Lee Hsien Loong
Singapore
“Yes, of course, every time I sell the land, I put money into the Reserves, but I am not putting the money into the Reserves all today. I am putting it in a stream of payments, 30 years apart.”
“Speaker, Sir, I do not think it was a very difficult question to figure out, that when I spoke to MTI, I spoke to the Minister, because Mr Gan Kim Yong is the Minister for Trade and Industry.”
“" I think that would have been unjust because he has not been charged. If there is a case, the case has not been heard, he has not been found guilty or acquitted or whatever. I cannot prejudge a case based on an incomplete investigation – started recently, or a partial investigation, just entered into the formal phase.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first, Mr Leong is quibbling over words. In February, Mr Tan Chuan-Jin told me, "I offer to resign". I said, "Yes, sort out your constituency first". In other words, decision taken. The moment to execute it, I will decide. So, it is quite clear. Legally, he has not resigned.”
“Sorry, Mr Speaker, to respond to Ms Poa on why not no pay leave. It is my judgement to make. The Civil Service works in one way; their basis is if you have been convicted, then you are on zero pay and other consequences will follow.”
“I am very happy to note that Assoc Prof Jamus Lim appreciates the second key and is seeking a third. And I hope that it portends a change in your attitude towards the Elected President and his custodial powers. But I think the Brazil example is a very interesting one.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,557 lines we hold for Lee Hsien Loong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 17 of 32.
“The old folks are waiting. I wish we could do it in five years, but it is a massive project and we need time to get it done. There is a physical constraint. So we will complete the programme in 10 years, for all the flats and blocks which are eligible, assuming of course that the Government's budget can afford this, which based on present projections, we can. Second, we have to get Singaporeans to work longer and retire later. This is what Mr Teo Yock Ngee talked about earlier. Our population is ageing, partly because more people are growing old, and also because Singaporeans are living longer. Back in 1980, which was only 25 years ago, men could expect to live till 70, women till 75. Today, men can expect to live till 77 and women can expect to live to 81. In other words, many will live a further 15 to 20 years after the present retirement age, or maybe even longer. In the newspapers recently, I saw a picture of two old folks celebrating their 100th birthday, eating durian cake. I would not be surprised if amongst today's audience, there will be somebody who will celebrate his 100th birthday one day and still be able to eat durian cake. 77 and 81 are not the end. Medical science will improve; we will take care of ourselves; and live longer on average. This makes it essential for our workers to work longer. You cannot afford to work for 40 years and then retire for 20 years. Because if you are going to do that, then when you are working, you must save up at least one-third of your income so that for the next 20 years, you can keep the same standard of living as you used to have - not counting your family. And if you live for more than 20 years, which a significant number of people will, then financial security at old age becomes a problem.”
“We have spoken at length over the last few months on youth issues because the future depends on young. But I know that the older Singaporeans have felt a little bit left out. They say, "What about us? Don't we count anymore?" In fact, older Singaporeans do count and they are important to Singapore too. As Mr Ang Mong Seng pointed out, they have contributed to our success, and we are grateful to them. He said in Chinese, when you drink from the well, remember the source of the water. They helped bring us here, they have valuable experience and wisdom, and will help to pass on important values to future generations. Many MPs have talked about the concerns of the aged. I will address three of these issues. Firstly, getting around. Dr Tan Boon Wan mentioned the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) and asked for it to be speeded up. The LUP provides lifts on every floor. Like all HDB upgrading programmes, it is based on the principle of co-sharing because it costs quite a lot of money, $30,000 per flat in some cases, sometimes even more. We must make sure that people really want it and so co-payment is a test. If you are prepared to pay something for it, then the Government will build it for you. But with an ageing population, it is the most popular item in HDB's upgrading packages. I just had LUP polling conducted in my own Teck Ghee constituency. There were five blocks which were eligible for and all five passed. Because it is the most important facility, especially if you have at home an old, elderly parent who has had a stroke or is immobile. Residents in all estates want LUP to be completed sooner because they are old people, and they want to enjoy it. We will speed up the implementation of the LUP for residents so that they will benefit from it sooner.”
“For families, this is a safe, secure and great place for raising children and enjoying family life. For the immigrants, we offer a better life. For the disabled, there is a better chance in Singapore to still live meaningfully. And for those who have committed past mistakes, a second chance to make good. For all, this is a country where you can make a difference, achieve your best, and be proud to call home. In Singapore, everyone who strives can make good. There will always be opportunity to grow. It is not just an act of faith but it is a cardinal determination. We will make it so, we want a society which is open, where people can move, where if you are talented, you can move up and be successful. There must be no social or class barriers which separate people and keep those at the top where they are and prevent those who are outside but with ability to contribute from moving up. Because of our meritocratic system and our emphasis on education, we can keep this a socially mobile and open society. Our schools and institutes of higher learning are very competitive. Students take it very seriously because they know that if they study well, they will succeed and they will be able to move up. We are not going to allow anybody to be trapped in the basement, unable to get out or up. We cannot promise a lift on every floor but there will be a ladder and if you are determined, you can climb the ladder and rise. Our modern folklore includes many stories of Singaporeans who have started poor but made good, and many of them are in this House today. We have MPs like Amy Khor, Lim Boon Heng, Ng Eng Hen, Ong Soh Khim and many others who start from very humble backgrounds. And there are new stories still being written everyday.”
“And if you impose such a bill on Singaporeans, which Singaporeans will stay to pay it? And which Singaporeans will say, "Thank you very much, I'm off. There are so many other countries in the world where the taxes are cheaper." Low Thia Khiang mentioned Nokia. It is a Finnish company, and a very successful one. In fact, Nokia represents what Singapore wants to be, but it is not what Low Thia Khiang thinks Nokia is. It is innovative, creative, welcomes talent from all over the world, and it is not based just in Finland. Its operations are outsourced and spread around the world. They have major R&D and manufacturing in China, they are starting a plant in India, and their chief designer is an Italian American based in California. Nokia started off as a paper company, in 1865. Now, it has totally reinvented itself into a major technology MNC. If it had remained purely a Finnish company and had continued being a paper company, it would have gone bust. So, if we want to survive and do well, we will have to persevere, reinvent our companies, outsource, and then eventually, we may have a Nokia in Singapore. Our approach is right - keep our taxes low, keep our Government trim, let people keep what they earn, encouraging them to work hard and do well, and to take Singapore forward. We should persist and fine-tune this approach. A place for all Singaporeans The second reason why Singapore is opportunity is because we offer a place for everyone. For the young, Singapore offers a good education. For those in the workforce, whether you are from ITE or the polytechnic or the university, we offer good jobs and the chance to fulfil your potential. For older people, we offer a society where contributions are recognised and the problems of the elderly are addressed.”
“Our policies have resulted in this standard of living and our plans and our approach are the best way to raise this standard of living further. What is the alternative way of developing our economy? Low Thia Khiang suggested that we go for welfare for the people, and suggested Finland as a good example of a welfare state. Indeed, Finland is a different model, and it is a good example of a welfare state because if you are looking for one which is working, Finland is not doing badly as Dr Loo Choon Yong yesterday told Members. Finland's model works for Finland, and we can learn from it, but Finland is not paradise. The Finns enjoy very generous welfare benefits. Who do you think pays for it? The Finns - because there is no such thing as a free lunch. Our GST is 5%. The Finnish VAT - Value Added Tax - 22% on most items, 17% on food, and 8% on public transport, medicines and books. As for income tax, two-thirds of Singaporeans do not pay, and the highest rate is 22%. For Finland, it goes between 28-55%. Our unemployment now is below 4% and young people have no problem finding jobs. Finland's unemployment is 9%, with one quarter being long-term unemployed and one-fifth being young people below 25 years old. And Finland recognises that the problem with the country is that the welfare is too generous and they have to trim back on welfare and retrain the jobless people. So if Mr Low Thia Khiang is thinking of campaigning in the next general election campaign of making Singapore like Finland, then I encourage him, in the interest of transparency, to be upfront. Do not just promise welfare benefits but show people the price tag. Explain how you are going to fund this for the people, how are you going to pay the bill, and who is going to pay the bill.”
“The overall cost of living went up by only 2.5%. In other words, even during these difficult years, your incomes went up faster than the cost of living. And if you look at the items that make up the cost of living index, food prices went up slightly but clothing got cheaper, housing got cheaper, transport and communications got cheaper. Education and healthcare got more expensive. But even for healthcare cost it only went up by 11% over five years. So, overall, there is no basis to say that middle-income Singaporeans are worse off and that price increases have left them with nowhere to turn to. If you look at what they own and what they do, you will see how our standard of living has risen. In 1998, 50% of Singapore households had somebody who travelled overseas. In 2003, after five very difficult years, 47% of Singaporeans still travelled overseas. And they go everywhere, to Australia, Korea, and China, not just along the coast but inland, to very far away and adventurous places. At home, Singaporeans have lots of consumer durables. We used to look at basic indices such as ownership of television sets and telephones. Then we stopped looking at these indices because we reached the saturation point. So then, we started looking at washing machines but they are also at 90-something per cent. So now, we have to look at ownership of personal computers and handphones, which have all risen. For air-conditioners, during these five years, the ownership percentage went up from 58% to 72%. That is part of the reason why electricity bills cost so much because air-conditioners consume a lot of electricity. Singapore's standard of living is real. Yes it is high, but it is not a pie in the sky or a castle in the sky, as Mr Low Thia Khiang claimed.”
“As for medical costs, Khaw Boon Wan has been studying this since last year. We are revamping MediShield and we will be announcing the details next week. For the mass of the middle or lower income Singaporeans, the Utilities Save scheme has helped significantly to defray their electricity bills. We cannot help it when oil goes to $50 or sometimes $55 a barrel, but we can do something to help Singaporeans so that they do not feel the pinch quite so much. But, rising expectations is the most difficult to resolve. As Low Thia Khiang says, the standard of living index - not the cost of living index - went up too high. You compare with your neighbours, you see new products, you want new things, and our expectations therefore run ahead of our ability to pay. One solution is to tell Singaporeans to just lower your expectations, settle for the second best. It is too tough to compete, our future is not going to be that bright, just be satisfied with what you have. We are not going to do that. We will aim high but we will aim to bring out the best in our people, get people to compete, get them to fulfil their expectations and to the best of their abilities so that they can have a better standard of living and afford what they aspired to. That is the best way to do it. But notwithstanding this feeling of pressure, in real terms, the standard of living of most Singaporeans has gone up. This is a fact which we have to remind ourselves regularly and every time Mr Low Thia Khiang or Mr Chiam See Tong raises it, they are doing me a favour because I get to update my charts*. *Cols. Taking the last five years, from 1998 to 2003 - these are difficult years including the recession and the Asian crisis - per capita income went up from $35,968 to $38,100, or 5.9%.”
“Rather than cutting their electricity off, why not install pre-paid meters so they can pay as they use the electricity? We have been following up on this. We will be ready to roll out the prepaid meters from May this year and will help families who have their utilities disconnected. SingPower will work with MCYS to decide who needs these meters most urgently and I would encourage them to go and talk to Dr Tan Cheng Bock because his area probably has more of these problems. Apart from electricity, we need to do more to help households who are going to be left behind when we restructure the economy. I will be talking and elaborating on this more later on. But it is not just a few poor households who are feeling pressured. As Low Thia Khiang yesterday said, the households are middle-income but they feel great pressure. Why is that? I think there are several reasons. With a slow economy, bonuses have been down, earnings are lower, they have less money to spend. Many people are worried about job security, so that causes them to hold back. Many households are very worried about medical costs or about higher utilities charges. Most importantly, there is the issue of rising expectations. These are things we can do something about. To get earnings up, to get people with money in their pockets to spend, the solution is economic growth. With last year's eight per cent growth, the unions tell me, that quite a number of companies are paying bonuses and many of their members are not doing badly. For job security, we need to manage the process of restructuring, and using programmes such as REAP to help workers to stay in their jobs and give them the reassurance that if something happens to their jobs, we will be able to help them to find new ones.”
“They can be more responsive than the big retailers. They can know their customers by name, what they like to cook, what spices they like to buy, when their gas cylinder will run out, who they can extend credit to, and therefore, they can find a niche. But in some housing estates, there will still be an oversupply of HDB shops. We have to do something about this. MND is working on ways to help these shopkeepers to upgrade or exit their businesses, and they will be announcing the details in the Committee of Supply. Apart from shops, some households are having difficulties too. Many MPs have spoken about this, especially Dr Tan Cheng Bock, narrating how his residents have difficulty paying electricity bills. We have many schemes to help them. But we have to look at this problem rationally, coolly and find ways to help the families who need help in a way which will encourage them to get back on their feet, get back working and looking after themselves. The supply of electricity should be kept separate from the provision of the welfare. SingPower is not a welfare outfit. It provides and sells electricity, so it must have its bills paid or it will not be able to stay in business. But if a household has difficulty paying its electricity bills, then it has to approach the CCC or CDC, or look for the MP. And if the MP thinks that his case is worthy and in fact that he deserves help, the MP knows where to find help for this family. While we sympathise with the cases which Dr Tan Cheng Bock raised, we have to find the right way to help these people. Last year at the National Day Rally, I talked about getting pre-paid meters for electricity. Because the problem with some households is that with credit, they are unable to pay the arrears.”
“The results were not bad. 21,000 mature workers picked up new jobs this way. Now that the recession is over, the need remains. So, we are going to modify and improve the scheme and start a new scheme, called the Re-employment Assistance Programme (REAP). It will have two components. Firstly, a nationwide programme to redesign jobs in certain sectors - similar to what we are doing for the cleaning industry. This will enhance productivity through mechanisation or by improving the work processes, and therefore, improve the pay so that more Singaporeans would be attracted to do these jobs. Secondly, we will have a re-employment adjustment support programme to help the unemployed overcome the barriers to taking up new jobs. They will receive job referrals, training, as well as incentives to stay on in their new jobs and build stable careers. You have heard Mr Lim Boon Heng yesterday. The unions will help us to make this work. Even with good growth, a few sectors are not benefiting and this is because they are going through difficult structural adjustments. Shopkeepers in the HDB estates are one such group. The fundamental problem is that shopping habits have changed, Singaporeans are no longer shopping downstairs so much. Both husband and wife are working, and on weekends, they visit big shopping malls and supermarket chains. And also, many Singaporeans travel extensively, especially during the holiday seasons. When they are overseas, they shop and as a result spend less in Singapore. It does not mean that there is no opportunity for HDB shops to grow and to survive. They may not be able to compete with the big boys on price, but if they are prepared to reinvent themselves, being small has certain advantages. They can offer more personalised and customised services.”
“So management and unions worked out new terms, trimmed the benefits, allowed longer working hours and more flexibility into the system. The workers were happy because their jobs were saved. Qantas, an Australian airline, have 35,000 employees worldwide, mostly in Australia. They are planning to outsource 7,000 of these jobs from Australia. Their CEO, Geoff Dixon, said, "Qantas could no longer afford to remain 'all-Australian', we're going to have to get the lowest cost structure that we can and that will mean sourcing things more and more from overseas." So the writing is on the wall. We have read it and we are moving. I know that restructuring is not painless, but by restructuring, we grow. By growing, we get resources. With resources, we can help to ease these pains and help those who cannot cope or those who are in need. One group who need help are the workers who are displaced and they do not always find it easy to get replacement jobs. It may take a long time and even when they find a replacement job, it may not be the same job at the same pay. And the ones who are especially vulnerable, as Mr Teo Yock Ngee pointed out yesterday, are the older workers with the lower skill qualifications. Overall, we are creating jobs. We are bringing in the investments, and growing the activities here. Singaporeans who are coming out from our educational institutions will be able to take up these jobs. But our challenge is to find ways to create more job opportunities, which are within the reach of these vulnerable workers. During the economic downturn over the last few years, the Ministry of Manpower introduced the People for Jobs Traineeship Programme. It was a scheme to encourage employers to take on older workers who are changing jobs from one sector to another.”
“When the world economy recovered, we rode the recovery and grew more than eight per cent last year. We have maintained a strong pipeline of investments at a time when there is strong competition for investments to go to China, India and other places. We have created many jobs and brought our unemployment back down. Last year, we created 60,000 new jobs. It is a big number considering we only have 40,000 babies born a year. Our unemployment went down in the third quarter to below 4%. In the fourth quarter, unemployment stayed low and employment continued to grow. We have also produced winners. PSA restructured, made itself competitive, and last year handled a record of more than 20 million TEUs. New enterprises and activities are starting up. I described some just now. We are no longer just an MNC-driven economy. But we still need to press on with the restructuring and changes because other countries are continuing to change and we too have to keep on moving to stay ahead. I will just give you two examples. One is Siemens, a German company, which is in Singapore in a big way. The story was reported in The Economist and I met the CEO-designate recently and he confirmed it. Siemens has plants all over the world, some in Germany, some in the rest of Europe, some in the former communist European countries, some in Asia. They needed to bring their costs down in the German plant that is making handphones. They discussed with the unions, but the unions were not comfortable to move. So the management brought the union leaders to Hungary, and showed them the actual site, the people, and the preparations made for a new plant to replace the German one. The union leaders went back and told the workers the management was not just serious about moving, they were dead serious!”
“One major issue which does not belong to any ministry is marriage and procreation, which Mr Wong Kan Seng has been overseeing. Many couples are benefiting from the package which we announced last year in August. These days, I often see people carrying little babies. I think they must have been conceived before August, but anyway, they pat their baby on the back and say "baby bonus", and so I hope there will be a bonus baby to come. It is too early to measure the results of the package but I was told that there have been more consultations at KK Hospital this year. Today, I would like to discuss three key reasons why Singapore is a land of opportunity. Firstly, because we have a competitive economy. Secondly, because there is a place for all Singaporeans. Thirdly, because all of us can play a part to build this exceptional nation. A competitive economy First, in Singapore, economic opportunities abound. We are a regional and global node where East meets West. When MNCs want to set up base in Asia, Singapore is always a prime candidate. And here, for Singaporeans and others, provided you are prepared to learn, unlearn and relearn your skills, you can find good jobs, hold on to them, start new businesses, grow existing ones, improve yourself, bring up your family and have a fulfilling life. Why has this happened? It is because we have adopted the right economic strategy. We have invested in our people, built up our infrastructure, opened ourselves to the world, given Singaporeans the incentive to strive, encouraged entrepreneurship, strengthened our competitiveness. And we have worked together - the Government, the people, the unions, the NTUC - to create wealth for all. As a result, we have weathered the economic downturn.”
“We are resolving the reclamation issue amicably through third party arbitration. We have issues left over from the package which we were negotiating with Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad which unravelled, and SM Goh is now discussing these issues with Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi. They have not been resolved yet but SM Goh has agreed with Prime Minister Abdullah on two basic principles. First, any proposal should be mutually beneficial; and second, these old issues should not hold future cooperation hostage. These are two very important principles to start off with. In Indonesia, we have also been discussing economic cooperation. That was the main topic of discussion when I visited Indonesia and met President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono in October. We have also been addressing the bilateral issues which are outstanding, for example, the extradition treaty. And again with Indonesia, we have agreed that the bilateral issues will not hold up our overall cooperation. Most recently, the region suffered a completely unexpected blow because of the tsunamis, and Singapore has been actively rendering assistance to Indonesia. We have been working with other ASEAN countries too. For example, with Vietnam, we have a Connectivity Proposal which the Vietnamese have also been keen on. Under the proposal, the Vietnamese will tap into our networks, while we gain an entry into Vietnam. So our external relations are in good shape. Domestically, the new Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports has been working actively with young people and developing new programmes. In the Ministry of Education, major changes are under way. We are bringing more flexibility into the system and in particular, revamping the teaching of the mother tongues.”
“Europeans going to Australia may over-fly Singapore instead of stopping at Singapore. They may fly through the Middle East instead of Singapore. In the port sector, other ports in the region are coming up. The Thais have been talking about the Kra Canal or the Kra land-bridge. So PSA has to watch the situation carefully and make sure nobody moves its cheese away. But we are taking decisive steps to defend our hub status. Changi and PSA have gone through painful cost cutting and retrenchments, and they have strengthened their customer focus. SIA is going to turn the threat to an advantage, using longer range planes to fly to LA and New York, and buying the new Airbus A-380, so that they can connect more passengers from Changi to other regional hubs. This will anchor our position as a hub. It all boils down to our mindset. When we see obstacles and challenges, do we curl up and die, or do we set about tackling them and see new opportunities for ourselves? Priorities The President's Address last week laid out this Government's priorities. In fact, we have already been working at these priorities for some time and we have made some progress. In external relations, I visited many of the ASEAN countries and we have renewed the constructive and good relations, which are inherited from Mr Goh Chok Tong's government. We are cooperating with our neighbours for mutual benefit and managing the inevitable outstanding issues, which arise between close neighbours. In Malaysia, our economic cooperation is going well. We have invested in Malaysian companies, banks, telecom companies. They have invested in a shipping line and most recently a stockbroker. We welcome them to invest in Singapore. We have outstanding bilateral issues with Malaysia, of course.”
“It was a cosmopolitan bustling city in the early 1900s because at that time, ships sailing from Europe to the west coast of America had to go round South America, so they went round Cape Horn which was quite a difficult journey. When they sailed up the west coast of South America, Valparaiso was the first port of call. The sailors docked, come off and do R&R. And so it became a booming city. But in 1914, the Panama Canal was built, ships no longer went that way, and the city declined. There is still a city there, it is a very nice place to visit. It is a world heritage site so every building is conserved. But it is not the centre of Chile or the region. It has lost its past glory and its relevance to the world. The same thing has happened in Bahrain in civil aviation. If you remember in the 1960s and 1970s when we used to fly to Europe, you would often stopover in Bahrain. Then jumbo jets came along, and we have direct flights to Europe. Bahrain lost its business and it stopped being a transfer hub. But Bahrain did not go downhill because it reinvented itself as a centre for financial services, recreation and entertainment in the Gulf region. It is connected to Saudi Arabia by a causeway, and on weekends, thousands of Saudi Arabians flock to Bahrain for shopping, entertainment and recreation. Dr Tony Tan was there last year in December attending a conference. He was in the Ritz Carlton and he told me it is like a mini-United Nations. All sorts of people from all over the world are there, including six Singaporeans who worked in the Ritz Carlton here and went there with their families. So, Bahrain reinvented itself and found a new living. The lessons for us are quite clear. We faced similar challenges like Valparaiso and Bahrain. Longer-range airplanes affect us too.”
“If a post-independence Singapore with nothing could represent opportunity, all the more a bustling, cosmopolitan city today opens so many more doors and so many more avenues for the young, the adventurous and the resourceful. There is so much more which we can now do because we have the resources and organisation, we have the wherewithal, and the discipline. We have valuable assets in our education system, in our healthcare system, in our housing estates, in the arts, in the public services, in a city where the people are warm and gracious, and conducive to nurturing the human spirit. And in the economy, there are so many chances to grow existing businesses and to start new ones. I do not know what businesses these young people whom Inderjit met have started, but if you just look around Singapore, you have OSIM, Breadtalk, 77th Street, Scanteak, Raffles Hospital - run by one of our NMPs - all doing well. Many of these are projects started by young entrepreneurs who saw opportunities in Singapore and went for it. We are still a young nation and there will be opportunities aplenty in our long journey ahead. If we lose the zest, the drive to go and seize new opportunities, then we will lose that hunger, that never-say-die attitude, the conviction that the best is yet to be, then we will stagnate, go downhill and back from first world to third in less than one generation. We will decline as quickly as we have risen, and history is full of examples of cities which have risen, prospered, seem to be ahead of everybody else, and then gone back down again. I was in Chile last November for the APEC meeting and I made a side trip, visited a city called Valparaiso, a port on the west coast, beautiful city, mountains curved around the bay, houses all the way up.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion. Introduction I would like to thank all MPs who have contributed their views and suggestions on the President's Address and the Addenda. This is an important debate at a significant moment for Singapore. We are facing new challenges domestically and internationally. We are reaching out and handing over to a post-independence generation. We have a new team taken over, developing fresh ideas. Your inputs, representing the inputs of Singaporeans, are essential for getting the best possible solutions and proposals for Singapore. What is it ultimately that we are striving for? Put it simply, a better life for all, to build a land of opportunity in Singapore and to strive not just for economic growth or higher incomes, but to build a nation where everyone belongs, where each person has a role to play, and where all can live with dignity. Whither Singapore? We have gone from Third World to first in one generation, from almost nothing, we created something unique, and we have succeeded beyond our wildest expectations at many levels. The generation who built today's Singapore can take great pride in what they have achieved. They seized many opportunities which came their way and created new ones too, and they left Singapore far better than when they started out on their working lives. Now, it is over to the post-independence generation. Mr Inderjit Singh reported how he spoke to some young people in California and they said, "Oh, opportunities in Singapore have dried up. America is where the milk and honey is." Is that really true? Not for a moment do I believe that, far from it.”
“If Mr Low can tell me what his grandchildren will speak, I would be able to answer his question. Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 4.35 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.15 pm until 4.35 pm. Sitting resumed at 4.35 pm [Mr Speaker in the Chair] REVISED CHINESE LANGUAGE CURRICULUM Debate resumed.”
“The mother tongue policy is that each community has to do its own mother tongue. There are exceptions. The Minister for Education has answered the question, explaining how the exceptions are made and how many there are. But, basically, the mother tongue policy means that each community has to study its own mother tongue. We had a debate in this House, and the Malay and the Indian Members have participated in the debate. For the Malay Language syllabus, the problem is not an urgent one, because most Malay parents still speak Malay at home, although this is shifting. And we are beginning to see Malay parents who speak English and whose children have difficulty learning Malay in schools. But it is a small number. For Tamil, it is a problem. The Ministry of Education has put it very gently that it is going to review this. But we know that it is a problem and the current standards are too high. And some Tamil parents have told me that they themselves who are native Tamil speakers - really truly mother tongue, not taken it as a second language - would fail the Primary 6 Tamil examination. And people who live in Chennai, who speak Tamil as it is spoken today, tell us that we are using a very literary, formal form of the language, which is not the way the language is spoken anymore. Because if you listen to the radio in Chennai, they use all kinds of English words and colloquialisms. I have to take this on faith, but I believe it is so, we have not kept up with it, we have been preserved in aspic jelly, and we are teaching a form which is not spoken anywhere else in the world, and it is probably not going to be spoken in the next generation in Singapore either. So adjustments have to be made, and will be made.”
“I presume Ms Braema means this modular approach to Malay and Tamil?”
“I readily concede those points. To speak, you must have a certain level and you have to attain a certain level in primary school in order to be able to take the subject in secondary school. The question is: what is that level? Is it the present standard? Is it something higher? Is it something lower? It cannot be the level of the Chinese school which he knew and I knew, because that is impossible. And you can see in many places where people are speaking Chinese, even though they are not at that first language standard. You can communicate. You are comfortable talking to one another. You may not be able to make a speech or write an editorial, but you can express yourself adequately and vividly. And I think amongst the children who are in our schools, in our polytechnics and even a certain proportion in our universities today, they would have that level. What would we be able to maintain in future for primary schools, that is an empirical question which we would have to establish. I cannot say for sure, if 80% of the families are English-speaking at home, what level can we achieve in school? We will have to find out as we go on. Then what level can we achieve in secondary school, if that is what they can reach in primary school? We would also have to find that out as we go on. It is not possible for us to say, "These are the levels, and come hell or high water, we are going to get there." Because it would depend on the pupils and on their abilities.”
“I strongly support them. The modular approach, customisation to the children's abilities, more choice for parents, even "Read first, Write later" will go a long way to interest and engage the great majority of our Chinese students to learn their mother tongue. So let us strongly reaffirm this bilingual education policy, in order to maintain our roots and identity. At the same time, let us take a practical approach which will minimise the trade off between learning English and learning Chinese. That way, we will entrench our position as an open, competitive and vibrant international city in the East. With bilingual skills, our people will be confident to face the new world, and will be in a better position to enjoy the fruits that the booming Asia will bring.”
“I think Singaporeans recognise this, which is why there is now strong support for the bilingual policy. In the past, the Chinese-educated and the English-educated had very different views on language, often resulting in heated debates. And the arguments arose from differences in very deep beliefs and very strong emotions. They concerned fundamental questions, such as what texture the society should have. Today, very few Singaporeans question the need for a mother tongue. Whatever our arguments, whatever the gripes of the English-speaking parents whose children have difficulty in school, they accept the policy. They want their children to study Chinese but they say, "Can you make it a little bit less hard?" I think on that, we can find common ground. And the Chinese-educated also accept the importance of mastering English. We have seen the benefits of the bilingual policy, and that has taken much of the heat out of the issue. So it is possible for us to have a rational and calm discussion in Parliament. If you follow the discussion in the English and Chinese newspapers, you will find that the views of the different segments of society have indeed converged, not become identical, but come closer together. And the parents are now better able to approach the issue objectively too. The challenge for us now is how we can best prepare our children to succeed in the future to become confident adults. Deep down, we know that for them to succeed, they have to master English but, at the same time, for them to survive, for them to be something like their forefathers, for them to be a society together, the more they know of their mother tongue, the better. I believe that this package of changes will help our children reap the most dividends from our bilingual policy.”
“There would be new technology. And we would have to adapt as we go along so that we continue to teach in the most effective way. So I do not think this White Paper is the last of the changes. It is the roadmap and there will be many adjustments as we go along. But the strategic direction is that we are adapting our language policy to the circumstances of today and the future. That is set and will not change. Despite all the challenges we face, our bilingual policy has been successful. Most of our students know two languages which give them many added opportunities when they start work. What we should compare is not Singaporean's Chinese with the Chinese' Chinese. It is the Singaporean's Chinese with the Chinese' English. So that is what we have achieved, a workable second language standard, a reasonable first language standard. The Chinese have a good first language standard and very little second language standard. They will find it very difficult to change. We have achieved something very valuable. I was in Chile recently, and some Chilean CEOs told me they admired the way we taught Singaporean children two languages, whereas in Chile, the children study predominantly Spanish, with only two hours of English lessons a week. Chile is another example of a society where you have got Germans, British, Spanish, all mixed together, but finally the dominant language is Spanish. And English is only spoken by the elite, German is not spoken. So there is a certain dynamic to the language which is spoken by the society which we have to accept and work within in crafting our policy. We therefore are at a significant advantage and able to serve as a bridge between the East and the West.”
“And we have to find ways to examine, so that we really establish what they know and that, when in preparing for the examinations, in fact, they are doing what we want them to do, which is to understand the language and to learn to be able to express themselves in that language. We will give our Chinese Language teachers more support. It includes providing good training, adequate resources. We need to ease their workload. We are recruiting more Chinese teachers so that they can spread out the workload. And we will set the right syllabus and examination format. Parents also will have to play a part, supporting the teachers, motivating their children and understanding when the child does not perform up to expectations. So we should record our thanks to the Chinese Language teachers for their effort over all these many years. They understand the problems. They know what we are trying to achieve. They are trying to help us solve this problem, and in solving this problem, we must take their input so that we understand what is happening, and we can make changes which are going to work. So I am glad that, in the course of this review, the Chinese Teachers' Union has been very receptive and made many constructive suggestions. We would have to keep in close touch with the teachers because we need this feedback loop, as we continue to implement changes, monitor the results and implement further changes, as we go along. The White Paper has stated a 10-year plan. So by 2015, the "O" levels examination format is going to change. I think 2015 is over the horizon. Many things will change before then. Our society will change further. We would have experience operating the first reforms to the Chinese teaching. We would have to see how they are working out. We need new ideas.”
“But the mother tongue teachers play an extra role in passing on traditional values and also teaching the language, which is a much more difficult task than teaching some other subjects. We can make all the right policy changes but whether the policy is worked on the ground, that depends on what happens in the schools and in the classrooms. We have had a lot of comments on what is wrong with our Chinese Language syllabus. But I do not think what is wrong is our Chinese Language teachers. Our teachers are dedicated and doing their best. Many of them have adopted innovative teaching methods which have spurred the students' interest. They have tried very hard. They conduct the lessons in schools, mark the assignments after work, give remedial classes on Saturdays. They sweat their guts out, and try their best to make the children pass the examinations. Some parents get angry at the teachers when their children do not do well. As a result, what do the teachers do? They want results. They want the schools to do well. They teach in a way that will help the students to pass examinations, which means you have to memorise words, phrases, idioms, sometimes entire compositions. The solution to this is to fix the examinations so that we examine in such a way that we are really testing you realistically for what you really can achieve, and you are not faking it. I know students who do this. You look out for key characters in the examination question, and you say da an shi ru ci, and you put the rest of the answer you memorised. And you get a few points right by chance. I think if examinations can be faked like that, that means, the students are cleverer than the examiners.”
“It has to be something here and now which they find relevant and it makes sense to them. And that is what is different when you are learning Chinese from learning Science, Mathematics or so many other subjects. The other subjects are hard too. But you know you need to learn Science or Mathematics, because you are going to become an engineer, a technician or a doctor. You learn Chinese. Why do you need that? So, there has to be a motivation. The motivation has to be that this is the language which is used, which gives you access, which you can enjoy using, and which your friends are using and you have a chance to talk to them, and you feel part of the in-crew. Bringing the language alive is a job for both the schools and the teachers and for our society. The Chinese community has expressed support for the changes. The Clans have done so. And Mr Wee Cho Yaw, as President of the Federation of Chinese Clans Association, has said that he intends to get the community organised to raise funds to do activities and programmes to promote the learning and use of Chinese, and he set the target of $10 million. I support the idea. The Ministry of Education also supports the idea, and MOE will match the fund dollar for dollar, up to $10 million. I wish the Chinese community every success in this effort. The money is not the problem. The challenge is to have the activities, the engagement, the fund and the young people to participate. And if we can do that, this is money well spent. The second key success factor of this exercise lies with our Chinese Language teachers. All teachers play an important role in moulding the characters of the young.”
“Because he remembers the Chinese schools of a different era when that was the first language, and that was what children spoke, he learned all the subjects in Chinese, that was what he achieved, and he was studying wen yan, zhonghua wen xuan (extracts from the classics). But, today, the standard we can set is not only determined by what trade-off we choose between English and Chinese. It is also determined by what level we can achieve if we try hard in this environment. There is a natural level which the students can do if they work at it. Let's say you make them study two hours of Chinese a day. They can reach a certain level. Can I add another 500 words per year by making them study three or four hours a day? It cannot be done. At primary school, you will already have a problem. By secondary school, you have a revolt. It has to be at a level which is variable and which they find they can achieve, and which they find a purpose in doing. So I think the most important thing for us is to make the children feel that there is a practical value to learning this language, then they will be motivated to learn, then they will have the motive to raise the standards over time. So we have to create opportunities for them to listen to Mandarin, to speak Mandarin. We have to help them to enjoy reading Chinese story books, Chinese newspapers, even Wanbao and Shin Min - why not, it is entertaining, it is practice of the language - and watch Chinese TV programmes, sing Chinese songs. And when they grow up, follow the developments in China and conduct business dealings in Chinese. But the motivation for learning the language cannot be that one day, they will go to China and they will need it. They are now in primary school or secondary school.”
“Some Members have said, what a pity the motivation is an economic one; we should have purer motivation. Let us only do this for cultural reasons because of values, because of heritage. Let us not do this because there is a living to be made. But it is quite legitimate to acknowledge that one reason why we are learning Chinese is because it is going to be useful to us. If it is not going to be useful, it is going to be a more difficult task. It will be like some of the East European countries or Balkan countries. Their people emigrate to Australia, New Zealand, America, to far parts of the world. The first generation may keep the culture. By the children's generation, the language is gone. By the generation after that, they are completely Australians or Americans. As Sin Boon Ann says, they speak like Americans. If Chinese were not useful to us, I think we would be in danger of that fate too. Fortunately, Chinese is useful to us. So I think that it increases our chances of keeping our culture and roots as Singaporeans. There are two critical success factors for this package of changes. First, we have to be able to bring the language alive for our children. They have got to see the practical value in learning the language, so that they will be motivated to learn and use it. Without that, there is no basis for talking about raising Chinese standards. The children will find it pointless to learn Chinese, and even if we impose high standards on them, it will be force fed. I listened to Low Thia Khiang. He said we must keep the standards high, and I can empathise with him.”
“It shows that parents value and support the programme, and there are students who are interested, who have the aptitude, and will grow up bicultural. The Bicultural Studies Programme complements the SAP schools and the LEP, and will give avenues for students with an interest in the language and the culture to pursue it further. Graduates from these schools will be in great demand. They will become diplomats dealing with China; thought leaders and writers working and writing in Chinese; teachers and lecturers helping to pass on the language and culture to the next generation. At the same time, they will give our economy the extra edge. Because they can communicate with the Chinese businessmen and entrepreneurs on the same wavelength and without barriers. They will be interlocutors and deal makers, and will be valuable economic assets for Singapore. Even those who did not do Chinese at first language level will learn. I was in Shanghai this year and I went to a restaurant on The Bund. It is called Three on the Bund. There is a restaurant, a spa and an art gallery. The chef was a Singaporean. He is originally from Hongkong. The sommelier, that means the wine advisor, was a young lady from Singapore. How did she do it? She found the opportunity and she had to learn all the wine terms and describe the wine in Chinese. I do not know how she did it - the shape of the cork, the bouquet of the wine - but she learnt all the words and she could tell a story in Chinese about French wines, mind you, not Chinese wines. And she made a living there. So Singaporeans, given the opportunity, will have the motivation to go and learn, master the language and make a living for themselves in China and in Singapore.”
“Now, the White Paper is taking a further step forward by adopting a customised approach when a child enters primary school, so that even from the beginning, we acknowledge that the starting points are different and we take account of that in the way we teach him Chinese; at the same time, offering a continuum of programmes at the secondary school level, SAP schools, Higher Chinese Language curriculum, and the Language Elective Programme (LEP), and now the Bicultural Studies Programme, so that those who can excel in two languages can go as far as they can. The fifth reason why we are changing now is because we feel increasingly that the Chinese community in Singapore has an imperative to ensure that we produce succession for the people who are bicultural, who are proficient in English, but at the same time almost CL1 in Chinese, who understand the language, the culture, the history, contemporary China, how to do business there, how Chinese society is evolving, and contemporary trends. It is not for sentimental reasons but it is because we want to maintain the Chinese base in Singapore. And to maintain that CL base at CL2 for the majority of the students, you have to have this group who are at much higher level than CL2, who will be able to teach, who will be able to expound, who can write, compose and carry forward the torch into the next generation. Also for doing business in China, that is another reason why we need people who are at that level who can understand, interpret and help us to take advantage of what is going on. So we started the Bicultural Studies Programme. We have had a very encouraging initial response, and we have many more students who want to enrol than there are places.”
“But how far to go beyond this minimum, how much more Chinese to do, and how much less English to do, this is a matter which the students and the parents ought to have more say in deciding, depending on their own interests, their own abilities and their own plans in life. What is it which will make them want to study more? Not pressure, not coercion, but them seeing that there is some point in learning Chinese, that this is not just an academic exercise, not just a dead language like Latin, but something which will be useful to them, which is interesting, which they find intriguing, challenging, rich and which will give them the interest and incentive to go and do more. What we can do to facilitate the parents' choices is by offering more programmes of different standards, and then within that, they choose. This was what we did in 1999, when I led a review on the learning of CL and we made reforms for the secondary school level. We decided to inject more flexibility into the system. At the lower end, we introduced CL 'B' as a different syllabus for the secondary schools, as a practical approach to help the weaker students cope with the subject so that they do not lose interest altogether. But, at the higher end, we allowed more students to study Higher Chinese. We added another SAP school, Nan Hua, and we allowed more students to benefit from a rigorous bilingual programme.”
“If we insist we have to write because with strokes and bi shun, in its right sequence, for some it is worth the effort; for many, if you are not going to become a calligrapher, there is no practical need to. Now what you have got to remember is how to use the keyboard, and that is a practical, realistic approach. Otherwise, we would still be using the brush - mao bi. So we need to emphasise the practical usage of Chinese. It would be ideal if all the students could do all four equally well - listen, speak, read and write. But, in reality, not everybody can achieve this. For students with average language ability, we should shift the emphasis, which means less writing, to more listening, speaking and reading. We should increase their exposure to spoken Chinese, so as to develop their listening and speaking skills. And we should give them more opportunities to speak and practise using the language, instead of sitting in class listening and memorising, and not actually having the opportunity to express and engage, and to have the language as a living, vibrant, useful medium to them. At the same time, we can make zuo wen (writing composition) easier by not emphasising on 100% memory of words and how to write them. Fourthly, what has changed is that we have to recognise and respect the growing desire of parents and students to make their own choices. We have to preserve a certain core and minimum standard of Chinese, which the great majority of students can manage. Maybe, as Yeo Guat Kwang says, it can be the HSK (hanyu shuipin kaoshi), if that is the appropriate level.”
“And least of all are they likely to write a formal note to a Government department - jing qi zhe and so forth, which I think the school children still have to do for their examinations. Take my work, for example. When I interact with my Chinese grassroots leaders and residents, I listen and speak Chinese. To keep in touch with what is happening on the ground, I read Lianhe Zaobao. And there are very few occasions when I need to write in Chinese. When I have Chinese speech, I work it on the computer. And with Windows XP, especially if you have extra software which MM described yesterday, you just type in a sentence and the characters will come up and will be corrected as you go along - wo men shi Xinjiapo gong min. By the time you reach the end, the software has figured out the whole sentence. And if you type in a name which is familiar, the name itself will show up, because there is artificial intelligence in the computer. I am not the only one using that software. Millions of Chinese in China are using that software. All their journalists, researchers and all their officials are using it. There are no handwritten documents any more. Everything is typed on a computer. In fact, if you read accounts of what is happening in China, the Chinese scholars themselves are beginning to forget how to write the characters, because they do not have to write, they just have to recognise. So I am not sure what will happen to the language after one generation like that. Something is going to change. Maybe some form of phonetics will come in, as has happened with Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese which were originally also ideograph-based. But I think the language will come under great pressure to change, and we should recognise this.”
“But if we look at the P1 cohort, 50% of whom are from English-speaking homes, project 10 years ahead when this P1 cohort reaches Secondary 4, and that is 'O' levels, can we imagine that they can achieve the same standards, the same fluency as the Secondary 4 cohort this year? I think long before that, there will be many who will run into difficulty with the curriculum, as they reach upper primary and secondary schools. Not because the teaching quality has deteriorated, or the students are less bright, but as a result of the shift of language profile. We know it. The evidence may be anecdotal but we see it. Little children going to school in Primary 1. After a few weeks, they have phobia. They say, "I am frightened of Chinese." Primary 6 or 'O' levels put on the pressure, as Mr Yeo Guat Kwang says cing ku chou - tighten the ring, force them to study, enormous effort. They swear, "Once I pass and get into whatever school I am aiming for, that is it. I am putting it down and I am not taking it up any more." If we have to do that to our students, we have failed. We have not succeeded in getting them to learn the language, to love the language or to imbibe the values which go with the language. Maybe he passes the examinations but at the expense of our ultimate objective which is for him to have something which he holds precious and which becomes part of him. That is the second thing which has changed. The third thing which has changed is the practical usage of the language. In our daily lives, we speak, listen and read Chinese much more than we write the language. In fact, we speak and listen more than we read the language. And, for young people, they are more likely to SMS one another in Chinese than to write in Chinese.”
“Since then, 1998 till now, which is about 6-7 years, it has increased further to 50%, and it is going to continue to rise. The home language background makes a huge difference in the child's ability to absorb Chinese. It also makes a huge difference to the right approach to teaching him Chinese. Because for somebody who is speaking Chinese at home, learning the language in school is a reinforcement or formalising of what he already knows. He speaks it, he understands the meanings, he expresses himself in it. What he needs is to learn the writing, maybe learn the formal grammar, maybe learn hanyu pinyin, and, over time, expand his vocabulary. For somebody who speaks English at home, he is learning what we call the mother tongue - though it is almost a foreign language - from scratch. He has no reinforcement at home. He has to learn everything - the words, the meanings, the sounds, the writing, the grammar. He has to express himself and, at the same time, we want him to absorb values and culture and many other things to come with that language. Well, some children will have a strong aptitude for languages and can do it, like Miss Penny Low, who is from a baba family, but spoke fluently in Chinese day before yesterday. I asked her what was her level of Chinese in school, she said, "CL2". I think if everybody could be a CL2 like that, we would not be having this debate today. But not everybody is of that level and some will face great difficulties however hard they try. MOE statistics show this, and the MPs know this first hand from experience with their own children. Today, I do not think we yet have a very serious problem, because most students can manage the CL curriculum in schools. Most of them still come from Chinese-speaking homes.”
“We have to accept that trade off. Therefore, we have to set realistic targets and expectations for learning Chinese, recognising that students differ widely in their language ability and home language backgrounds. And we have got to allow and encourage the stronger students to study Chinese at a higher level, while helping the weaker students to gain confidence in the language and not become overloaded. The level we can achieve is going to vary from person to person. It depends partly on your general ability or IQ, but it is not just IQ. For equally bright pupils, some will be good at languages, the girls particularly, but others will struggle with languages. Many of the boys are like that. Some may not be very clever with Mathematics or Science, but they will be good with languages and they will be facile. We have to acknowledge that, recognise it and take it into account. So that is the first change in our thinking, which is our realisation that there is a trade off. We have to accept this trade off and we have to decide where along that choice we are going to go - one quarter, three quarters, one third, two thirds, or whatever. The second change is in the language habits of our families. The profile is steadily shifting from Chinese speaking to English speaking. This has been under way for some time. We already recognised it several years ago. In 1999, when I did the last review of the Chinese Language teaching in schools, we already noted that over 10 years, the proportion of P1 students coming from English-speaking homes had doubled. In 1988, 20% of the children in P1 came from English-speaking homes. By 1998, 10 years later, the proportion had doubled to 40%.”
“We have touched on some of these in the debate, but I would like to summarise them into just a few points. The first change is our progressive realisation of what we can realistically achieve when we are trying to make people bilingual. As Minister Mentor described vividly yesterday, most people can only master one language well, which is the one we use most of the time. The majority will not be able to master a second language at the same level. We started off believing that we could bring everybody up, or even that we could bring everybody about equal, even though they did not quite reach 100% for both languages. But, gradually, after many years of experience, we have come to the conclusion that it is not so. The more we learn of one language, the less we learn of the second. English is our working language. Everybody accepts that, and you have to master that in order to learn all the other subjects in school, and in order to make a living. We have to start off with that as a first requirement - that we are going to learn English and learn English well. Within that constraint, we want to achieve as high a standard as we can for the mother tongue for each child. So the standard will vary with each child, and will also vary depending on the social environment in which the children grow up in. But, basically, we have to make a trade off. We do not like it. We wish it did not exist, but it is there. The more you emphasise Chinese, the less you will have of English and vice versa. If you want to improve your English, you have to use it, you have to practise it, you have to be exposed to it, you have to speak it with your friends, with your teachers, with your colleagues. The more you do that, the less practice you are going to have with your Chinese.”
“After I left school and entered work, so much of the business is done in English that it became even more entrenched. And if I do not practise my Chinese, it becomes very rusty. The phrases do not flow, the grammar goes very strange, the pronunciation drifts off, and I have to practise, read, speak, engage in conversations and, after a while, it comes back. If I visit China or Taiwan, or if I am in a Chinese speaking environment, I start having to think in Chinese, it comes back faster. Within a day or two, I am up and running. So, in an election campaign, at the beginning, the speech sounds terrible, but by the end, it is OK. But Chinese is not just for elections. I have found knowledge of Chinese valuable, not just to talk to Chinese and Taiwanese officials face-to-face and without interpreters, but also because it gives me a more rounded view of the world. You read the Straits Times, you read the Zaobao, same news, different angle, different perspectives, different presentations. Sometimes different news is picked up. And you understand that the English Language perspective is not the only one in the world, and that there is a big reality out there which the purely English educated are missing out on, and which because I have that Chinese education, I have access to. If I only had English, I would have been a different person. So I am very grateful that my parents sent me to a Chinese school. This made me what I am. If the bilingual policy stands, then why are we having to change the way we teach Chinese in schools? What has changed? Is it our thinking which has changed? Is it circumstances which have changed to cause us to make such far reaching fundamental reforms?”
“We are today, notwithstanding the skyscrapers of Shenton Way or, later, Marina South, notwithstanding the modern structure of our economy, our instincts, our values, our social norms are all distinctively Asian. The culture, the values carry that Asian tinge, and indeed more than tinge, a deep dye is still there. And we have been able to succeed because we have displayed Asian traits - hard work, thrift, respect for elders, tolerance, social inclusiveness. So, the motivation for the bilingual policy stands and we need to maintain the bilingual policy and we want all our children to learn their mother tongues. There are advantages, of course, in learning Chinese because China is rising and there are opportunities there. India is rising and there are more opportunities there too. But our language policy is fundamentally driven by the deep questions: Who are we? What kind of people should make up Singapore? I myself am a product of the bilingual education policy. I spent 15 years altogether learning Chinese, about three years in a Chinese kindergarten, 12 years in a Chinese school, but I had a home background which was English speaking. As a result of my Chinese education, I became competent in Chinese, and imbibed the values of the Chinese educated Singaporean. I am one of them. I was inspired by the dedicated teachers who taught me, who imbued me with their values and a sense of passion, their commitment to do their best for their students, and it has left a deep impression on me to this day. But somehow, my master language was English. I do not know why, not for lack of exposure or effort, but somehow while I am fluent in both, English became my master language.”
“Today, the Chinese recognise the need to learn English to compete in the globalised era. The country with the largest number of English students is China. For 2008, for the Olympics, they are trying to persuade everybody to learn a few sentences of English, particularly in Beijing. And all the taxi-drivers are supposed to know 100 phrases and they gather, Chinese-style, in football stadiums, where you have a master instructor saying, "Good morning, teacher" and they practise back. I am not sure it will work, but it shows how fervently they feel the need to learn English. And we have that. That is why so many peidu mamas send their children to Singapore to study. They want them to have a good foundation in English. At the same time, this is an Asian society, they feel comfortable living here and so they come here, and so they benefit from us. As for the identity part, over the last 40 years, we have, as a nation, made a lot of progress building a Singapore identity. We are more cohesive, we feel much more Singaporean.We can recognise a Singaporean, and our common ground is much stronger. But the process is not yet complete, and to complete it is going to take a very long time. At the same time, the external pulls on us, to separate us, are stronger than before. We are more cosmopolitan. The world is more connected. We have to work harder to make sure that our next generation retains a sense of self and cultural identity. At least, watch Singapore Idol and not just American Idol. We may be English speaking. We may adopt western ideas and knowhow but, fundamentally, we are a society of Asians living in Asia.”
“As we had grown up, as we had known these values, we wanted to update them, but we also wanted them to continue and to be perpetuated, and for our children also to be something like us and to carry some of our heritage. And the way we decided to do this was through the bilingual policy - to teach English as the main working language and the main language of instruction in schools, but also the mother tongues as second languages to maintain these cultures and values in Singapore. We did not believe that if Singapore became a purely English-speaking society, or even for that matter, if just the Singaporean Chinese became purely English-speaking, we would have the collective instincts, the resilience or the cohesion to survive as a nation. The base on which the PAP won elections was a Chinese base. The base on which the society and the nation was built, the instincts were basically Asian - attitudes towards society, towards Government, towards parents, towards the family. At the top, a small elite spoke English. Some went to RI, ACS, a few English schools, but they were not representative of the whole society. And if the whole society had been English-speaking, I think it would have been very different. And even the non-Chinese, the Malays and the Indians, would have found Singapore a very different place in which to live, because the texture would have changed. That was 1965. Today, nearly 40 years later, these reasons for a bilingual policy are as valid as ever. More than ever, English is the international lingua franca. It is the language of the Internet. Today, knowing English is great plus for Singapore. If we compare ourselves with Hong Kong, South Korea or China, we have an advantage.”
“It is a strong reaffirmation of our commitment to the bilingual policy. We are making these changes to the teaching of Chinese, in order to make bilingualism work under new circumstances. If we just let it be, it is working now, more or less. We can carry on for another 5-10 years. But if we do not change, with changing circumstances, eventually, the policy will snap and will fail. If we change now, we position ourselves so that we can maintain the bilingual policy and a reasonable standard of Chinese, maybe for another generation, and then we find new solutions to new problems. The root of our bilingual policy goes back to independence in 1965, when the Government took the fundamental decision that English would be our common working language. Why? Because English was the language of international businesses. It gave us the best chance for economic survival. It was also the common language on which all races could meet on neutral ground. Had we decided on Chinese as a common working language, first, it would have been much harder to make a living; secondly, the minorities would have been marginalised and aggrieved, and Singapore might well have broken up. English gave everyone and every community the equal chance to succeed in life and equal space to lead their own way of life. But it was not viable for Singapore only to be English-speaking either, because as a society, we needed strong cultural roots and it would take us generations to develop a strong culture of our own. Our immigrant people still had the cultures of their ancestral countries, and still upheld the values of these ancient civilisations. We wanted to preserve these heritages and values, to keep in touch with our roots and to pass down these traditions to our children and grandchildren.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, over the past three days, many MPs have spoken up and given their views on this issue of learning Chinese Language in school and, more broadly, on our mother tongue policy. These are issues that are very close to our hearts, because the changes which we are considering and which MOE will implement will have a profound impact on our children and indeed on Singapore's future. The debate has ranged very widely over the last few days. And yesterday, MM gave a comprehensive tour of the whole subject. So, today, I will not do a comprehensive tour. I will just focus on three issues. One, why I think the bilingual education policy continues to be vital and relevant to Singapore today. Two, why we are making these changes now to the way we are teaching the language. What has changed? What has made these major changes in the way we teach Chinese in schools necessary? And three, what are the key success factors if we are going to make these changes work and get students to learn Chinese the way we would like them to do? Let me start with bilingualism. As MM emphasised yesterday, bilingualism is the cornerstone of our education policy. We adopted this not just because we want to equip our children with language skills, or because we are looking for economic advantage. Language policy goes much further and deeper than that. It concerns such fundamental issues as how we see our role in the world, how we express ourselves culturally as a people, how we ensure that Singapore survives as a society, and how we can have the confidence and the sense of identity as Singaporeans to chart our future. So the White Paper is not just about changes in the curriculum and pedagogy of Chinese lessons in schools.”
“The rental rebates are temporary relief measures to help affected businesses tide over an economic downturn. The rental rebates were introduced as part of the off-budget measures in June 1998 when GDP growth was expected to be 0.5%-1.5%. The rental rebates have been extended several times as economic recovery had not been very strong, with GDP growing by 2.2% in 2002 and 1.1% in 2003. When the rebates were last due for expiry in June 2004, the economy was already turning around. However, as the recovery may not have filtered down to all sectors, the Government decided to extend the rebates for another 6 months, from 1st July 2004 to 31st December 2004. The economy this year is likely to grow 8%-9%. As temporary relief measures to tide over the economic downturn, the rental rebates should not unwittingly lead to a situation where businesses become reliant on Government's assistance, particularly with economic recovery underway. However, the relevant Government agencies will, like all landlords do, review their rental rates for market benchmarking. This review will be an important factor on the decision as to whether to extend the rental rebates, which is to be taken at the end of November 2004. SCDF AMBULANCES 22. Mr Andy Gan Lai Chiang asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether there is sufficient number of ambulances on duty each day to meet emergency calls; and (b) how many calls are made each day that require the presence of ambulances and on site first-aid.”
“The National Day Rally on 22nd August 2004 was funded by the Government. At the Rally, the Prime Minister explained the Government's policy directions and priorities and the challenges facing the nation. His audience comprised grassroots and community leaders, union leaders, business and professional leaders, youth leaders, as well as key members of the establishment. They were invited because their understanding and support is essential for rallying Singaporeans, and for implementing Government priorities and policies successfully. From time to time, depending on the issues, the Government also invited relevant groups to the Rally. Thus, teachers, nurses, civil defence officers, students and other young Singaporeans were also invited to the Rally in the last two years. Opposition Members of Parliament have never been invited to the National Day Rally as they cannot be expected to help the Government rally the ground to support the Government's policies. VEHICLES USING COMPRESSED HYDROGEN 2. Mdm Cynthia Phua asked the Minister for Transport (a) what safeguards are there to ensure that vehicles running on compressed hydrogen do not pose a danger to the public in the event of a collision involving such a vehicle; (b) whether there will be the possibility of an explosion of the vehicle upon impact in a collision; and (c) how is the Singapore Civil Defence Force being prepared for such contingencies if more motor vehicles use compressed hydrogen.”
“Even so, it is important that we continually review our practices in the light of developments here and experience elsewhere. The Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA) has been studying the whistle-blowing legislation in other countries, to see if they have had the desired effects, check if there have been unintended consequences, and assess if Singapore should adopt a similar law to protect whistle-blowers. MR ISKANDAR JALIL 44. Ms Braema Mathiaparanam asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) what help was given to Mr Iskandar Jalil to save his 43-year-old kiln; (b) what alternatives were offered to him in terms of working with that kiln; and (c) what support is given to artists who prefer to work from their homes and are in need of such spaces and facilities.”
“Employees can play a vital part in preventing fraud because often they have intimate knowledge of what is really going on in the company. For large and complex organisations, it would be extremely difficult to uncover fraud without some help from within the company. Enron and WorldCom are just two examples where so-called corporate whistle-blowers have been instrumental in surfacing corporate fraud. Indeed, the UK through its Public Interests Disclosure Act and the US through the Sarbanes Oxley Act have, amongst other things, tried to provide some form of protection for whistle-blowers. It is too early to say whether such legislation has had the desired benefits or whether it has led to some unintended consequences. For instance, there could be a proliferation of unfounded allegations of fraud from employees who may simply have an axe to grind but who now have the protection of the law. This would not only undermine our companies but also cause disruption to operations. Second, it is not clear that we need specific legislation to protect whistle-blowers given the many other reforms, especially in the area of internal controls, which we have put in place in recent years to enhance corporate stewardship. For instance, auditors are required under the Companies Act to report to the Minister for Finance should they come across, in the course of their duties, a possible fraud or act of dishonesty by officers or employees against a public company. The authorities, such as the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Commercial Affairs Department have also been able to rely on anonymous complaints and tip offs to surface possible fraud cases.”
“The Government has made reaching out to youth one of its priorities. It renamed the Ministry of Community Development and Sports as the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports to reflect this emphasis, although youth matters have always been under the purview of MCDS. If MCYS requires more funding going forward, it will put its case to the Ministry of Finance for consideration during the annual budgeting process. MOF will scrutinise any requests rigorously but sympathetically. PROGRAMMES FOR YOUTH 34. Ms Braema Mathiaparanam asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) what plans are in store to engage our youths; (b) what is the budget for these plans; and (c) what will be, if any, the budgetary and resource-allocation impact on other programmes run by the Ministry.”