Kok Heng Leun
Singapore
“When we talk about earning trust, it is not just about sitting there and say, "Hey, show me you can be trusted". It means one needs to reach out to connect in order to express trust.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. I have some supplementary questions. I ask this question in light of all the interest in history debate, and I have heard from historians that they would like to have more access. So, are there actually barriers for researchers to access this information?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, before I speak, I would like to say this on behalf of all my Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) colleagues. We were talking about it. We would also like to express our thanks to the House, to the Government and to all our fellow Parliamentarians for your patience, for your generosity.”
“I thank the Minister for the Report. My condolences to the family. I have one clarification and one question. The first clarification is the part about the conducting officer asking them if they had seven hours of rest. The troop apparently did not respond to that. Did the COI talk about why they did not respond to that?”
“Okay. Teachers have a job to fulfil to the best of their capabilities and that is true. But they are human, too. So, do not treat teachers like you are a customer, that they are salespersons at your beck and call.”
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. Mine is a follow-up to the question. Is there a desirable student-to-teacher ratio that the Ministry is trying to achieve?”
The complete record
Every one of 261 lines we hold for Kok Heng Leun, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 6.
“Second, it is worthwhile to invest in smart, protective and functional design for future pedestrian, foot and shared paths and to enhance existing pathways with safety conditions. Mdm Speaker, it appears that most of the shared paths, especially those in the more mature estates, are not segregated by physical barriers. These shared paths are usually demarcated by a visual line between the pedestrian path and the path for cyclists. We should also not forget that the existing shared paths are bi-directional. Yet, existing shared paths are only segregated between different users, that is, pedestrians and cyclists. Not only does that mean that there is a narrower pathway for cyclists and riders of mobility vehicles, moving bi-directionally, they must also be mindful of other pedestrians also moving bi-directionally, using the same path. Further, without a physical barrier that segregates pedestrians from other cyclists and riders of mobility vehicles, there is a tendency to stray into each other's lane, either because of personal convenience or in situations where the shared path is particularly crowded or when visibility is low at night. I am sure many of us have encountered such situations or have ourselves been guilty of walking or cycling along paths not meant for such purposes. Without physical segregated pathways for different kinds of users as well as segregation of pathways per direction, it is surely a recipe for accidents to occur. There are clearly safety risks we take when we try to shoehorn different and sometimes competing needs into the same design solution. It is largely for such reasons that countries like the Netherlands build separate pathways for cyclists and pedestrians.”
“Mdm Speaker, as I was preparing for this speech, I was reminded of a production that I did years ago. I looked at the effect of high-speed motor cars on human and social psychology. To borrow the words of an English novelist, JG Ballard, "I think the 20th century reaches its highest expression on the highway. Everything is there: the speed and violence of our age; the strange love affair with the machine, with its own death." My apologies to start a new year in my speech with such a grim image, but I do think that both walking and cycling would really provide a good antidote to a society that is driven by speed to a point where civility, a lot of times, is ignored and lost. Hence, I think this Bill is a good step towards a cultural shift in our mobility choices by protecting the safety of all users of pathways. However, I would like to express my concern on the structural and spatial design of existing and future pathways that might frustrate some of the purposes of this Bill. First, under clauses 15 and 16 of the Bill, an individual may ride on a pedestrian-only path or footpath under limited circumstances. My concern is that existing pedestrian-only paths and footpaths might not be wide enough to accommodate such usage, thereby leading to accidents. Furthermore, even though various vehicles are generally banned from such paths, accidents might also occur when narrow paths are utilised both by pedestrians as well as users pushing prams, strollers, trolleys or users who are in wheelchairs. I hope the Ministry would consider widening existing paths and ensure that future paths in new estates are wide enough to accommodate users with various needs.”
“I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the detailed answer. Looking at it, out of $200 million, $152 million has been actually used up. So, would this scheme stop when the current Cultural Matching Fund runs out? Would the Government continue to support this scheme? The second supplementary question is: under what conditions are applications for such Cultural Matching grants rejected? Lastly, I do note that a huge sum has gone to the national companies. So, I am wondering, while this Fund is good for companies, but at the same time, I think the rationale behind it is to help to build other companies in terms of their capacity to get sponsorship. Has this aim been achieved and how do you ensure that this process is being cultivated?”
“I thank the Minister. In my experience working with the elderly, I realise that language plays a very important part in communication. I wonder if all of MSF's outreach programmes would also include other languages. Besides English, which most of the organisations are comfortable with, we are really looking at Mandarin, Malay, Tamil or even various dialects. Would such programmes be available? And how do we make sure that these are going out to the elderly?”
“And lastly, as I heard my fellow Parliamentarian, Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan, who had proposed that maybe we should now debate and revisit the role of the Nominated MPs (NMPs) and see how they can help in being a good check and balance instrument in our Parliamentary and legislative process. The Elected President is a symbol of unity, not just in good and peaceful times, but also in difficult ones. It is in crises that the true mantle of the President is tested, where his or her moral integrity and independence is counted upon to make necessary decisions. We must, therefore, ensure that the President is elected based on a fair system, one that embraces the values of equality and justice that we seek to uphold, regardless of race, language or religion; regardless or class, gender or sexual orientation. Let me end by reading a monologue in a radio play, "A Malayan Language", written in 1957 by the late Mr S Rajaratnam. "What does it matter that we are Malays, Chinese, Indians or Eurasians – or Eskimo or Patagonians? What matter if our skins are this or that shade? Remember that beneath the skin we are brothers. We are fellow Malayans. That is why I am here before you, to preach to you the gospel of brotherhood. That is why my party has fought bitterly against those who preach communalism, against those vile men whose insane ambitions has led them to exploit fears and hatreds." With that, I thank you. [Applause.]”
“These same qualities will inform the President's decision to support or veto the appointment of key officeholders. It is, therefore, the President's value system that is critical here. In view of this, I would, therefore, like to remind the House of this: yes, it may be important for the Presidential nominee to have qualifications, such as having being a chief executive officer (CEO) of a company of more than S$500 million of shareholders' equity or having been in senior positions in the Public Service. But, ultimately, it is the nominee's value system and moral strength that will guide him or her to make responsible, independent decisions for the nation. And this leads me to another suggestion, which I hope the Government will consider. As articulated very fluently by my fellow Nominated Parliamentarian Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin, we are faced with a complex world rife with standoffs and contestations among people, the government, interest groups and so on. There were indications in the 2011 Presidential Election that Singaporeans yearn for alternative possibilities to deal with such difficult situations. Some had hoped that the Elected President could provide such an alternative institution for arbitration or maybe for mediation, something akin to what Prof Tommy Koh and President Tony Tan have suggested: an ombudsman. Could this ombudsman, a role of mediation and negotiation, and one built on trust, reside in the Office of the President, given that it possesses a unifying symbol for the nation?”
“If we look at our television dramas, you may think that people living in Singapore are all Chinese. Occasionally, you will see minorities in shows but they only serve as a decoration. Should we not feel ashamed of this bias? Perhaps we should reflect more on our mindset as the majority, instead of focusing on the plight of the minorities. We know that our hearts are biased. To have the same heart is not easy. We need tolerance. We must be accommodating and broad-minded. Our mind should not be filled with anxiety, misunderstanding and ignorance. (In English): My intention, Mdm Speaker, is not to sway this debate into a discussion on racial politics. However, race is very much at the core of the issue here with regard to the Elected Presidency Bill. It is not a special provision. Ultimately, it is not a special provision for a minority President or Prime Minister that we need. What we need is better, inclusive and genuine engagement across racial and ethnic lines. To me, "regardless of race, language and religion" means that, in a society, we need to consider and care for people of other races and religious beliefs, people who speak a different language from us, perhaps more so than our own race, language and beliefs. I would also like to speak about another important criteria of the Elected President, that is, he or she should be someone whom we believe has his or her heart in the right place, someone who will act for the good of the nation, for the people. So, while we argue that the President needs to have strong financial knowledge and advice to decide when to employ our Reserves in difficult times, he or she will also need the moral courage and integrity to make sometimes difficult important decisions.”
“By proposing this amendment, the Government is reminding us that many people vote along racial lines. If that is the case, we must then ask ourselves, how far are we from our vision of seeking a common ground among differences? We clearly know that under the "one man, one vote" system, if we vote along the racial lines, then the majority community can easily decide the outcome of the election. That is to say that the majority, which is the Chinese community that I belong to, is key to this debate. This brings me to my point of feeling a sense of shame. This is my personal reflection mostly. As a member of the majority race, do I have a deep understanding of the minorities? Is my interaction with the minorities deep enough, both economically and culturally? Is eating mee rebus in the morning and thosai in the afternoon enough? Is showing off a few Malay words, such as "terima kasih", enough? As the majority, do we realise that, compared to the minorities, our starting point is different? Because we are the majority, we are privileged in terms of resources and opportunities. So, as a member of the majority, do we join in when we hear people of our own community making fun of the minorities? Or do we stand up when we see minorities being treated unfairly at the workplace? Do we realise that it is putting up fences when we see phrases like, "can speak Mandarin" in employment or rental advertisements? Hence, it is not the minorities who should feel uneasy about this proposal. The proposal reminds us to ponder what we have contributed to our multiracial society as the majority. Is it enough just to settle problems in our own community? You can see this mindset from our Chinese media. The Chinese newspapers seldom report news about the minorities.”
“According to a survey on race relations commissioned by CNA-IPS, nearly two in three Singaporeans surveyed have heard racist comments being made, and about half the time, it was by workplace colleagues and friends. Faced with such comments, 65% of respondents said they ignored the person's comments. This is in spite of the fact that 84% said they would get upset if they heard racist comments about any race; 62% said it was never acceptable to make jokes about another race in the company of friends; and 67% said it was never acceptable to call a racial group terms like dirty, lazy or money-minded. I will now proceed in Mandarin. It is sort of related to what I said just now. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] This debate on the Elected Presidency has caused me much confusion. Again, this time, we are focusing on the minorities. Frankly speaking, as a member of the majority community, I feel some anxiety mixed with a bit of shame. I will be proud that we can elect a respectable minority candidate. It demonstrates the success of our multiracialism and our meritocracy system. However, it also satisfies our sense of ego. Look, what a fair society Singapore is, and how progressive we are! I know that the minorities have reacted differently to this proposal. I have discussed with some minority people and the response I get is that, should a minority candidate become the President, the community would be very proud. But how do we achieve this outcome? As proposed by this amendment Bill, when a member from any racial group has not occupied the President's office after five continuous terms, the next Presidential election will be reserved for a candidate from that racial group. This arrangement is rather controversial.”
“And by real engagement, I am not talking about superficial exchanges, such as eating thosai or mee rebus, or wearing other races' traditional outfits on Racial Harmony Day. In fact, such a provision may exacerbate the issue, in that it provides a convenient argument for the majority to say this special provision already allows for a Malay, Indian or Eurasian President, negating the need to really reach out, understand, appreciate and support the best candidate, regardless of race, language or religion. In some ways, this provision may placate the minorities, only to reassure the majority and, above all, may even sometimes feel patronising. In layman's terms, what we are possibly saying to the minority races is this: we have made provisions for you. So, let us move on and allow some of these people, and maybe even allow some of these people to say, "do not complain and do not be so ungrateful." For the longest time, we, as a society, have not addressed this issue adequately, deeply, honestly and meaningfully. We are able to do so because, in Singapore, there is hardly any hate crime or physical attacks because of race. However, other forms of racism can still rear their ugly heads. Comments such as Little India being dark because there are too many Indians there and racial discrimination in the rental and job markets, where the phrase "Mandarin speakers only" seems to be code for "non-Chinese need not apply". Such actions reveal the cracks existent in our social fabric. It is worse when those who voice their discontentment regarding such actions are said to be "too sensitive" or "overreacting" by members of the majority race.”
“I do not know if I can adequately speak about the minority races' aspirations or apprehensions on this issue. But as a member of the Chinese majority, I feel that I can speak about my concerns instead. Our current population is predominantly Chinese and, therefore, how Chinese Singaporeans vote will have an undeniable influence on the final results. So, can we Chinese Singaporeans look beyond race to make an informed choice for our votes? Do we know enough about what happens in communities other than our own? Do we interact enough with other races meaningfully? Or do we keep to our own, assuming that our well-being implies the well-being of others who are not like us? Are we aware that our majority status inherently creates an imbalance that privileges us where resources and opportunities are concerned? Or do we imagine that since our society is a meritocratic one, then all, regardless of race, will enjoy the same starting point in life? Does our language-based media expose us to news about other communities? I read the Chinese newspapers and I can say that little is written about other communities. I watch our local Chinese television and you would think, given what is on screen, that Singapore is made up largely of Chinese people, with minority races making silent cameo appearances on television series. Is this a problem? Our Chinese majority has yet to raise this issue with a concerted voice. Maybe, most think that it is not of concern. But I believe otherwise. The fact that we need to amend the Elected Presidency Bill to ensure minority representation says a lot about how far the majority is from real engagement with minority races.”
“This brings me to the Bill's amendment of reserving the Elected Presidency for a racial group if it is not represented for five terms. Naturally, we would want to see different races being successful across all strata of society. I would personally be most proud to have a President, or a Prime Minister for that matter, who is of a different race as myself. It would send a signal to both Singaporeans and the world that our society has a system that embraces individuals, regardless of race, language or religion; that we are proud to have them as our leaders and role models to uphold our values and Constitution. Yet, while racial representation is valued, how we achieve it is equally important. So, my question is: does the proposed mechanism in the amendment Bill honour the vision of justice and equality that we aspire towards? There has been cynicism, criticism that such a provision is indicative of tokenism. Would these sentiments put doubt and even undermine the role of the President as a unifying symbol? Is the rationale behind this provision because we feel that Singaporeans will vote strictly according to racial lines? If so, then having this provision may not eradicate the problem but, in fact, indicates that there is a lot of work to be done to achieve our vision. I have spoken to a number of young Malay Singaporeans and, while most agreed that they would welcome and be proud to have a Malay President, they questioned the process of the selection. Is it possible, in a democracy, to pre-select the race of the President before any campaign or contestation has even begun? Do we, in trying to be inclusive, come across as quite exclusive and, sometimes, maybe even a bit discriminatory?”
“Mdm Speaker, I will speak in English, followed by Mandarin and English, so that we have time to change. This Bill is one of great importance to our nation, not only because of the powers vested in the Presidency, but also because it involves the process of selection and the system's inherent justice. Allow me to begin with a personal anecdote from my childhood. The year was 1971 and I was five years old. I vaguely remember that time the President had just passed away and there were programmes on our black-and-white television about him and his work because I was young and really did not know what a President really means. But what struck my impressionable mind was how he must have been an important person, so much so that his passing had a huge impact on everyone around me and, of course, that moment, there was no regular TV for a young boy like me. But this has informed my impression of the Office of the President to this day. While the President does not mete out policies nor is he supposed to have political affiliations, he or she does more than a ceremonial role. As noted by the Prime Minister and also in the White Paper, I quote: "Very importantly, the President is also a symbol of the unity of the country." In essence, the President serves to unite and bring people together. What does unity mean? How is unity achieved? Let me refer to our National pledge here, "…In order to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation, We must be united as one people, 'regardless of race, language or religion'", three aspects of which the late Mr S Rajaratnam has identified as possible divisive factors to our national fabric. And how do we achieve this? We do this through a system that is "based on justice and equality".”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State. The newspaper announcement that Ellison Building, or at least that part, will be demolished was actually quite disconcerting. And that is why a lot of non-government organisations (NGOs) responded to it. Are there no other options? Could the NGOs be engaged much earlier in the upstream discussions so that such miscommunication will not happen? The third thing that I want to check is: would the Ministry consider making culture impact assessment mandatory and compulsory in such development projects? When I say culture impact Page: 16 assessment, it will not just be heritage impact assessment, but also social, environmental as well as economic impact assessments.”
“Page: 72 What we have is a potentially pioneering project that could become a milestone in our approach towards urban and community development, one where the people take ownership and proactively negotiate amongst themselves to put forward viable, sustainable plans for the future. 5.48 pm”
“Clearly, for many Singaporeans, city-building is not merely about the physical or architectural side of projects. Rather, they saw and valued intangible assets of the precinct, personal relationships and organisation within the community, meaning-making of the space they lived in and were proud of it. In short, what we witnessed was a case of citizens who want to take ownership of their community and history. And their sense of ownership is what makes for successful development. The proposal that Mr Lim had presented earlier is exactly what the Government has always been looking for – ground-up initiative with a bold vision. The proposal requires us to work with many different communities within and outside of Dakota, to redevelop the place into something inclusive, yet deeply respectful of the heritage and community of Dakota Crescent. Furthermore, the proposal has the makings of a successful place-making project. One, it has leadership and ownership from the community. Two, it embraces collaboration, and is consultative. Three, it embraces diversity and openness. And four, it is creative. The proposal is spearheaded by a community that has rallied together through a common recognition of a cultural asset of the precinct and a desire to enhance this value. It is a ground-up initiative by a community that seeks to strengthen itself and remain relevant to our nation's narrative. Mdm Speaker, I firmly believe that this proposal as presented by Mr Lim is an extraordinary community effort that should be taken seriously. I would therefore urge the Government to consider this proposal positively, to give residents the opportunity to redevelop and repurpose Dakota.”
“Page: 71 While demolishment may be the cheapest solution or the easiest one, we lose not just tangible assets like buildings but also intangible cultural assets, historical narratives and memories. Some may say that history can be told through books and photographs. But I would counter that by arguing that these cannot replace the role and power of actual sites, resplete with their stories, lessons learnt and hopes for the future. Heritage is not about celebrating the past. Hence, I urge the Government and urban planners to embrace cultural assets as a resource for development and, in considering adaptive uses for them, move from just urban planning towards cultural planning. Secondly, the ground-up Initiative. Joe Mihevc, the Toronto City Councillor who led the ground-up effort to transform the Wychwood Barn, reflected, "If there is one key lesson to be learnt it is that positive things happen when Torontonians step up and take charge. The passion and dedication of hundreds of people created a critical web of support. Together, with each holding a piece of the puzzle and needing the cooperation of the others to make it happen, the Barns project was an unstoppable force." Going back to the case of Dakota Crescent. When news that the SIT flats of Dakota Crescent would make way for future development, Singaporeans and residents of Dakota very quickly responded. People visited Dakota Crescent to take pictures of the quaint little estate, artists came to create engagement projects to document what was valuable about Dakota. Some, like Dakota Adventures, helped people to understand more about the area. Others, such as residents like Jonathan Poh, organised themselves and envisioned a different future for Dakota Crescent.”
“The Wychwood Barns reopened in 2008 and has become the "social heart" of the community, hosting 26 artist livework spaces, programming and administrative facilities for 10 non-profit organisations, 14 artists' studios, indoor and outdoor community gardens, a community-run gallery and an 8,000-square feet covered street used for farmers and art markets, conference and events. There are many other such amazing creative place-making projects, like Project Row House in Houston, Pillsbury House in Minnesota. I quoted these examples because they have so much resonance with what my fellow parliamentarian Mr Lim Biow Chuan has shared in his speech. I am supportive of his Motion and the effort to champion this important cause for two very important reasons. One, redevelopment with cultural assets as a resource. I would like to reiterate that any argument for conservation is not, and I repeat, not an argument against development. What the conservationists are arguing for is development that takes heritage as our cultural asset into consideration such that heritage becomes a resource for development. As we strive to become a more liveable, sustainable city state, such cultural assets should be a key component for redevelopment because they can serve to enhance its overall value. Conservation of precincts, such as Dakota Crescent, allows us to protect and promote our identity as a nation with rich and complex identities, histories and narratives – all of which are traits that not only make us interesting and exciting, but also show our resilience and the relevance of our historical development to our success today.”
“Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion because I believe that as we continue to forge ahead in terms of national development, it is crucial that we have an acute appreciation for our cultural assets and incorporate them holistically in urban planning. Let me illustrate this through the example of Toronto's Wychwood Barns. In 1996, the Wychwood Barns, a complex of five tram sheds constructed in 1913 for the Toronto Civic Railway was slated for demolishment and the land where it sat on was to be sold. While the Barns was an important transit facility from the 1920s to the 1940s, when trams were phased out, this unique red-brick complex was decommissioned, unattended to and soon degenerated into disrepair. Then, it was closed for many years. However, fearful of what might be redeveloped on the site, local City Councillor Joe Mihevc and some of his residents around the area decided to act quickly. The Barn was opened for residents to visit and acquaint themselves with the space. Many were awed by the structure, its high ceiling and its enchanting red bricks. The community rallied together, requesting that a Heritage and Environmental Impact assessment be conducted. People gathered together over many sessions to discuss plans for the building and the land. The residents also engaged Artscape, a non-profit organisation that engaged in real estate and programme development for the arts and creative sector, to help develop ideas. The conversations and the consultations took many years and the final proposal was only ready in 2005. I visited the Barn in 2014 and was awed by what it has become.”
“I thank the Minister. In a recent report from the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE), secondary school students with depression reported being unable to access a trained counsellor at school because the teachers did not want her, who is a girl, to see a male counsellor, and faced uninformed and unhelpful remarks from teachers about her conditions, such as the teachers saying that she did not want to recover because she was smiling. As teachers are always viewed as authority figures over these vulnerable young people, what sort of formal training do they have to ensure an informed and sensitive understanding of depression, other mental health difficulties and counselling?”
“It would, hence, be important for the Ministry to clarify how it aims to do both regulation and promotion as well as provide a transparent, accountable procedure where regulations and appeals are concerned. With that, Deputy Speaker, I thank you.”
“As this will be under the purview of the new IMDA, I would like to seek clarification from the Ministry on this process of appeal so that content providers have ample time to respond and negotiate. To take a recent example, the case in point was Newsha Tavakolian's exhibition "I Know Why the Rebel Sings" presented under the open programme of the Singapore International Festival of Arts. The application for an Arts Entertainment Licence was submitted within the application period and yet it was only three days prior to the show that the organisers were told to remove a number of photographs found to be objectionable. Clearly, a three-day lead time gave little room for negotiation and appeal. And is it turned out, such missed opportunities for engagement and dialogue ended in media furore and subsequent unhappiness, both of which could have been avoided. Given that creative work would undoubtedly illicit subjective responses, I believe that the clarity of the procedures of negotiation and appeal would go a long way in preventing such situations and I urge the Ministry to relook the procedures as part of shaping the roles and responsibilities of the new IMDA. Deputy Speaker, as a nation, we are encountering new sets of challenges and opportunities with media convergence. IMDA is well-placed to spur the development of our infocomm and media industries so that Singapore can continue to be a media hub and creative city. Yet, as IMDA focuses on its regulatory functions, I believe it is also essential for the newly merged entity to ensure that the space for creativity is not stifled.”
“It will be beneficial for all industry players, audiences and this House alike if the Ministry can clarify how IMDA will regulate and encourage self-regulation, whereas encouraging industry development is predicated on creativity and content creation. Deputy Speaker, as MDA has done, I have no doubt that the newly merged IMDA will work towards ensuring that infocomm and media services are maintained at an impeccable standard and present high-quality, balanced and diverse subject matters, inline with public interest and good taste. Page: 120 At the same time, as a creative maker, I am concerned as to how responses to creative works can be subjective, as evidenced by cases, such as the recent Les Miserables, a comic moment could be misconstrued by a few complainants as offensive. A minority group's complaint could thus easily override and overrule the silent majority who were not offended. In such a situation, a clear and transparent procedure within IMDA for dealing with such disputes is so important to ensure that all voices are heard and identified so that the content provider can adequately respond. Therefore, I would like the Ministry to elaborate on these operating procedures, such that creative work is protected and both content providers and complainers can openly dialogue and find common ground in a transparent way. Deputy Speaker, I believe we all acknowledge the importance of positive engagement between the Government and the public. Constant open dialogue between stakeholders help to ensure accountability and transparency as well as to encourage mediation and negotiation. This entails that a clear procedure of appeal be set in place.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, as we move forward with the Media 2025 plan, it is heartening to note that the new IMDA aims to develop these sectors through, I quote from the Ministry of Communications and Information's (MCI's) press release, "an emphasis on talent, research, innovation and enterprise". The infocomm and media sectors are highly dependent on creative talent. I believe we can all agree that creativity requires the desire to question and to go beyond comfort zones and tried and tested methods. MDA has recognised this and, as such, its functions, as stipulated in its Act, chapter 172, clause 11(b) states that it is to encourage, promote and facilitate the industry. Mr Deputy Speaker, with regard to the new IMDA, my question to the Ministry is whether the new entity will be continuing this nurturing role of promoting creativity. I ask this because I noted that the new Bill states in clause 5(1) that the authority's function includes, I quote, "to promote the efficiency, competitiveness (including internationally) and the development of its information, communications and media industry in Singapore". The omission of the term "to encourage" differs from MDA's stated function. As such, I would like the Ministry to clarify if the new IMDA will take a step back on encouraging the industry's creativity and will focus instead on its regulatory functions in a bid to promote efficiency and competitiveness. Will regulatory and economic concerns override the need to protect the creative space and instead of encouraging creative development may potentially hamper it for market purposes?”
“I will just need to do a double confirming. If there is a dispute as to whether what the Government believes on an issue is necessary in the public interest, then the judge can take a view and the judge can also refer to the common law, especially Judge Choor Singh's case.”
“I am reminded of a game that I have played in theatre called the "Trust Circle" whereby there will be a person in the centre with people around him. As he falls, the people will hold him up. It is a game that is about trust. But what is important as we learn through this game is that the people around them must have the responsibility to take care of the person in the middle, but the person in the middle must be able to have the tenacity and the strength to take the robustness of this exercise. And that will only help to build a very robust and strong Judiciary system.”
“There are various clarifications that the Ministry has provided and can provide in layman's terms, so that the public can better understand the impact of the Bill on their daily lives. Failure to do so will inevitably cause undue augmented fear in the public to discuss matters of public interest, in case they are accused of sub judice. We have had clear instances where public debate is beneficial and constructive in that it guides institutions to relook at existing regulations and revise them accordingly for the betterment of all. It would, therefore, be helpful for the public and the House to have clear definitions of what the public can or cannot do in its own interest. Mdm Speaker, I believe that the Bill is important in enshrining the powers of the Court and serving the public interest by allowing legal sanctions against anyone impeding the administration of justice. Nevertheless, the queries I have raised are not unique. They are shared by various members of the public via petitions, conversations, dialogues with bloggers, civil society people and art makers. Such discourses are essential in any healthy democracy. We need to protect the public space that allows us to seek clarifications and make suggestions towards the improvement of our institutions, modus operandi and guidelines which, in themselves, are meant to protect public interests. A meaningful dialogue goes a long way to help us understand complex issues better and, especially one that holds so much interest at stake. More consultations and earlier consultations would help make people better informed. In fact, we ought to think about how to make all these conversations that we have here reach out to the public.”
“I believe it is necessary to remind ourselves that it is the Court, not the Government, that is the ultimate arbiter of facts in all disputes, both among civilians, and between the Government and the people. It is for this very reason that we are debating this Bill, so that it reinforces public trust in the Court and protect its integrity. Given that the Government's statement undoubtedly wields great impact on the people, will its comments pending Court proceedings influence witnesses? Furthermore, new evidence might later emerge, either through the trial or through other sources, which the Government may not be privy to at the time of making the statement. This might render previous accounts given by the Government to be factually inaccurate. In such cases, would such an account of wrong facts, even if it was done in good faith, not be prejudicial to the parties involved in the Court proceedings? While this Bill provides opportunities and defence for the Government and the AGC to voice their positions, should there not be provision of a defence for public interest raised by individuals or the common man? Lastly, I would like to touch on the part on scandalising the Court. I would like to thank the Minister for clarifying why we need to lower the test for scandalising the Court. What I want to ask is, after lowering the test, what has changed exactly? For example, would what was allowed before be no longer allowed in the future? Can the Minister explain more? (In English): Mdm Speaker, I have detailed my concerns pertaining to the Administration of Justice (Protection) Bill in my speech.”
“Mdm Speaker, there should be enough substantive safeguards within our legal system to protect the right of the accused, including access to counsel and a highly qualified Judiciary – a judiciary more than capable of insulating itself from the taint of extrajudicial materials and comments. The sub judice rule also seeks to prevent witnesses from being influenced by extrajudicial material. However, witnesses' testimonies are not the only evidence which the Courts have before them. Evidence given by witnesses must also be tested against the body of objective documentary evidence tendered in Court. Furthermore, the Court has the discretion to evaluate the veracity of the evidence before relying on it. Given the above, it is not clear how compelling the justification of the sub judice rule is, especially when we have an eminently qualified Judiciary that can ensure that evidence which have a greater prejudicial rather than probative value is not admitted at trial. Another point I would like to raise is the exception given to the Government. The Bill states in clause 3(4) that a statement made by a person on behalf of the Government on a pending Court proceeding is exempt from contempt of Court if the Government believes such a statement is necessary in the public interest. I would like to seek clarification from the Minister on this exception. While I recognise the importance of having the Government make statements when necessary in the public interest, this clause seems to imply that the Government would be the final arbiter of facts and what constitute public interests.”
“They are often quick to comment on issues of the day with hilarious effect, which many Singaporeans enjoy. These light-hearted moments, sometimes on current Court cases, do nothing more than raise a chuckle. Will our local funnymen be in contempt of Court for their sense of humour? Mdm Speaker, public interest is better served when the public is not prohibited from discussing important public matters arising from pending Court cases. In the Dominique Lee and Benjamin Lim cases that I have mentioned, public concern and outcry over the pending Court cases have encouraged the authorities to re-examine internal procedures and policy. We, as a nation, would be much poorer off without such discussions. Mdm Speaker, another point which I wish to make pertains to the empowerment of the AG to apply to the Court for an order to require particular persons to take down their publications, if the AG deems it in the public interest to do so. What is of particular concern is that the order may be granted even though such publications may not actually pose a "real risk" in undermining the public confidence of the administration of justice. The publications are in contempt as long as the AG deems them so at first sight. Furthermore, the AG does not have to inform the person to whom the order is directed at before it applies to the Court. The affected person, therefore, cannot be present at the Court application. One would have thought that the Court would have benefited if it was able to hear from both parties as to whether the takedown order should be granted. From what I know, the accused should only be tried by evidence led in Court, and not by extrajudicial evidence.”
“In that case, it was held that a statement would only be sub judice when the risk of interference with the proper administration of justice was a real and grave one. Hence, I would like the Minister to clarify what would pose real risk to, or prejudice and be sub judice to the whole proceeding. To give an example, if a relative of the accused were to write on her Facebook page, "I hope the truth will be revealed", will she be in contempt of Court? It would seem like a very reasonable post to make. Or what if the post said, "I don't agree with how the case is being handled"? Would that be considered "fair criticism"? Let me share a real-life example to elaborate on this. As an art-maker, in 2014, I made a work entitled "Both Sides now", dealing with end-of-life issues. During the same period, the case of Yang Yin, the ex-tour guide accused of misappropriating $1.1million from a wealthy Singaporean widow, made the news. As part of my project, we held public talks at outdoor spaces, one of which was on wills and the Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA). Inevitably, given how the case was topical, there were comments made by audience members in a public space. Would their comments have been considered sub judice? Within civil society, certain ongoing campaigns aim to protect the interest of the common people, even if they are minorities or belong to marginalised groups. I am very glad to hear from the Minister that, if a civil society group that advocates the abolishment of the death penalty and there was a Court case that sought to repeal the death sentence, their campaign would not be seen as sub judice. The same question can be asked of humorists Mr Brown, Mr Miyagi and the satirical site, Newnation.”
“These include the severe punishment, the overreach of who may be liable for contempt, the vague definition of sub judice – which I will touch on later – and AGC's ability to obtain a Court order to require a takedown of potentially sub judice publications. One issue with the Bill is that it prescribes severe and disproportionate punishment for contempt of Court. Under the Bill, the prescribed maximum punishment for contempt of Court of up to $100,000 and/or a term of imprisonment of not more than three years is exceedingly harsh and disproportionate for a non-violent offence. In contrast, a person who has voluntarily caused hurt or caused another person to be unconscious is only punishable for no more than two years in prison and/or a fine of not up to $5,000. Such high penalties might deter the public from participating in discussion or be imposed on members of the public who participated unknowingly. Under what circumstance would a person be liable for contempt? Mdm Speaker, the definition of what constitutes a "publication" with respect to the Bill is also a cause for concern. According to the Bill, a person is said to have "published" if he merely disseminates or communicates by oral, visual or electronic means a potentially contemptuous matter to a member of the public. To put it simply, if I shared a potentially contemptuous publication on Facebook, even if I had no intention to interfere with the course of any pending Court proceedings, I could potentially be prosecuted. Such a wide definition of the term "publication" further gives the public reason not to comment on pending Court cases. What constitutes sub judice? The Singapore Court has only had one instance where it contemplated the legal requirement for sub judice to be made out.”
“Public discussion on Dominique's case had, in part, led to the Singapore Armed Forces reviewing and improving their safety management. The second is the Benjamin Lim case. Considerable public outcry and concern over the death of Benjamin Lim had also led the Ministry of Education and the Singapore Police Force to review their procedures when the Police conduct interviews with young persons. In particular, I wish to highlight Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng's Ministerial Statement on this matter. The Minister acknowledged that questions and concerns were raised as to whether Benjamin's school's protocol was adequate in protecting Benjamin. The Minister also said that such public concern was fully understandable, but had chosen not to respond earlier because a Coroner's inquiry was about to be held; in other words, comments made on this case could be considered sub judice. The public concern over Benjamin Lim's case led to the Police reviewing their procedures when interviewing young persons. Again, Mdm Speaker, as the Minister has himself acknowledged, there is value in permitting the public to discuss pending Court matters or, in this case, when there is a Coroner's inquiry. In fact, I believe it to be necessary for the public to have the right to comment on such cases, especially when the issues intimately affect their lives. Although the purpose of the Bill is not to ban discussion on pending cases except for that which might potentially be sub judice, unfortunately, a combination of factors might lead the public to err on the side of caution by not commenting on cases at all.”
“Before I elaborate on my reasons for saying so, I would like to express my gratitude to the Minister for providing some clarification on what has remained fundamentally unchanged in this codification of the Bill. As I understand, there are two main changes to note, specifically: first, lowering the test for scandalising the Court from the previous term, "real risk" to just "risk"; and second, investing more power in AGC in this Bill with regard to contempt of Court. I will discuss these areas of concern in my speech and hope the Minister can clarify. Mdm Speaker, I believe the House can agree that this is not an esoteric Bill. This Bill has a wide-ranging impact on the public's ability to legitimately comment, discuss and debate on matters of public interest that affect each and all our lives. The Government's encouragement of active citizenry has seen more Singaporeans becoming increasingly involved and interested in public matters, with individuals and civil societies alike stepping up to raise – if not address – concerns. In many ways, their commitment to the betterment of society has helped the Government make some very good decisions in the interest of the public. Likewise, the petition that I have submitted on the Bill highlights the concerns of many Singaporeans with regard to how it will impact their lives and society at large. Let me now speak on the provisions of the Bill dealing with sub judice. I will give some examples to demonstrate how the public has benefited from discussions on pending Court proceedings. The first is the Dominic Lee case. Dominic Lee was a full-time National Serviceman who passed away in a training accident due to an allergic reaction.”
“Madam, I will be speaking in Mandarin for most of my speech. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak on such an important Bill. To a newcomer like me, today is very special. Earlier on, we witnessed a very exciting and passionate moment. However now, we are debating a Bill which hit many nerves. First of all, I do believe that the Bill can, to a certain degree, ensure that the Court's orders are obeyed and providing legal sanctions on individuals who disrupt and impede the administration of justice. Secondly, the Bill aims to enshrine the integrity of the Court in the public eye, so that we – both the public and the Government – continue to hold it in the highest esteem as a fair arbiter of disputes. As such, the terminology used in the Bill must be clarified so that we collectively understand them and adhere to the Bill to the letter of the law. Furthermore, as the Bill states, it serves to protect the people across all strata of society, be they large corporations and people of standing, or the common man on the street. In the situation where they are involved in a Court proceeding, this Bill protects them and ensures they are given a fair trial that is untainted by public discussion on the case at hand. Hence, while I am not fundamentally opposed to codifying the law of contempt into the statute, I am concerned that the current provisions of the Bill may unintentionally result in undue restriction on legitimate debate of important matters that affect the public. This is specifically in relation to sub judice and contempt by scandalising the Court.”
“I would like to make a correction about the people presenting the Petition. [Please refer to "Petition", Official Report, 15 August 2016, Vol 94, Issue No 22.] Let me clarify that the humble Petition is submitted by Zeng Ruiqing, Lisa Li Shi-en and Lee Yi Ting, and others of like opinion.”
“The petitioners pray, "Given the wide and far-reaching implications of the Bill on individuals, we, the Undersigned, humbly pray and urge the Parliament of Singapore to: (a) delay passage of this Bill pending greater and more extensive public consultation on the implementation, effects and implications of the Bill for the general public; (b) to reconsider and clarify provisions of the Bill as stated in the text of the Petition to Parliament to ensure that it does not intentionally or otherwise restrict legitimate expressions and discussion on matters of public interest; and (c) refer this Bill to a Select Committee for further consultation and deliberation." I will now hand the Petition to the Clerk. [(proc text) Petition handed to the Clerk at the Table. (proc text)]”
“Mdm Speaker, I present to Parliament a Petition under Standing Order No 18. The Clerk has endorsed the Petition as being in accordance with the rules of the Standing Order No 18(5). This Petition is presented on behalf of Ms Kirsten Han Li Ying, Ms Lisa Li, Dr Thum Ping Tjin, Mr Jolovan Wham, Ms Rachel Zeng and others of like opinion. Including the five petitioners named above, there were a total of nine valid signatures. [Please refer to "Personal Explanation", Official Report, 15 August 2016, Vol 94, Issue No 22, Personal Explanation section.] Madam, the material allegations raised in the Petition related to the concern that the Bill goes beyond its stated goal of consolidating key elements of the law of contempt into statute. If and when the Bill passes, more persons could be liable for prosecution over a wider range of activities and subject to heavier punishment than is currently the case. The petitioners argue that the key provisions in the Bill are vague and further blur the lines between permissible discussions and impermissible discussions on legal proceedings. They believe that, together with what they see as disproportionately heavy punishment for contempt, these elements in the Bill can, unintentionally or otherwise, restrict legitimate expression and discussion on matters of public interest. The petitioners ask for a delay in the passage of the Bill, pending open and more extensive public consultation to reconsider and clarify provisions in the Bill and its full implications and open deliberation in Select Committee.”
“The Minister talked about using art for the purposes of unity, harmony and comments. Any society is not just based on that; it is also about discord, dissensus as well as, a lot of times, disagreement. So, what does the Minister think about providing that safe space so that we can have diversity? I just want to remind the House that John F Kennedy did say, "If we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity". Page: 46 Secondly, I want to thank the Ministry for starting on place-making. Based on what I hear, most of the engagements for place-making tend to be top-down. Can the Minister talk about how we can start democratising the whole engagement process and, especially, it is important to give time for a place to happen. Can we talk more about that? Thirdly, I would like to address this point about traditional arts, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Quite often, traditional arts is about trying new things. During this process, training becomes especially important. It will require time and expertise. I would like to ask whether NAC has a framework to allow these traditional artists to have time to immerse and learn. Second, traditional arts also need innovation. Li Yu in his book "Sketches of Idle Pleasure" (闲情偶寄) talked about "thinking out of the box" in length, in other words, only by creating new things can we communicate with the audience. The process of "thinking out of the box" also takes time. May I ask whether the Traditional Arts Master Plan has taken this into consideration?”
“"…两者之间，倒有不安于现状的同一。惟政治是要维持现状，自然和不安于现 状的文艺处在不同的方向......政治想维系现状使它统一，文艺催促社会进化 使它渐渐分离…" That is to say, while the arts and politics are frequent fellow travellers because both seek change, at some point on this journey, they will take divergent paths. It is in the nature of art to examine change, to pursue truth. In doing so, art may raise uncomfortable questions, and may seem to divide, but it is through these questions that society can progress. Community Arts”
“Artists like Lee Wen and Amanda Heng created some of their most interesting works there and these artists later became Cultural Medallion recipients, honoured by the nation. Institutions like this, such as Centre 42, Intercultural Theatre Institute and the up-and-coming Traditional Arts Centre, are important in the development of Singapore's arts scene. I hope there will be more of such centres; and some of them can support interdisciplinary and intercultural experimentation, developing ways of art-making that incorporate science and technology, as well as different kinds of genres and cultures. Singapore is in a unique position. Being such a globalised economy and a connector among different regions, we can take advantage of our status to be a facilitator for exploration and exchange. I would also like to advocate for such institutions to have a different funding model. For example, the Intercultural Theatre Institute (ITI), are funded under the three-year Major Grant Scheme, just like other arts organisations. The key performance indicators of these kinds of developmental centres are different from a typical arts organisation. I would urge MCCY and NAC to develop a different model for these institutions that will encourage experimentation, creative processes and learning. The very fact that we have a Ministry and affiliated agencies that look specifically at the arts and what it can do for society means that the arts and politics are not strange bedfellows. Yet, the arts should be viewed for its intrinsic worth, and not merely to serve political purpose. Here, I think it is apt for me to quote from the great author Lu Xun who spoke about the relationship between arts and politics, I will say this in Mandarin, but I will translate later.”
“Developmental Programmes In examining the Ministry's key performance indicators, I noted that there is an emphasis on the instrumentalisation of art: what art can do for society. I would like to thank the Government for acknowledging that the arts can have such an extensive impact on society, which I hope will also help to convince more Singaporeans of the importance of arts to be part of our lives. But I would also like to recall a Chinese saying: 工欲善其事，必先利其器. That is, to do a good job, the artisan must have the best tool to do it. In this case, the art must be good. Besides having institutions to provide the best arts education for emerging artists, there must also be arts centres or venues that will help young or mature artists develop their craft without the pressure of market forces. Institutions that pay attention to developmental objectives must be seen differently from, say, a theatre company that sells tickets to their work. In a way, they are revenue generating. But for institutions with a developmental objective, their focus should be on process over results, experimentation over tried-and-tested products. One is reminded of what the late Kuo Pao Kun had said before: "Better to have a worthy failure than a mediocre success." The Substation, founded by Mr Kuo, was such an arts centre: it provided infrastructure support and resources for young artists to kickstart projects and, at the same time, provided an environment to encourage artists to take creative risks. In other words, The Substation was a home for the arts, a place for artists to learn, a safe space within which they could venture to explore, that is, to innovate. Many young artists have begun their careers there, including filmmakers Royston Tan and Boo Jun Feng, and theatre director Goh Boon Teck.”
“Many artists who work in the community tend to operate as individuals, without the backing of administrative and organisational support. As such, to encourage more participation and engagement from the community, more intermediaries must be made available to facilitate fruitful collaborations among artists, related agencies and the community. I, therefore, urge the Ministry to look into developing these specialists. Thirdly, creative place-making. To bring arts closer to the community, such that it becomes an everyday presence, we should begin looking at creative place-making. Creative place-paking makes the arts a part of community living. It is not a place or venue management. It is not about presenting performances and programmes to create buzz. The key word is "place". According to Tuan Yi Fu, a well-known geographer, a place comes into existence when there is a "moment of pause", which provides people within the space to reflect and connect with others around them. It is created not by transactional needs, but by relational needs. In creative place-making, the arts are an essential mediator that helps to bring the community together. It is also important for artists to want to be involved in place-making; they must want to see community engagement very much as part of their work. Creative place-making will only be sustainable if it is ground-up. It must not be forced. It must not be "hip". It must not be short-sighted. If planned and executed properly, it will not only foster community bonding and identity, build capacity in a community, it also empowers the community to action and change, it will also solve one of the problems that artists and arts groups face in Singapore: the lack of physical space to work.”
“It moves the audience, changes their sensibilities, by making the invisible visible and the unheard heard. Secondly, development of intermediaries. Facilitation and organisational skills are specialties that not all artists possess. Artists need a different set of skills to encourage and inspire community participants to express their creative selves. At the same time, artists may need to organise and mobilise resources from different agencies to make projects happen. For example, if you are going to do a project on end-of-life issues, we may require the involvement of the Agency for Integrated Care, hospitals, nursing homes, caregiver communities, amongst many others. Many of these agencies are not familiar with arts. Hence, when artists partner them to create community work, dialogue and processes are important so as to avoid miscommunication and distrust. This requires specialisation, an intermediary role that bridges artists and communities. A good example of such a good intermediary would be the group ArtsWok Collaborative. They facilitated and produced "The Rite of Spring", a dance performance choreographed by Cultural Medallion recipient Angela Liong of Arts Fission. The performance was presented at Esplanade Theatre, featured four different elderly groups like AWWA Seniors Activity Centre, AWWA Community Home for Senior Citizens, National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) Eldercare and Henderson Senior Citizens' Home, as well as children. To accomplish such an intergenerational work, a lot of facilitation and organisation need to be done. The intermediary needs to be someone who is well-versed in the process of art-making but, at the same time, understands the art of community engagement deeply.”
“Let me share about a project entitled "Unseen: Constellation" which is currently being exhibited at the Chapel Gallery of Objectifs along Middle Road. Initiated by artist Alecia Neo, the project involves seven students living with visual impairment from Ahmad Ibrahim Secondary School. Over two years, under the guidance of mentors from a diverse range of professions, the students were immersed in a very deep process of discovery, which resulted in them creating works that explore their lives and dreams. The various artworks now displayed at the gallery comprise music videos about friendship and discrimination, a short film about vulnerability of love and boyhood, a motivational speech, amongst others. In the motivational talk, student Dallon Au revealed his insecurity as someone with impaired vision, I quote, "Many times, I just feel like giving up and killing myself. This is so unbecoming of a motivational speaker, right? You have no idea how many times people have said this to me. ‘If you cannot even keep yourself motivated, how are you going to motivate others?' Believe me, I agree. But I am working on it and I am getting better." Through the work, you can see how these students had learnt so much about themselves through a highly engaged process facilitated by very thoughtful and sensitive artists and mentors. The process has resulted in the creation of artworks that are moving and of high quality. "Unseen" is deeply engaging and impactful. Its engagement is deep and life-changing. As we move towards the future, we should encourage more of such deep and engaging work. The depth and process will result in profound learning experiences for the community and will also result in artistic work that is aesthetically rich.”
“Let me, first, declare my interests. I am the Artistic Director of a theatre company that is very much involved in creating and curating socially-engaged and community-engaged art. I am also a member of the examination board of the Intercultural Theatre Institute. Mr Chairman, in 2011, the Arts and Culture Strategic Review (ACSR) report was unveiled. It outlined a vision for 2025. I quote: "...a nation of cultured and graceful people, at home with our heritage, and proud of our Singapore identity". To achieve this vision, two strategic directions were identified: one, to bring arts and culture to everyone, everywhere, and every day; two, to build capabilities to achieve excellence. In response to the report, the Government has committed $270 million worth of programmes under three master plans, rolled out over five years from 2012 to 2016. This would mean that come 2017, we can look forward to a comprehensive review of what has been achieved. This review will be an important document to help us determine the approaches we should take for the next eight years as we move into 2025. Hence my two cuts will deal with these two strategic directions for the future. The community engagement master plan that was rolled out since 2012 has seen a proliferation of arts programmes organised by PA, NAC, NHB and the National Library Board (NLB). It has increased the number of art activities and brought the arts closer to our doorstep. This has provided livelihoods for some artists who are very committed to working with the community. Going forward, I would like MCCY to look at the following issues. Firstly, engagement on a deeper level.”
“I would, however, like to suggest a paradigm shift: let us begin work on the young, so that as they grow in their ability to handle change and loss, they, in turn, can be the living examples that their children can learn from. Would this not be groundbreaking, effective and empowering? 12.15 pm As I speak, I remember this young adolescent whom I taught, who cuts himself to stop his girlfriend from cutting herself also. The best story was his mother left home when he was very young. His father never explained to him why he had to go through this. He is living through the pain and, now, he does not want his girlfriend to go. The philosopher Arthur Schopenhaur said: mostly, it is loss which teaches us the worth of things. Cyber Education”
“Experiential learning builds within the body a memory that does not forget easily and help the students to cope. It is like riding a bicycle. You cannot intellectually learn how to ride a bicycle; you have to go on it, fall. But after a while, you realise that even if you do not ride a bicycle, you will still remember how to do it because your body recalls it for you. Page: 19 Thirdly, the teachers. To deal with the issues in the classroom may sound very daunting. As it is, the teachers are already swamped with work. I hope that more teachers can be employed, specifically trained to manage these areas of teaching, where a lighter touch is needed and where a safe environment is crucial. Schools may already have existing counsellors. But these operations often appear to be detached from the daily grind of school life – as if being in touch with a counsellor is a sign of weakness or, worse, a taboo. Imagine then if such teacher-counsellors are part and parcel of school life. Imagine if a child can ask questions about algebra and fractions in one class, and then talk about the pain of losing her favourite cat minutes later. The message is simple: we care about you and not just how well you do. These are some of my suggestions which I hope MOE, in partnership with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), will consider. I believe that a multi-agency approach is required to effect this change in our social, familial and education systems. Some may think that my proposals would mean that parents are excused from their responsibilities.”
“In this context, I would like to advocate for schools to take on a proactive role in preparing young people to deal with emotional distress. Firstly, literature. My predecessor, Nominated Member of Parliament for the arts, Ms Janice Koh, had spoken passionately about the importance of literature. Allow me to quote from an article by Keith Oatley, Professor Emeritus of cognitive psychology at the University of Toronto: "The process of entering imagined worlds of fiction builds empathy and improves your ability to take another person's point of view. It can even change your personality...The emotional empathy that is critical to our day-to-day relationships also enables us to picture ourselves living as the characters do when we read fiction." I would like to suggest that reading sessions become part of our primary and secondary schools' core curriculum and not merely an exercise within the English class. Led by facilitators with strategies, reading sessions can help students access the lives of characters and understand their deeper emotions. In this way, the students can better deal with similar issues that they may be facing. Secondly, Character and Citizenship Education (CCE). Firstly, I would like to commend MOE in their recent revamp of the pedagogical approach to CCE. Here, I would like to suggest the topic of loss be included in the syllabus at all levels. The content can be scaffolded. For primary school students, we can use relatable stories, like taking care of pets, to examine issues of loss. For higher levels, we can tackle more complex situations. However, the approach must be nuanced. Students have to be guided in the process. And I would think that experiential learning would be a good strategy.”
“Madam, I would like to continue my call for "small acts of repair" in my previous speech. Specifically, I am proposing for a focus on emotional and critical learning in children and young people, where responses to issues of loss and changes Page: 18 in life are addressed. In my encounters working as an educator with children, youths and adults, many have been scarred by deep-seated emotional issues, such as loss, for example, when a child has to part with a long-familiar domestic helper at the end of her contract or when a pet dies or when a child's precious toy is thrown away without his or her knowledge or consent. There are also cases of more extreme losses and adjustments for the young: when they leave their friends in school and move on; when family members pass away; when their school or classmates die suddenly in accidents or even suicides. It pains us greatly, as adults, to see young people struggle in such circumstances. What we cannot prevent, we should prevail, we should overcome. The pain and burden of a child in school should be carried by more than just the child. A caring society should begin with a humane school environment, one that places value on compassion as much as competition, and goodwill as much as grades. Emotional upheavals should not be dismissed as personal failure, as if those who go through pain somehow deserve it because they had not done enough to prevent it. Minister Shanmugam shared about the difficulty of getting whole families to participate in the rehabilitative process when they face problems. Imagine how many more unknown problems exist out there, with families unwilling to speak of their pain, let alone seek help.”