather less than what one would expect. Possibly, the NAC is being prudent and saving more to be spent in the later part of the five years.”
“Sir, the National Arts Council's mission statement speaks of developing Singapore into a vibrant global city of the arts. This is not just a luxury that we can now afford to allow ourselves but, in fact, an integral part of what needs to happen to make this a satisfying and indeed an exciting place to live in both to engage our own young talented people and keep them here as well as to attract the additional foreign talents that we need to our shores. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] 4.51 pm That Government is supportive is clear from its acceptance last year of the Renaissance City Report and the commitment of $50 million in funding over the next five years towards this initiative. Sir, the NAC has a great challenge ahead of it. Let me start by saying that from my conversations with various arts groups and practitioners, I have heard much positive comments about the NAC's accessibility, about its efforts to establish and maintain a good dialogue with the arts community and its responsiveness to suggestions and recommendations made about assistance schemes and training grants that would be most helpful and supportive. Building depth in industry is not something that can be achieved overnight. And currently, it is difficult to find enough good and experienced people from players to technicians, production managers, all categories of people, for all the events and activities that are now being organised. The underlying problem is the inability to pay enough to build a good solid core of full-time professionals in the arts industry.”
“There were also two short-term measures recommended, ie, of looking into the pool of existing transport resources and modifying current transport arrangements to ensure that there are affordable and elderly-friendly transport services to eldercare facilities even now. This was to be undertaken jointly by MCDS, MOH, NCSS and the LTA. What has been the outcome of this effort? While the IMC gave a longer time horizon over which the LTA might implement its recommendations, anticipating that the numbers of elderly would really start to grow tremendously in the next decade or two down the road, the challenge in making the environment family-friendly is here with us today. I would therefore like to ask the Minister what the timeframes are for implementation of the recommendations and if these timeframes can be speeded up for the benefit of both senior citizens as well as parents with young children.”
“I would like to ask the Minister what the status is of the action on the recommendations of the IMC on the Ageing Population with regard to meeting the transport needs of elderly commuters. It has been a year and a half since the IMC Report was published in 1999. I am interested in the progress at this point in time. Because in the recent discussions on the subject of making the environment family-friendly, it was noted that parents with young children share very similar challenges in using our public transport system as the older population. A parent with a child in a pram faces the same problem negotiating flights of steps and narrow automated turnstiles or gates in MRT stations, or getting on and riding in a bus, as an elderly frail person in a wheelchair. A parent carrying a child on one arm and possibly shopping or other bags in the other experiences the same difficulty in getting on a fast-moving escalator in our MRT stations as a senior citizen who is perhaps not so steady on her feet. May I therefore ask if the North-east MRT line and the LRT stations currently being built will indeed have barrier-free access, and whether in fact any existing MRT stations have yet to be retrofitted with ramps and lifts. With regard to buses, what progress has been made on the proposed pilot project to test the efficiency of wheelchair-accessible buses? Has anybody taken that up? In the past year and a half, has LTA been more successful in encouraging taxi operators to bring in more wheelchair-friendly cabs and what are the proposals to reduce taxes for this type of vehicle in return for reduced fares for the target users of this service?”
“The men are not considered salaried employees and their allowance is meant only to cover some of their basic daily expenses since their accommodation and food are already provided in camp. I am not at all arguing against the principle that NS is indeed a national responsibility and obligation. I would submit, however, that in our current very fast paced environment, the commitment of 21/2 years in service to the nation with the consequent delay in completion of studies or of starting up in a career is in itself already a significant sacrifice. May I therefore ask the Minister once again if he will review the allowance for NSmen, in particular, with a view to making some payment into CPF accounts for the men, regardless of the fact that it will be on an allowance, and not in the usual manner, on a salary?”
“Sir, I am rising also to speak about allowance for NSF men. The subject has been brought up, I think, with some regularity during Budget debates and, in 1996, I remember Dr Wang Kai Yuen detailed the proposal for the payment of an amount equivalent to the employer's and employee's CPF contribution, at that time, amounting to 40% on an approximation of an office worker's starting salary of $1,000 into CPF account for our full-time NSmen. The fees were reviewed and increases in the allowance had been very much on the basis of financial hardship, particularly, for those NSF men who have to support family members. I am bringing up the matter again this time in view of an additional consideration which surfaced during the recent intensive discussions that we have been having on the subject of the family, specifically encouraging our young people to get married and settle down earlier. Surveys conducted have consistently indicated that, among the top reasons, our young men and women delay getting married is to say that until they can afford to have a home of their own. A scheme, such as that proposed by Dr Wang, that starts building up CPF balances for the young men as they discharge their full-time NS obligation would make a significant difference and how soon young couples are able to afford that downpayment towards the home of their own that would start them off on a lifetime together. From previous responses from the respective Defence Ministers, each time has been largely to remind us that NS is a responsibility and an obligation of all male Singaporean citizens and that the philosophy is that some element of sacrifice is expected.”
“Would our economy be able to hum and grow as it has, if there was not all that work being done every day in homes all through the island to keep our workers fed and rested, and our children cared for? These women will also grow old and add to the households with retirees without income that form the bottom 10%. We must find a means to register and reward their contribution so that, when they grow old, they do not then find that, after the many years of contribution, they are reduced to feeling that they survive only on the generosity of society. Finally, there is one other group that has an important part to play in any discussion on the income divide, and this is the group at the top, who are of concern for two reasons. Firstly, they may be moved to give something back to the society that has enabled their development and progress, and contribute their skills and abilities as well as some portion of their material wealth in helping the further advancement of the nation and the welfare of its less well-endowed citizens. And, secondly, that they will remain rooted to Singapore in the face of the many opportunities open to them anywhere else in the world. ADJOURNMENT OF DEBATE Resolved, That the debate be now adjourned. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng].”
“23% of them were over 65 years of age, probably without CPF accounts in the first place, unaware of the scheme or the necessity to deposit $100 in the qualifying period, or too poor to spare the amount. Our CPF top-up is the best way to share some of the economic surpluses during good years for the country. Would the working majority begrudge some portion of the goodies being shared with those who have no CPF accounts, particularly if they are the older generation who contributed in the past, or women whose contributions are not in the labour force? In fact, could we go beyond the current structuring of payouts to further direct the money where it is most needed? For the people in the top 20%, could we implement an opt-in scheme to indicate that they want their $500 top-up, otherwise that money would be re-directed for disbursement to the bottom 20%? The amount could mean very little to one group and be significant to the other, and it would be a good way to demonstrate concern and support across the divide. The approach of looking at various ways of enhancing Singaporeans' financial planning for their retirement, through their CPF savings, assumes that people have enough savings available to spare in the first place. The Supplementary Retirement Scheme, the details of which were also recently announced, is such an example. In fact, there is a large group of Singaporeans, the 47% of women who are not in the labour force, ie, the homemakers, and who therefore have no CPF accounts, who will presumably have to rely entirely on their children to provide for them, since they are most likely to survive their spouses. These women work; only their work is unpaid labour, done at home.”
“It is imperative, therefore, that children of the lower income households have not only the opportunity to be in school, but a little extra attention, where necessary, to make up for what support may be lacking in difficult home circumstances, so that they may have a good shot at better opportunities in life in the future. Similarly, for the large pool of older unskilled workers, retraining and upgrading of their skills are critical and, in this area, the Government has been devoting significant attention and resources. However, response to skills upgrading programmes could be much more satisfactory, and work must continue to be done to see how this can be improved. Apart from those for whom the issue is simply that of poor attitude, what are the obstacles hindering the participation of the others? For the elderly, we must look at both those who are already currently in their retirement years as well as preparing for the aging of our population of baby boomers. The IMC on the aging population in 1999 devoted one segment of its report to planning for financial security in retirement. For those already 65 years and above, it is too late to be talking about financial planning, and our efforts must be to see how we can help those who need assistance to access it. These are the citizens in our midst who do not know what help is available, do not know how or are too frail or otherwise incapable of accessing available assistance. The recent information on the almost 200,000 Singaporeans who missed the opportunity of benefiting from the first tranche of CPF top-up is an illustration of this.”
“Nor is there any argument with the Government's focus and policies to ensure that we keep abreast of the challenges of globalisation, of its philosophy of leveraging upwards, giving its attention to how to support and facilitate enterprise and talent at the top, so as to generate benefits for the nation at large. Nevertheless, I do believe that we should pause to look at the widening income gap and review if we are indeed doing enough to ensure that we will continue to maintain our social cohesion and build an even stronger national spirit. In addressing the income divide, there are two main issues that are cause for concern. The two issues are, firstly, ensuring access to education and training that are critical to providing all Singaporeans the opportunity to do better for themselves and, secondly, providing adequate assistance and support to those who are struggling at the bottom of the income ladder. These two issues are of particular relevance to four groups of people: the elderly poor, women, the large group of older and unskilled workers, and the present and future school children from low-income households. We have an education system that produces sterling examination results and sees our children winning accolades at international mathematics and science competitions. These are our kids at the top. But does our system give enough support to the kids at the bottom, particularly those whose home environment may afford them hardly the bare essentials? That education is the bridge across the income divide is clear and unquestionable. Another quick look at the Census Report shows clearly the difference that just one member of a household having a higher level of educational attainment makes to those households' average income.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I join others who have spoken already in expressing appreciation of the Minister for Finance's generous Budget, with something in it for everyone - companies big and small, and individuals across the board. Against the background of the Census Report 2000, released last month on household income, it is good to note that we have not forgotten to specifically direct some small measure of assistance to those at the bottom of the economic ladder in the form of utilities and rental rebates, and in the structuring of CPF top-ups, such that lower-income earners receive the highest payouts. The Census Report showed a widening of the income gap, with those at the top 10% of households earning 36 times more than those in the bottom 10%. It has caused a significant discussion, as indeed it should, especially in the midst of concurrent recent soul-searching about what it means to be Singaporean, on belonging, rootedness and values. The Prime Minister, just quoted in yesterday's newspapers, said that we should not get too carried away in exaggerating both the width of the income divide or its consequences. Certainly, at this point in time, we are very far from being a society that is polarised, with a group of very rich who indulge in ostentatious consumption, against the backdrop of large numbers of desperately poor without even their most basic needs met. In fact, our short history has been one that has seen large numbers of Singaporeans, the majority, being able to translate their efforts and capabilities into much improved standards of living for themselves.”
“This is what drives parents and students, regardless of whatever other messages the Ministry of Education may issue about there being no need to be immoderate in pressuring their children. It is a rare Singapore family that does not struggle with the stresses of putting the kids through our education system. Add to that MOE's steadfast refusal to entertain that there might be any other way or perspective to explore in such issues as ranking and streaming, and how much progress can we hope to make in addressing stress for families. The Working Committee on Marriage and Procreation published some recommendations at the end of August. Two recommendations for the civil service - three days of paternity leave and flexibility in organising work hours around a 42-hour week. One on building more hostels to facilitate the blooming of romance in our university campuses, and one on helping newly married couples with their HDB downpayments. Mr Eddie Teo, who heads the Committee, in explaining the rationale for some of the recommendations, voiced the consideration that we should not, and I quote, "send the wrong signal that Singapore has arrived, and it is okay for workers to switch to a less intense pace." I sincerely hope the Committee does not consider its work done, that it has many more recommendations to make to the Ministerial Committee and that when it does make these recommendations, they will not simply provide small symptomatic concessions but be bold and sweeping and get down to challenging our assumptions on where the balance must be struck between purely economic imperatives and the building of a world class home. Sir, I support the motion.”
“In this instance, I would say, okay, do not compel them, but allow the exemption from plot ratio calculations for such centres. And I dare say some may indeed take up the opportunity to plan accordingly, because I do believe that this may, in fact, be a selling feature of the development. But for this to happen, the exemption must come first. In any case, here is another Ministry - MND - that could and should be applying its thoughts on how to contribute to this effort to promote pro-family or family-friendly facilities. It seems to me that possibly the conviction is not quite there in this effort. And possibly the conviction is not quite there because we are still, all this time, just scratching at the surface, looking for the easy quick fixes, ambivalent about what is truly important to us, and avoiding some real soul searching, including relooking at the sacred cows comfortably ensconced on the altar of the first-world economy. How do we prioritise between being the best workers in the world and putting much more attention to strengthening our families? Do we truly believe mothers should be out contributing to the economy or at home rearing the kids? Do we have a choice? Do they have a choice? We hesitate and that is why up to now, we are still ambivalent about actively promoting the setting up of creches for babies below two years of age. If we cannot afford to have working mums drop out and stay at home, how much role sharing are we truly going to promote without worrying that it will undermine our tenet of a patriarchal Singapore? We are inordinately driven by elitism. Can we not ease up at all without losing the drive to compete economically? You are nothing if you are not in that cream at the top, not a scholar, not in one of the top professions.”
“The efforts, to date, to grapple with the many issues that need to be addressed, have been driven largely by MCDS, but many more Ministries must be engaged. Otherwise, we will never get anywhere, because there is no simple magic bullet that is the solution, but many, many different things - policies, programmes, services that impact daily on all our lives. For example, to help companies become more family-friendly, Government's assistance in defraying the cost of job redesign to facilitate flexible working arrangements would be most helpful. It has been suggested that companies could apply for such support under the PSB's Work Redesign Assistance Programmes. For this to work, however, the criteria for support will need to be modified from the relevant programmes as they currently are. I do not believe any progress has been made in this, possibly because it may not even be registered onto PSB's list of things to do, or possibly because PSB's priorities are set by MTI and not by MCDS. Another example, which I had previously raised with MND for consideration unsuccessfully, is to require developers of commercial and industrial complexes above a certain size to put aside space for child or dependant care centres, and to exempt this space from the calculation of plot ratios, so that near-site childcare centres could be available to the workers and companies located in these complexes. The Minister, in his answer, had said that Government did not wish to compel developers to do this. It would leave it to the companies themselves. Well, we all know, when this Government believes that something needs to be done, it has never before had any compunction about acting on its beliefs.”
“If Singaporeans take this attitude in this instance, it will be a sorry situation indeed, as it will surely make the journey even more arduous and long and the destination less certain. What is the employers' role? Employers need to do more than just pay perfunctory attention and lip service to seeing how they can become family-friendly. It is however much easier said than done. It involves a lot more than just introducing programmes in an ad hoc manner. To be successfully truly family-friendly involves a systematic approach, from analysing what your own particular profile of employees truly need, through enabling and supporting your managers and supervisors in dealing with the flexible working requests from their subordinates, to achieving all of this while keeping one's cost of operations within reason. But in truth, in our tight labour market, employers will find, over time, that they will be under pressure to respond to the needs and wants of a changing and more demanding workforce. So, why not be proactive about it and, in fact, adopt family-friendliness as a competitive advantage in recruitment, motivation and retention of good people? What is Government's role? Obviously, it is more than to exhort companies to be family-friendly and to exhort individuals - well, Government sends these messages to individuals that convey tremendous expectations. To be the best workers in the world, to continuously upgrade their skills and expertise, to engage in life-long learning, not to neglect their children, and to provide care for their parents, as filial sons and daughters, right up to the end of their increasing longer lifespans. And to do so, if at all possible, without foreign domestic help!”
“Can we get to that happy state in Singapore where we can have a productive, satisfying job that pays reasonably well enough to maintain a decent standard of living and yet, at the same time, look forward to the prospect of a family albeit that it comes with responsibilities, with pleasure rather than trepidation? What does it take? It seems to me it must surely have to be a tripartite effort - involving Government, employers and individuals themselves. All three parties have a role to play. Let us start with individuals. What is the individual's role? It is certainly essential. Employers and Government can and must support and facilitate through their policies, programmes, services, approach, willingness to be flexible. But the individual must also be prepared, firstly, to make his or her own life choices, for as surely as death and taxes, you can be sure that it is not possible to have it all. You have to decide what is most important to you personally, your priorities, and be aware of the implications of your choice. At work, in some companies, some family-friendly benefits may be readily available, but many, particularly those involving flexible working arrangements, for example, will often require the employee to also get engaged with his or her supervisor on seeing how to make it work, for both the employee and for the company. Singaporeans sometimes have a tendency to look to some higher authority, namely, the Government, to solve their problems for them. This is particularly likely in situations where Government has already signalled that the area is one in which it has an interest and a stake in prescribing the outcome.”
“The current Government attention on family-friendly and pro-family work practices, policies and programmes to support and strengthen the family is, to a large extent, driven by the baby agenda. But, in fact, these practices, policies and programmes are important for far more than just promoting the production of babies. Strengthening the family is intrinsically important in itself, especially as we have always held the family to be the basic building block of our society. Even more so in the face of the challenges of the accelerating pace of our modern working environment, coupled with the influences that our youngsters are now open to with the easy accessibility of information. Strengthening existing families is important, even if all our efforts do not result in one more couple deciding to have one more baby. And, indeed, helping Singaporeans maintain a balance between their work and family responsibilities is an intrinsic and essential factor in achieving the quality of life that we all aspire to as citizens contributing to a first-world economy. In that same speech last October, the Prime Minister spoke of our twin goals of having both a first-world economy and a world-class home. He observed that the goal of a first-world economy was easier to achieve than that of a world- class home, which involves many intangibles and cannot be measured simply by hardware and physical infrastructure. It seems to me that we are still holding on tightly to all our old assumptions and measures of success that drive towards economic goals, unwilling to explore shifting the balance even just a little, afraid to let go, lest the easier tangible goal slips from our grasp, as we reach for the harder to achieve intangible one.”
“Sir, I rise to support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Kreta Ayer-Tanglin GRC on family-friendly work practices. Since the Prime Minister's speech here in this Chamber in October one year ago, on his concern that Singaporeans are not reproducing ourselves, increasing attention has been turned to the subject, once again, of persuading Singaporeans to increase their productivity from the population perspective. Intimately intertwined in the ensuing discussions and debate is the subject of the family, and of the stresses on our current day Singaporean families, which surely impacts on our young couples' decisions on whether to start a family and, in fact, on the size of the family to have. We have seen considerable activity over this period with the formation of the Working Committee on Marriage and Procreation, involving an impressive panel of Permanent Secretaries, the announcement of a Ministerial Committee to be led by the Minister without Portfolio, Mr Lim Boon Heng, the establishment of a Work-Life Unit by MCDS, and yet another committee on Public Education on the Family, chaired by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary of MCDS. In between, there has been a seminar to discuss the preliminary report of the Committee on the Family, workshops conducted by invited consultants on Work-Life Balance, and the Family Friendly Awards, a tripartite initiative of SNEF, MCDS and NTUC. All this energy and enthusiasm is certainly a good start, but the concern is that this flurry of activity gets translated into real, substantial and sustained effort, policy reviews and initiatives and programmes for both the immediate and the long term.”
“Ho Peng Kee (for the Minister for Home Affairs): The answer is yes. Traffic Police takes a serious view of motorcyclists who ride and park on pedestrian pavements. Such inconsiderate acts cause obstruction and pose a danger to pedestrians. Motorcyclists who park or ride on pedestrian pavements can be fined $70. Traffic Police has been and will continue to take enforcement action against errant motorcyclists.”
“Yes, Sir. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, I thank the Nominated Member of Parliament for the clarification. But I think we can still see a difference between looking at a play in Tamil and then reading the English subtitles and the actual play being performed in English, because for a start, I think the audience mix will be vastly different and moreover, the impact will be vastly different. Yesterday we talked about whether PELU should be the authority for arts performances. In the arts, some will argue that because of the need to balance artistic merit and also the desire of artistes to express themselves and try new things and, on the other hand, the need to ensure that some of these sensitivities we talk about are observed, we have asked PELU to look at it, do a review, and the Ministry will also be in consultation with MITA to see who should be that one-stop agency. Mr Jeyaretnam: May I ask the Minister of State: does he not think seriously that this case affords the best grounds for setting up an appeals board consisting of distinguished, respectable citizens to decide on these questions? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Mr Jeyaretnam missed the debate yesterday. I think we talked about it at length. He was not here. He asked many questions. I answered him and corrected some of his misperceptions. This point was indeed addressed and this review will look at whether or not panels need to be set up. MOTORCYCLISTS RIDING AND PARKING ON PEDESTRIAN PAVEMENTS (Action by police) 6. Mr Goh Chong Chia asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Police will consider taking action against motorcyclists who have been riding and parking on pedestrian pavements in the Central Area as this poses a threat to the safety of pedestrians. Assoc. Prof.”
“Yes. How do we guard against being overly sensitive so that we are forever caught in a mind of not moving ahead when possibly we are overly sensitive to the sensibilities of certain communities? I have read the play and the context of it is very largely domestic violence.”
“First, a point of clarification. I believe the first performances of the play in Tamil were subtitled in English, so they did in fact reach a wider audience than just the Tamil community. In fact, I think, quite a few English-speaking were there in the audience and understood the play. Secondly, all of us here fully understand that we live in a multi-racial society and that we are very sensitive about not offending all our various communities with their different religious beliefs. But there is also a danger of ---”
“I have no argument with the philosophy of paying a person his worth and of the importance of having the best people in leadership. But with this juxtaposition of earning capacities right now so starkly highlighted, I strongly and sincerely urge the Government, our top civil servants and Ministers that, as the Government continues in its work to formulate and implement policies and programmes, it takes pains to be seen to be sensitive to the aspirations of and gives adequate weightage to, not alienating, this full 40% of Singaporeans. 5.35 pm”
“Mr Speaker, the Senior Minister and the Prime Minister have just earlier shared with us and reminded us of the calibre of our Ministers and the achievements of the Government. Actually, I think there was no real need for that because there is no question that our Ministers are deserving and that the Government has done very good work. The question that is troubling me is how you reconcile the pragmatic approach that we will always take in reducing everything down to economic equations, on the one hand, with our call, on the other hand, to Singaporeans, and to younger Singaporeans especially, to be patriotic and to have a love for their country and to have a commitment to it. These two days we have been debating and discussing the salary revisions that are just about to be made for our top civil servants and Ministers. Just about one month ago, the results of the 1999 Labour Force Survey were published and they were a reminder for us that things are not all well for all Singaporeans. Much of the discussion that has ensued in the weeks since have focused particularly on the bottom 12% of households with income of less than $1,000. Not that much attention was paid to the next category which was the households with income of $1,000 to below $3,000. This is another full additional 30% of our population. While we are certainly not destitute, they are not anywhere close within reach of what we all consider the good material things in life. And we all know and recognise that cost will continue to increase and that, with this increasing cost, this group will also struggle more and more to be able to afford these good things. These two groups together comprise a full 42% of Singaporeans.”
“Sir, I would just simply like to ask the Minister of State that, albeit that cars are not a basic need, they do form a very real part of the aspirations of many Singaporeans and, therefore, the LTA, as it further studies refinements and hopefully enhancements from the public point of view, takes due consideration that it tries not to contribute more to the very real and growing feeling among ordinary Singaporeans that more and more things are getting out of reach of the little guy and of young people starting out in their careers.”
“Sir, there are some groups of people who have great difficulty in accessing the skills retraining programmes, eg, working parents who are struggling to earn a living and, at the same time, look for childcare arrangements. Are there any programmes or service assistance that would be available for this grouping so that they could in fact take advantage of skills retraining? BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: Sir, there are many programmes which are available. If Dr Jennifer Lee knows of specific cases, they can be referred to either MOE, MCDS or to a CDC. All these agencies are aware of the whole array of schemes which are available and which would best meet the needs of particular families. The fact is that if you look around, yes, there are poor people around us but are their children not going to school? Are they not being treated for illnesses because of a lack of financial resources? And the reason why the outcome is not there is because these schemes are available and they are available in different places. If there are individuals who do not know how to access them, these cases can be referred to their MPs, CDCs or to the Ministries involved.”
“They have been involved in the development of the selection criteria. They will also be involved in the training of teachers, and may act as advisers to schools. We are presently developing a more holistic approach to sexuality education, building on what is already covered in the existing curriculum and bearing in mind the different needs of the students at different stages of their development. A multi-media package is being produced which will examine concepts and attitudes in sexuality education in a structured manner. This will be used as an additional resource for guided discussions about responsibility, consequences and choices with respect to one's sexuality. Sexuality education has been, and will continue to be, carried out alongside civics and moral education because MOE always believes in imparting the right moral values. But MOE is aware that the subject of sexuality touches very deeply held beliefs which may differ between people and across communities. As such, we will consult various groups before deciding on whether this additional component of sexuality education should be built into the school curriculum or be left as an optional programme. Let me assure Dr Jennifer Lee that we are working on the subject.”
“As the Committee on Compulsory Education is still in the process of gathering feedback and studying the experience of other countries, I do not think I should take up the time of the House much further. We will study the issues and the feedback raised by Members of the House very carefully before we make our recommendations and put up a report by the second half of this year. Mr Chiam is not here. I think he said something about the duration of compulsory education. I would also consider his views together with the other Members' when we decide on the duration of compulsory education. Let me respond very quickly to Dr Jennifer Lee's questions on sexuality education. She asked whether or not we should source out the teaching of sexuality education because most teachers who are entrusted to teach this subject find it uncomfortable to do so. This is indeed one problem, but sourcing out is not the solution because there are very few agencies out there which have the expertise and the inclination to do so. What we plan to do is that we would like to get the support not just from the teachers but also from members of the community and, where necessary and possible, even volunteer parents, to help us teach the subject. Bearing in mind that not all teachers may have the background or inclination to conduct lessons in sexuality education, we will be providing the schools with a set of criteria for the selection of appropriate teachers for sexuality education. We will give them the adequate training. In drawing up the criteria, we have consulted psychologists, social workers and other professionals in this field from organisations such as the Institute of Health in the Ministry of Health, and Family Service Centres.”
“Yes, there is some problem with the offering of Tamil language and they are trying to group together to send children to certain centres that have these classes. Mr Zulkifli said that the Government should perhaps come in and integrate the different ethnic groups in the PSE centres. But if there are some parents who prefer to send their children to religiously-affiliated centres that teach not just PSE but religious education, I think there is nothing very much the Government can do about that. I think I have addressed most of the points raised by Members on PSE. Let me move very quickly to compulsory education as time is running out. I would like to thank Dr Wang Kai Yuen for calling us to focus on the twin goals of our national education system. To reiterate, the two goals are: First, to give our children a common core of knowledge and skills, which will provide a strong foundation for further education and training that would prepare our children for a knowledge-based economy. Second, to give our children a common educational experience which will help build national identity and social cohesion. Given the range of views that we have been hearing at our feedback sessions, and from the press as well as from Members of the House, I think it is important for us to keep constantly in mind these two main objectives of our national school system. In deciding on whether or not compulsory education should be introduced and the form and duration by which it should take place, we must constantly bear in mind these two major objectives, which are the reasons why MOE has done its best to bring most children into our national school system.”
“If we look at the range of opinions offered by the press interviews just two days ago, some parents do not want the Government to step in at all. They want choice. They want variety. I think leaving it in the private and voluntary sectors will encourage creative innovation, as each centre strives to meet the needs of its unique pupil profile. I would urge parents to work hand in hand with the centres, and later on with schools, to provide the best learning opportunities and experience for their children. It must be remembered that PSE is only one factor of success in learning. Home support for children is equally, if not more, important. In our eagerness to promote PSE, we must not think that early childhood education is just done in or by PSE centres. I should add that the recent spate of press reports, interviews and comments have shown that parents have a very wide range of views on the issues. This is to be expected. However, if these reports have raised a lot of expectations and anxieties among parents regarding PSE, maybe this is an unintended result, it is still not very helpful. It would not help matters. MOE will take the approach of tackling the issues step by step. This will ensure that any further Government investment in this sector will be worth the monies spent. Before I move on to compulsory education, I would like to respond to Mr Zulkifli bin Baharudin's point regarding the segregation of children in ethnically run or religious affiliated centres. The PCF centres which provide the largest proportion of pre-school education to children in Singapore are open to everybody. In fact, many of them have Malay teachers. They offer classes in Malay language as a second language.”
“As for research, I have earlier explained the need to establish the long-term value of PSE. I also made a case for carefully determining the optimal investment in PSE, should it be shown that it plays a significant part in raising the overall capacity of our people. MOE intends to achieve the above through a pilot research programme. This is a longitudinal study to ascertain the long term cognitive and non-cognitive benefits of PSE. In particular, we will be studying the impact of teacher-training and a new curriculum on children's intellectual and social growth. Full details of the pilot research, such as the number of children involved, participating centres, research methodology and funding will be announced later. The pilot research will yield useful insights into the training of teachers and the development of instructional materials. The aim is to see how we can raise the quality of PSE in Singapore, and what level of Government investment is justifiable. A full research programme with longitudinal studies indicating the effects of different pre-school strategies is likely to take many years, perhaps up to seven. MOE will carry out a pilot study, and is prepared to proceed on a wider scale on the basis of the preliminary results of this study after two to three years, if the preliminary results indicate that longer term results are likely to be good. Before I end, I want to emphasise that MOE will not take over PSE. The provision of PSE will remain firmly in the hands of the private and people sectors. There is merit in allowing different centres with different philosophies and schools of thought to offer different types of PSE.”
“The P1 programme and P1 teachers recognise that pupils are different and they will adapt strategies that are appropriate for them. Actually, our schools already have programmes that cater to these differences. For example, the Learning Support Programme is designed to help P1 and P2 children who have not yet attained a sufficient level of English proficiency to improve quickly. This programme has proven to be successful and has greatly helped the children improve their reading and writing skills. To recap, school readiness is not about mastering some of the P1 curriculum by day one in primary school. It is also more than having adequate language facility, important though it is. School readiness is about being eager to learn, able to make friends, take turns and share, pay attention, and enjoy learning. Members have rightly identified teacher quality as the key to raising the quality of PSE. This point has been raised by Mr Iswaran and Mr Loh Meng See. My Steering Committee on PSE has set up a task force comprising MOE officials and representatives from NIE and other service providers in order to study the matter. It will look into the teacher-training curriculum for different levels of qualification, as well as an accreditation framework, and map out progression routes for PSE teachers to attain higher qualifications. The task force will also study how PSE teachers can participate in continual education and training in order to develop better practice and keep abreast of professional developments in their field. At present, there are a number of agencies providing PSE teacher-training. The task force is looking into how MOE can assure standards and rationalise the provision of teacher training among such agencies.”
“For those with no English facility, schools will focus on the development of the aural and oral skills first, and early reading and writing activities will be gradually phased in. Some Members have remarked on the different standards of various PSE centres. I think this is natural, given that the community and private sectors provide PSE, and MOE's regulatory role is in setting guidelines on curriculum and teacher-training. Many people want MOE to bring children to the same starting point at primary one. While this is well-intentioned, in reality, it is impossible. Children have different abilities and aptitudes, and their home backgrounds vary. It is unrealistic to expect that they will turn out the same just because they have been through the same pre-school programme for one or two years. Even students attending exactly the same pre-school class will come to P1 with different levels of preparedness and proficiency. Also, as Mr Sin Boon Ann has put it so eloquently, there will always be parents who try to give their children that extra head-start in PSE over their peers. Children, especially at this age of rapid growth, are different. They develop at different rates and in different ways. We cannot "equalise" everyone after two years of kindergarten. We cannot even do that after 10 years of general education. In fact, as education is about enabling each child to achieve, given his own combination of talents and abilities, it must show up in the end the diverse achievements of people in different areas. 2.45 pm The PSE can, and should, bring children to an adequate level of school readiness. It cannot, and should not be expected to "equalise" every child by Primary 1.”
“I would like to assure the House that this is an extreme case, and that the practice is not widespread. MOE's policy is that schools will take in primary one pupils with varying degrees of readiness and teach them from there. In regular meetings with principals, MOE has reminded schools of this policy. The desired outcomes will be translated into a new curriculum which will provide age appropriate learning activities in five domains, ie, moral, cognitive, social, emotional and physical domains. This new curriculum will be ready in about half a year's time. We will teach the children what is right and wrong. Cognitively, children should learn through discovery, experimentation and observation. Language learning will focus on aural, ie, listening, and oral, ie, speaking, skills. Socially, children will learn to listen attentively, share and work together. Emotionally, they will develop self-confidence and be able to relate to others, to their peers and to adults. Activities will also help children develop their physical co-ordination. I would like to assure the House that the new curriculum will help to ensure a smooth transition for young children from pre-school to primary one. In designing the curriculum for primary one, MOE will start from the desired outcome "Be able to listen and speak with understanding". There is a language focus in primary one, particularly in English, because this is the medium of instruction and the means by which students access most subjects in the curriculum. Pupils entering primary one do differ in English proficiency, because of their different abilities and backgrounds. For those with basic oral and aural proficiency, the primary one curriculum will build on that.”
“] Members will notice that the Desired Outcomes of PSE closely mirrors MOE's desired outcomes of education for the other levels, ie, primary, secondary and JC levels. This is deliberate, so as to ensure a continuity of focus from PSE to primary one. After all, learning is a continuum. As a statement of outcomes reflecting values, attitudes and skills, there is no mention of specific competencies in the 3Rs - reading, writing and arithmetic. Again, this is deliberate, as we want to emphasise that PSE should be about preparing children for life-long learning, and not just a preparation for primary one. The current practice of some kindergartens offering parts of the primary one curriculum needs to be re-looked at. I am not saying that we should not teach the 3Rs. Indeed, it is most unnatural to designate the first day of primary one as the beginning of reading, writing and arithmetic education. What I am saying is that there are important pre-reading, pre-writing and pre-arithmetic skills to be learnt before a child can read, write and do sums. We need to give adequate attention to these critical fundamentals. Moreover, a child's motivation and interest in learning must be nurtured from this tender age. We must fire his curiosity and his sense of wonder. He needs to learn in fun ways, through play, art, music and movement. Feeding him with a curriculum that he is not ready for may raise his performance in primary school or at primary one, but this may also dampen his love for learning which will severely affect success in school in the long term. The press recently reported the case of one primary school requiring children entering primary one to have already learnt to read and spell about 100 words.”
“While there is some evidence that PSE provides a learning head-start, there is also countervailing evidence showing that the benefits wear off after some time. In fact, it is unclear today whether PSE brings sustained benefits, ie, well into elementary school. There have also been calls in the press for MOE to pump in more money into this sector. But I think simply pouring money into PSE will not raise quality automatically. It is better for us to carefully decide how to deploy resources so that most children can get the most value out of PSE. What then is my Ministry's response to the research findings? We will look at them more closely and explore their relevance to the local context. In MOE's Addendum to the President's Address last year, we announced that we will be more involved in PSE, paying particular attention to high leverage areas like defining outcomes, designing a developmentally-appropriate curriculum, training teachers, conducting research and improving our regulatory framework. The first step must be to delineate the outcomes desired of PSE, in order to lend focus to our efforts and direct our attention to what is most crucial. Mr Loh Meng See, Mr Iswaran and Mr Zulkifli Baharudin have all asked what MOE wants to achieve by PSE. I am glad to inform the House that the Steering Committee on PSE, which I chair, has come up with the Desired Outcomes of PSE. It is a comprehensive, yet succinct, list of the end-objectives of PSE and this has been put together in consultation with professionals, practitioners and policy-makers. May I ask the Clerk of Parliament to help me distribute the sheet of paper containing the Desired Outcomes of PSE. [Document distributed to hon. Members.”
“Sir, the Senior Minister of State for Education, Dr Aline Wong, had, in a recent sitting of Parliament, spoken about the cross curricular approach that the Ministry takes for the delivery of sex education in our schools. Dr Wong mentioned that the schools tap resource speakers from external agencies, such as MOH and the Singapore Planned Parenthood Association, to conduct talks, courses and seminars relating to the subject. My understanding, however, is that the primary responsibility still lies with teachers assigned to the subject in schools. Many of these teachers are most uncomfortable with this assignment. May I ask the Minister if it might not be a better approach to source out the teaching of sex education altogether in an organised and structured way with a well-defined curriculum to agencies or organisations who would be able to assign trained and qualified instructors, who would be far more comfortable and skilled in undertaking this. The Senior Minister of State for Education (Dr Aline K. Wong): Sir, let me reply to those points on pre-school education first. The recent surge of interest in this sector, shall we use the abbreviated form of PSE for pre-school education, has come about partly because, over the last decade or so, there has been some research, especially brain research, which suggests exciting possibilities especially in non-cognitive development and language acquisition that PSE can bring to children. This has prompted the public as well as the press and parliamentarians alike to urge greater MOE involvement in this sector. On past occasions, I have stated in this House my position on PSE. I think it must be cautioned that, taken as a whole, the findings are by no means conclusive.”
“And I hope that the Ministry will be on the look out for opportunities to share useful information with parents and engage them, wherever possible, in the education process.”
“Sir, when parents express dissatisfaction with the education system, I expect that part of the problem may lie with the system, but part arises from parents' own response to the system. It seems to me that if we could engage parents in the education process, share information with them about policies and how they work, the reasons for them, the benefits and good outcomes, and the misperceptions and misconceptions that they may have, we could go some way towards gaining the awareness and understanding and alleviating the angst that many parents feel. A good example is information that the Minister shared at the recent sitting that 60% of our school leavers actually make it to our local universities and polytechnics. The implication of 60% making it to tertiary education is that parents do not have to move heaven and earth to try and get their children's performance to the top few percentile and, in fact, fairly average children will be able to make it through tertiary education. I do not know how many parents were or even now are aware of that statistic, but certainly information of that nature would give them significant comfort. And I think that we could do more in getting parents involved in this process and give them this kind of understanding. In hospitals, we find that time invested upfront in communicating with parents of young patients yields much dividends in gaining their understanding and tolerance and reducing anxiety in the subsequent interactions in the course of their children's care and management. I am acutely aware of the House having just discussed on Wednesday about the burdens of the workload that our teachers face, but I think that time spent with parents explaining policies and sharing information would be well worth the investment.”
“I know there have been a lot of efforts made in terms of new promotional grades, through remuneration packages. In fact, whatever other initiatives that the Ministry has taken and planned in its effort to fill the vacancies in the Education Service.”
“Sir, like Dr Tan Boon Wan and Mr Hawazi Daipi before me, talking on the subject of recruitment and retention of teachers, a fair amount of the dissatisfaction we hear expressed by parents would be alleviated if we had more teachers. We can have smaller class sizes, more attention to students, better interaction with parents. The problem, it seems to me, however, is not at all an unwillingness to provide more positions for teachers. The problem is in filling those positions already provided. From the Budget book, if I read it correctly, I note there is an establishment of 31,169 for the Education Service last year, FY99, of which only 24,842 positions were filled, and that actually gives us quite a staggering vacancy position of 6,327. In this year's main Budget Statement, we hear again of an additional 2,344 positions created for MOE in general to take care of an increased student intake. I can imagine the challenge in finding enough new recruits and I am sure there is difficulty as well in retaining existing staff. 6.30 pm Therefore, I wonder if the Minister could give us the whole picture to share with us the Ministry's efforts in this area, how successful our efforts to recruit locally both trained teachers as well as young people into NIE programmes, how we might be supplementing this with foreign recruitment of teachers both in the interim as well as for the longer term, how we could relieve teachers of administrative duties so as to optimise use of their time, and in fact, saying that, is there also a problem in finding administrative staff because our manpower position in Singapore is very difficult. How successful have been our efforts to retain teachers?”
“But with the Normal (Technical) stream, for example, in our secondary schools, these students now have the opportunity to go to secondary schools when they otherwise might not have. In these four years in the secondary school, they get a much stronger foundation in Mathematics, in Science, in language, which allows them to go on to post-secondary education. Mr Peter Chen is very proud of the fact that something like 75% of them have gone on to ITE, something which they would not have been able to do before.”