Lee Kuan Yew
Singapore
“Sir, I had not intended to intervene in any debate. But I was doing physiotherapy just now and reading the newspapers and I thought I should bring the House back to earth. Mr Rajaratnam had great virtues in the midst of despondency after a series of race riots when we were thrown out during Independence.”
“A point of clarification, Sir. The Member has compared Singapore against Switzerland, Denmark and Finland. Can I ask him if he considers Singapore's population to resource ratio equal to Denmark, Switzerland and Finland?”
“The Member has not answered my question. Is he saying that we are comparing apples with apples? Is he saying that the system of government in Finland, Denmark and Switzerland can bring them from First World to a superpower? Can they do that?”
“I am putting a simple question and ask for his clarification. He has compared Singapore as if it were a Denmark, a Switzerland or a Finland. Their system, their governments, never produced the kind of transformation that we have had, and their system and their governments have a broader base, and can afford a mediocre government.”
“At the end of the day, that will be the same for the Malays, for the Indians and for all the others. S Rajaratnam was aiming for the stars. I went along with him with the pledge, and we must try to live up to the pledge. But to say, let us forget race, language, religion, culture, that is not doable.”
“So there is a wide range of options open and it depends on your judgment on the quality of the people you appoint, and also what is the objective of appointing people to these positions, whether you want them to stay effectively until retirement, which means you have to avoid appointing good people to these positions early which is, I thi…”
The complete record
Every one of 506 lines we hold for Lee Kuan Yew, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 11.
“Nobody can speak – I would not say authority – with the knowledge that I have because I knew the circumstances in which the Pledge was made. I admire the sentiments of Mr Rajaratnam. At that moment in 1965, my worry was, what would the Malays in Singapore do, now that they knew they were a minority, and that we would wreck havoc with them as we were made to suffer when we were a minority. When I returned on the 9th of August, on the advice of our Special Branch, I did not go back to my house. I stayed at Sri Temasek, which was my official residence. I stayed there for one week, then I went to Changi Cottage and stayed there for two months to make sure that everything subsided. These are realities. Today, 44 years later, we have a Malay community, I believe, at peace, convinced that we are not discriminating against them, convinced that we are including them in our society. Our Member works in SINDA. I am told he has been there for 10 years. He will know Indians are not equal. There are those Brahmins; they will not be in SINDA. It is the non-Brahmins who are in SINDA. So I think it is dangerous to allow such highfalutin ideas to go undemolished and mislead Singapore. We are here today, we have this building, we have all these facilities. All around us is evidence of our accountability. Without being accountable, we would not have been re-elected and there would be no Singapore of today.”
“We will not be able to get a Chinese Minister or an Indian Minister to persuade Malay parents to look after their daughters more carefully and not have teenage pregnancies which lead to failed marriages; subsequent marriages also fail, and delinquents. Can a Chinese MP or an Indian MP do that? They will say: "You are interfering in my private life." But we have funded Mendaki and MUIS, and they have a committee to try and reduce the number of such unhappy outcomes. The way that Singapore has made progress is by a realistic step-by-step forward approach. It may take us centuries before we get to a similar position as the Americans. They go to wars – the blacks and the whites. In the First World War, they did not carry arms, they carried the ammo, they were not given the honour to fight. In the Second World War, they went back, they were ex-GIs – those who could make it to university were given the GI grants – but they went back to their black ghettos (in 1945) and they stayed there. And today there are still black ghettos. These are realities. The American Constitution does not say that it will treat blacks differently but our Constitution spells out the duty of the Government to treat Malays and other minorities with extra care. So the basis on which the Nominated Member has placed his arguments is false and flawed. It is completely untrue. It has got no basis whatsoever. And I thought to myself, perhaps I should bring this House back to earth and remind everybody what is our starting point, what is our base, and if we do not recognise where we started from, and that these are our foundations, we will fail.”
“In its Declaration of Independence on 4th July 1776, adopted in Congress, the Declaration read, in the second paragraph: "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." The Constitution, passed a few years later, says: "We the people of the United States [this is the preamble], in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Nowhere does it say that the blacks would be differently treated. But the blacks did not get the vote until the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s with Martin Luther King and his famous speech "We Dare to Dream". An enormous riot took place and eventually President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act, and it took many more decades before the southern states, which kept the blacks in their position, allowed the registration of black voters and subsequently even after that, to allow black students to go into white schools. It was 200 years before an exceptional half-black American became President. So, my colleague has put it: trying to put square pegs into round holes. Will we ever make the pegs the same? No. You suggest to the Malays that we should abolish these provisions in the Constitution and you will have grave disquiet. So we start on the basis that this is reality.”
“Sir, reference was made to the Constitution. The Constitution of Singapore enjoins us to specially look after the position of the Malays and other minorities. It comes under Articles 152 and 153. I will read it: "Minorities and Special Position of Malays. It shall be the responsibility of the Government constantly to care for the interests of the racial and religious minorities in Singapore. The Government shall exercise its functions in such a manner as to recognise the special position of the Malays who are the indigenous people of Singapore and, accordingly, it should be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster, promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests of the Malay language." And on Muslim religion, Article 153: "The Legislature shall by law make provision for regulating Muslim religious affairs and for constituting a council to advise the President in matters of the Muslim religion." We explicitly state in our Constitution a duty on behalf of the Government not to treat everybody as equal. It is not reality, it is not practical, it will lead to grave and irreparable damage if we work on that principle. So this was an aspiration. As Malays have progressed and a number have joined the middle class with university degrees and professional qualifications, we have asked Mendaki to agree not to have their special rights of free education at university but to take what they were entitled to; put those fees to help more disadvantaged Malays. So, we are trying to reach a position where there is a level playing field for everybody which is going to take decades, if not centuries, and we may never get there. Now let me read the American Constitution.”
“Sir, I had not intended to intervene in any debate. But I was doing physiotherapy just now and reading the newspapers and I thought I should bring the House back to earth. Mr Rajaratnam had great virtues in the midst of despondency after a series of race riots when we were thrown out during Independence. And our Malays in Singapore were apprehensive that now that we were the majority, we would in turn treat them the way a Malay majority treated us. He drafted these words and rose above the present. He was a great idealist. It came to me; I trimmed out the unachievable and the Pledge, as it stands, is his work after I have trimmed it. What is it an ideology? No, it is an aspiration. Will we achieve it? I do not know. We will have to keep on trying. Are we a nation? In transition. I want to move an amendment to this amendment that "acknowledges the progress that Singapore has made in the 50 years since it attained self-government in 1959, in nation building and achieving the aspirations and tenets ...". These were aspirations. This was not an ideology.”
“I am putting a simple question and ask for his clarification. He has compared Singapore as if it were a Denmark, a Switzerland or a Finland. Their system, their governments, never produced the kind of transformation that we have had, and their system and their governments have a broader base, and can afford a mediocre government. The Singapore base is less than 700 square kilometres. When we started, it was less than 600 square kilometres. Could the system in Denmark, Switzerland or Finland produce a transformation as in Singapore?”
“The Member has not answered my question. Is he saying that we are comparing apples with apples? Is he saying that the system of government in Finland, Denmark and Switzerland can bring them from First World to a superpower? Can they do that? Does he realise that Singapore's GDP is only one-third of its external trade - that our external trade is three and a half times that of our GDP, higher than Hong Kong, by three times. And that if this economy ever falters, it is the end of Singapore and its First World status. Denmark, Switzerland and Finland are part of Europe. They can fail and they are still caught in a European situation. If we fail here, we fall back to a South East Asian situation. Just look around you.”
“A point of clarification, Sir. The Member has compared Singapore against Switzerland, Denmark and Finland. Can I ask him if he considers Singapore's population to resource ratio equal to Denmark, Switzerland and Finland? Second, have they brought the standard of living of their people up, multi-fold times, from third-world to first-world in one generation? To maintain that quality of government both in the political leadership that sets the tone for the whole civil service and for the whole country, can you get a Swiss-type government, Finnish-type government or a Danish government to bring about the results that Singapore has brought about in their own countries, let alone bringing them and their systems into Singapore? Please explain.”
“For the next 20 to 30 years, the international economic forces favour us. The US is likely to remain the dominant power and will maintain security in this region. Our economy is closely linked with the three big economic centres - US, Japan, EU. Now we will have India and China to pull up the economies of ASEAN, and also those of Australia and New Zealand. Singapore is at the heart of ASEAN, and it can play a special role in this economic renaissance of Asia. If we reject these integrated resort projects, the world's investors and players will mentally scratch us off from the list of countries that will be good for them for their business, for their leisure and entertainment. Ask ourselves, everyone of us, after all the heart-wrenching stories, and anecdotes, if you are in charge, if you are responsible for Singapore's future, for its well-being, for its vibrancy, for the kind of life Singapore can provide its people in 10, 20 years, can you say no? That is the question you have to answer. If I were the Prime Minister, and I was challenged - I was challenged on many issues when I was a younger man and had a lot of energy - I would take every challenger on and set out to convince Singapore that this is right, that the price is high, but the price of not having the Integrated Resorts is even higher. This is your choice. Surely we must move forward and keep abreast of the top cities in Asia and the world.”
“Hence, cities now compete to hold the Olympics because they can sell the TV rights and the cities will advertise themselves to the world for two weeks of the duration of the games. Only two decades ago, before global TV advertisements directed at the global consumer market made it profitable, cities that hosted the Olympics lost money. Nobody then wanted to host the Olympics. Singapore has to reposition itself in this world. We have to study London, Paris, New York, San Francisco, Sydney. Nearer home, I say, watch Shanghai and compare it with Tokyo. Because Tokyo is more Japanese and less open, Tokyo has not become a cosmopolitan international city. Tokyo has not become an international banking and financial centre, in spite of being the second largest economy in the world next to the US. Maybe it does not aspire to be one. So, although the Japanese have first class Japanese painters, sculptors, excellent symphony orchestras, outstanding artists and musicians and conductors, Tokyo has not become an international cultural centre, like New York, London or Paris. In 30 years, Shanghai will probably be the most international city of Asia. China wants Shanghai to reclaim its pre-war eminence as the cosmopolitan centre of the Pacific. We cannot compete with Shanghai on that big canvas. There are 500 million people in a catchment area around Shanghai. The whole of China's talent is drawn towards Shanghai. But we can become a gem of an island with a vibrant economy for six, maybe seven, million people by 2030, a throbbing, exciting fun place for businessmen and for tourists, and where parents can bring up children in wholesome and safe neighbourhoods. They do not have to go to Harrah's or MGM's integrated resort; there are many other fun places.”
“Then there is a big casino in Phuket or Khao Lak, an integrated resort by the seaside. Ask ourselves: must we insist that alcohol be banned and Singapore go "dry" like India, because some Singaporeans will become alcoholics? Or take an extreme example, Osama bin Ladin's Al Qaeda hates the intrusion into the Muslim world of American culture with its pre-occupation with sex and immediate gratification of desires, its wild rock music, its materialistic, consumerist money-minded culture. These Al Qaeda Islamic extremists believe that by repeated and huge suicide bombings, they can drive the Americans out of the Middle East, destroy America and frighten Europe, and thereby keep their Muslim societies pure and pious, as in the seventh century. They cannot succeed, because technology will continue to develop and change our economies and our lifestyles, whether we are Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists or agnostics. We have to develop our high culture: symphony orchestras, ballet, arts, paintings, sculptures, museums and so on, which we have been doing. But we must also develop our popular culture: pop singers, TV dramas (reality TV, MTV and sitcoms) - I don't watch them; sports on cable TV: football, rugby, cricket, swimming, tennis, golf, Formula One racing, whatever people find joy in watching and doing. These are activities which I do not watch. Unfortunately for me, they draw huge numbers of young and not-so-young people to participate in or watch on TV. And in today's global village, we have to be a part of it. Whatever entertainment that is watched on TV screens by millions around the world, companies will pay to advertise their products and themselves on it.”
“Today, Australians proudly proclaim themselves as multicultural and multiracial. Sydney projects itself with its Sydney Opera House as an icon of an international city. They have hosted the Olympics. Perth has a casino and also attracts many migrants from Southeast Asia, India, China and Europe. Mr Speaker, Sir, we live in a different and an ever-changing world. Singapore must become more lively, more exciting, more of a fun place, and at the same time retaining its virtues - clean, green, safe and wholesome. We can learn to limit the social fallout. In any case, we cannot prevent the outside world from affecting us. Our people travel. If we do not allow an integrated resort with a casino in Singapore, Singaporeans will still become victims frequenting casinos elsewhere, as Mr Chia Teck Leng who wrote a 20-page memorandum did. That was his story, an Asia Pacific Breweries executive who was sent to 42 years in jail for embezzling $117 million. There was no casino here. He went on cruise trips. He gave a detailed analysis of why the casino banker can never lose, that the players must collectively lose. Yet he played, knowing that the odds were against him. He explained how human weaknesses which he had, brought him down despite the clear mind that he had. Gambling pathology, like AIDS or SARS or Avian flu, cannot be prevented from affecting Singaporeans, as we all know. But we have to take measures to keep Singapore safe and clean, despite these dangerous viruses. And we have the determination and ability to handle these social problems. Yes, we have problems. We have two casinos here, we have more problems. Double? I don't think so. By one-third? Maybe. By one-half? If we are unfortunate. But look at it another way. Suppose we say no.”
“By being the first to liberalise banking laws, London pre-empted other cities in Europe to become the home of the Euro-dollar. Many American, European, Japanese, foreign banks and security firms gravitated to the city of London. And because the Americans with the world's biggest banks and the world's biggest currency resources and the biggest economy use English, now all EU banks use English for their international business; and all EU banks print their company reports in English. So British lawyers, accountants and professionals are valuable support for London's financial hub. It is now most difficult for any European city to displace London. So, incidentally, by going into English, we have given ourselves an advantage as a financial hub. When I visit London today, I see a city totally different from the London I lived in as a student in the 1940s. Then it was very British, all white, except for a sprinkling of coloured peoples from the empire. Today, the city is full of Americans, French, Germans, Europeans, Arabs, Japanese, Chinese, Indians, anybody and everybody who want to be a player in the financial services industry and many other businesses. And Singaporeans now own hotels, restaurants, bus and taxi companies in London. Tourism is flourishing. London, with 14 million people, sets out to be and is cosmopolitan, a world metropolis. On a smaller scale and in a different part of the world, Singapore must travel a similar route. To remain only as the cleanest, greenest, safest, most efficient and healthiest city in Southeast Asia, the "with it" world will pass Singapore by. When I went to Australia in 1965 for the first time, its cities had no buzz; there was no zing in the air. They were provincial towns, comparable to the British provincial towns.”
“The old model on which I worked was to create a first world city in a third world region - clean, green, efficient, pleasant, healthy and wholesome, safe and secure for everyone. These virtues are valuable but no longer sufficient. Now we also have to be not just economically vibrant, but an exciting, fascinating city to visit, with top class symphony orchestras, concerts, dramas, plays, artists, singers and popular entertainment. These are lifestyles of international professionals and executives who locate in Singapore working in multi-national banks, finance houses and other MNCs. And we want those companies who manage these entertainment troupes to include Singapore in their tour of cities around the world. My question is: can we make it? I believe, yes, if we are open to change and willing to accept new ideas. This integrated resort is only a small part in the remaking of Singapore. We will have to build a new downtown, adding lustre and colour to the present CBD, with beautiful parks, an interesting waterfront, outstanding buildings, excellent transportation and the buzz of night life. We must play host to cultural troupes from Asia and Europe. We must be the place where artists, musicians, sculptors of South, Southeast and East Asia will come to display and market their works of art. I have watched London from the 1940s till the 21st century. Up to 1960s, London was the capital of the British empire. Important. But when the British empire was dissolved by the 1960s, London was reduced to just the biggest city of the British Isles. Then London remade itself. It has been able to retain its status as a financial centre, although the pound sterling is no longer a reserve currency.”
“This is a clean, attractive, well-policed, safe city, a financial centre; no money laundering, no muggings, no thieves, no drugs. And we have to keep it that way. If we turn down their proposals, surely they will go elsewhere in the region. In any case, even if we give out two licences, the others who do not get licences will go elsewhere. Thailand? Burma, not likely. Philippines? I think, if Singapore says "no", the next best place is Thailand. Whatever we do, we can be sure that the other ASEAN countries will do. This has happened with airports, container ports, convention centres. We have one, they say, "Right. Must be a good bet." A few years later, they have one. Do we want to be second, third, fourth in this game? Most interesting for me was that Genting Berhad put in two bids, one for Marina South and another for Sentosa. They have teamed up with international partners, Universal Studios, to run a theme park for Sentosa. For Marina South, they and their sister company, Star Cruises, are prepared to commit $3 billion for the integrated resort to help establish a resort and a cruise centre in Singapore. What does it mean? It means that they must be prepared to sink $5-6 billion and watch their investments in Genting become secondary as we draw in the crowds. Therefore, I believe that the Prime Minister and the majority in Cabinet have made the right decision for Singapore's future, not just for the casino. To say, "no", after the worldwide publicity of our arguments for over a year, Singapore will be sending out the wrong signal, that we are staying put, the same old Singapore, neat and tidy like Switzerland, better than Switzerland - no chewing gum, no smoking in air-conditioned places, no this, no that, no fun of a place to visit.”
“They are going to build an integrated resort costing $2-3 billion each. Eleven out of the 19 - this is crucial for me - said that they would proceed, whether it is one or two casinos. Indeed, several said that two casinos would be better because there would be variety and competition. When people lose money at one casino, they would blame it on their bad luck at that casino and go to the next one. So both will prosper. These companies understand the psychology of gamblers. I am convinced that two integrated resorts in Singapore must depend on tourists because they cannot survive if they were to depend on Singaporeans. The projects show that potential investors expect, on the average, to earn more than two-thirds of their revenue from foreign tourists. If they turn out to be wrong, they stand to lose $2-3 billion each. And, we are not changing the rules to bail them out. This is not our money. One project required us to put in 30% of the capital. That project is out. This is a total bet by the gaming companies. Let me list out the companies. They are all on the New York Stock Exchange and some on NASDAQ - Harrah's Entertainment, MGM Mirage, Las Vegas Sands Corps which has long experience in gaming, and Wynn Resorts listed on NASDAQ. These are hard-headed business decisions. It tells me that their research leads them to bet, and they are betting as bankers, not as gamblers, that the number of visitors for an integrated resort will be huge. As people in Asia, especially in China and India, become wealthier, they will travel and visit integrated resorts. Several said that their Singapore integrated resort would be their flagship project in this part of the world. The reasons are obvious.”
“At the same time, you ask yourself, if you say no, and this is but one of many steps Singapore must take to keep abreast of the rest of the world, how do you keep ahead of the rest of the region to be a vibrant, exciting, interesting city to visit. We have to decide in this present world whether Singapore should still reject an integrated resort because it has a casino. Once upon a time, there were no cruise ships. When I said, "no", there were no Genting, and no casinos in Batam. Now, Singaporeans fly to casinos in Perth, Melbourne, Sydney, Queensland, Las Vegas, Britain, Australia, Canada, Europe. Indeed, a British Labour government last year wanted their parliament to allow 25 major Las Vegas-type integrated resort casinos. In the 1940s and 1950s, when I was a student there, that was impossible. No casinos, except in Monaco. Now it is commonplace. And, as you have heard from Mr Lim Hng Kiang and Mdm Halimah Yacob, even Switzerland has casinos - neat and tidy Switzerland. China has allowed Macau to expand its casinos by inviting Las Vegas companies and allowing mainland Chinese, by the tens of thousands, to go every day into Macau to keep the casinos prosperous and Macau booming. India has casinos in Goa. That is in India that prohibits alcohol because it is afraid people will become alcoholics. Ask ourselves: should Singapore change? Should Singapore still reject an integrated resort because it has a casino? I was in two minds. On the 22nd of March I was briefed on the projects. That was the day I launched the Marina Barrage opening. After that I went straight for the briefing. I was briefed on the 19 projects. They are serious proposals by world-class operators with world-class concepts and architects.”
“I have not changed my mind nor my basic values. But I have had to change my attitude to casinos in Singapore when it is part of an integrated resort. They said 3%-5%. It makes no difference whether it is 3%, 5% or 15%. What is important is: will it be a total plus for the economy and is it worth the price we have to pay in social cost? Whether we should proceed with an integrated resort is for the present generation of leaders to decide. The Prime Minister and the majority of his Cabinet have decided to go with two IRs. There was no unanimity. As a rule in Cabinet, you do not discuss differences because otherwise it is not possible to run a coherent government. And you will totally confuse your followers if each and every argument on every important issue, you have dissenting voices put across to the public. At the end of the day, you close ranks and carry out the policy. That debate is within the Government. If anybody feels strongly enough, then he leaves the Government, which is what people do when they feel strongly enough, just like Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, resigned from his job when President Jimmy Carter sent his forces to rescue the American hostages in Teheran. Before the action failed, he decided that it was wrong. Whether this difference reached that point was dicey, but, in the end, everybody realised that it was a very difficult decision to make. We are not bound by ideology or by religion. Each and every Minister has strong personal beliefs and convictions of what is good for his family, for Singapore, for the kind of society they want.”
“So he pays for all his runners and when they get caught, he pays for lawyers like me to defend them. It is part of the cost of running a business. When the PAP took office in June 1959, over half of our supporters were young Chinese-educated left wing types. They were fired by the anti-yellow culture movement in Communist China. And they believed it was a sure way to be rid of decadence and corruption. My Minister for Home Affairs was Mr Ong Pang Boon, also Chinese-educated, from the Confucian High School, Kuala Lumpur. And responding to grassroots sentiments, he banned all pornographic books, magazines, lighted up all the dark cubicles in bars, closed down gambling dens and arrested triad societies that supported prostitution and gambling. But I held him back from doing the impossible - to stop prostitution or gambling. I reminded him that from the founding of Singapore in 1819, seamen from all over the world looked for creature comforts when their ships were in Singapore harbour. So we left these red light districts be. But from time to time, they moved into Joo Chiat and we chased them off. But we managed. However, I supported him in smashing the gambling syndicates, "chap ji kee" and other fraudulent cheats. But when I was Prime Minister, I allowed the Turf Club to continue, Toto and 4 digits. There was no open fraud. I do not know jockeys are bribed, or horses are doped, that is another matter. On several occasions, my business friends in Hong Kong suggested that Stanley Ho, who ran casinos in Macau, would be happy to start one in Singapore. I ruled it out. I did not want to undermine Singapore's work ethic and breed the belief that people can get rich by gambling, something that is impossible because the odds are against you.”
“You then bet, whether if divided by four, the end result would be 1 or 2, or 3 or 4 beads. When all the bets had been placed, the croupier would use an 18-inch long curved bamboo stick and, as a very skilful and delightful exercise, he would deftly move four beads at a time so that everybody would watch and see that there was no cheating, leaving everybody in suspense as to the final result with his last few strokes of the bamboo stick. I did my calculations, and I majored in Mathematics in Raffles College, that if I bet 10 "banana" in Japanese dollars, and they bet by the thousands of Japanese dollars, on every number 1, 2, 3 and 4, then on an even playing field, I would not win; I would not lose, I would get my money back. But, no, you would lose because when you win, you would not get 40 dollars back. You would get 35 dollars, maybe 34, 33 or 32 dollars, depending on the banker, because he took his cut. He had got to pay for the croupier, he had got to pay a lot of people, from Japanese officers down to policemen, etc. So it was a business in which the "house" (banker) never loses, but the gambler collectively must lose. So I thought gambling is a mug's game. In the 1950s, as a young lawyer, I defended clients who were arrested for running "chap ji kee". This generation does not know what "chap ji kee" is. But it was prevalent. All housewives bet on "chap ji kee" and it is amazing how they were skimmed. They placed bets on certain numbers and at closing time, the "banker" would open up all bets and declare the winning number. He opens the bets first. He knows where the bets have been placed and he chooses the number with the lowest number and that is the winning number. How can the "banker" lose?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am anti-gambling. As a child in primary school, I saw my father become a problem gambler for several years. I watched many quarrels between my father and mother. He wanted her jewellery to pawn and gamble on "21" or black-jack to win back his losses. Fortunately for us, he gave up gambling. I have never gambled. An exception was during the war in January and February 1942. For several weeks, I had to stay up all night at Raffles College, working as a MAS (Medical Auxilliary Service) orderly, waiting to go out to tend to injured persons. I played poker with fellow undergraduates. But poker is a contest of nerves, at least, that is what I told myself, of psychology, not simply a game of chance. May I diverge to answer many of the points made by speakers in this House? What is a gamble? A gamble is where you place a bet and you have absolutely no control of the outcome - where the roulette ball will land, what cards you will get in a black-jack, or whatever. Every business you start carries risks and is a gamble. But it is a different kind of a risk which I would not call a gamble. It is risk-taking which venture capitalists and banks will finance on the basis of probabilities. During the war, with little to do in the evenings, I would wander around the Great World Amusement Park, which has now been demolished, where there was a gambling farm. The Japanese encouraged gambling farms. They encouraged opium, gambling, all the things which would keep the population docile and preoccupied. And they gave the licence to Shaw Brothers. I was fascinated to watch how totally absorbed and engrossed the gamblers were. The most popular game was "Fan Tan": the croupier would place a handful of black and white beads in a pile and half cover the pile with a bowl.”
“At the end of the day, that will be the same for the Malays, for the Indians and for all the others. S Rajaratnam was aiming for the stars. I went along with him with the pledge, and we must try to live up to the pledge. But to say, let us forget race, language, religion, culture, that is not doable. We have to accept the realities that this is what we are, and we should be grateful that we have got here in one piece. You look at our neighbours; I believe their societies are less integrated. You can see problems in Indonesia. You can see problems in Malaysia. So when they have national service, they have problems between their races, because they go to different schools, and they have different friends. We all go to the same schools. We are learning the same working language. That we are able to talk about these things now without arousing deep emotional reactions is great advance. This is where we are. How do you take it forward? I say, take note of how we have evolved, gradually, and let's evolve further. Do not go for one-stroke solutions; we may regret it.”
“We are price takers, we are not price givers. We often confuse ourselves. This is relevant to what Irene Ng said. We are not trying to be Chinese-educated. A Beijing professor recently in an article made this point. When you say zhongwen jiaoyu (Chinese education), you mean not only learning the language but learning the culture of China, the history of China and a love for China, and all this is in one package. Their textbooks inculcate their whole value system. What we are learning is the language, not necessarily the culture. Our culture will evolve over time as we become Singaporean Chinese, as Ong Ah Heng has said. I do not believe watching Phoenix or CCTV, we will absorb their culture. We will watch it just as we watch American sitcoms. That is their culture, you are not identifying with them. You begin to understand them better. But when we have our own sitcoms on Channel 8 or Channel U, that is us. Gradually over generations, we will become more what we should be. I sum up saying we cannot settle this forever. The value of the language will change, the emphasis that each parent wants for his child will change. So we will adjust our policies accordingly. I do not see Singapore giving up English as a working language because then we will perish. Nor do I see Singapore losing its mother tongues because, I think, we will all be the losers. Not just for reasons of culture, roots but for that sense of self and confidence in self. I am not an Englishman. I am not an American. I do not pretend to be one. I am Chinese but Singaporean. I do not share the values totally with the Chinese. Many of their basic values - courtesy, the various things you do, food, etc, - that is part of me, it is my heritage, nothing to do with the politics of China.”
“It is sad, but BBC has decided to go with the tide. Theirs was a class society. The BBC accent was the accent of the educated elite, the establishment. The Oxbridge public school types - spoke English that was crisp and clear, well-enunciated, not cockney English, not barrow boy English. Even the Australians are veering away from British English. I think eventually American English will infect the world. Today, I keep my spelling on Microsoft, "English (UK)". In another 20 or 30 years, "English (US)" maybe the norm. So, double "ll" or single "l"? Languages live and change. Languages impinge on you by its frequency. We are not the custodians of the Chinese language. We follow whatever standards China sets. When China went to the simplified character, jian ti zi, we said, "Let's go!". Taiwan, Hongkong stayed put. I think Hongkong will give way. Every day, I read more and more Chinese PRC notices. Taiwan is trying to create a new language. Their Romanised Mandarin is spelt their way, not pinyin - I do not know what they call it, it is a special version - and they added Hokkien words. If you watch their channels (TVBS, Zhong Tian), you will degrade your Chinese. How can 27 million people be the gold standard for Chinese? Why should Microsoft put in the effort to create these programs for 27 million people when you've got 1,300 million on the other side? So, Tamil, Urdu, Hindi, whatever it is, we will follow the custodians. For Malay, we follow Malaysia. Over time, maybe not 10 years, 20 years, but 50 years, the number of publications in Bahasa Indonesia, which is a different language with a different diction, different rhythm. We may follow them. They will influence us. So we will move from Melayu Baku to whatever they set. We are users.”
“These are the realities of life. I read recently in Zaobao about the 130th anniversary of Tan Kah Kee's death. His grandchildren cannot speak Hokkien or Mandarin. It would have saddened him, but they have to live, they have to work, they have to adjust to the world. Let me wind up by giving you my perspective of where we are. We are not the custodians of either the English language, the Malay language or the Tamil language, or Gujarati, Hindi, whatever. We are just the users. We adopt their standards and try to approximate them. Irene Ng must understand this. For English, our gold standard was Britain. But you look ahead, another 50 years, and you see the volume of books, magazines, literature, TV; businessmen, tourists, interchange with Americans, our English will gradually be Americanised. When I listen to our radio, they are picking up American pronunciations. "Inquiry" - it jars with me. I am British educated - "in quiry", "inventory"; not "in ven tory" (that is American). It jars with me, because it sounds uncouth. But can you defeat American speech? It is everywhere. Newsreaders do not know. They do not look up the English pronunciation dictionary. They do not click on the little microphone and press it for the electronic voice. We use wrong words, have wrong pronunciation; or mangle up names! The American spoken language will dominate. It's happening to the British. They are picking up "inventory" as the Americans pronounce it, and on BBC. Canadian English is close to American, a variant of American. The Australians are a variant of the British. Our English is influenced by our dialects, Malay, Tamil. I tried hard to get BBC English put across on our news. But BBC has abandoned BBC English. You hear strange accents on BBC.”
“Because we are English speaking, because we have connections with the English speaking world - US, Japan, Europe, India, Australia, New Zealand, large parts of the English-speaking world. That is our value add. We know the outside world better than they do. So we are a valuable partner. We bring something to the table. We can speak their language. We understand them, but speak not as good as they do, but that is OK. What is my value to them? Why do they talk to me? Because my Mandarin is good? No. Once we talk business, I talk in English. But I know a lot about management, the political stance of the US, Europe, Japan, etc. Will they learn all this, yes, because they are now going all over the world - in America, Europe, Japan, Latin America. They are building harbours and ports for the Brazilians, buying up factories, mines, from Brazil, Argentina and so on. They are everywhere. Will we be as useful in future? It is difficult to say. I think at the top they will learn much that we know. But in South East Asia, we are still the specialists. We live here. That is why I say, do not lose our regional connections and bahasa, Malay. They will never understand this region like we do, because we are part of this region. That is our value add. They cannot take that away from us. So, 50 years from now, they may know about America better than we do because they have got more people there than our few in the Embassy and our businessmen. They are outnumbering the Taiwanese in America and in Europe. But in South East Asia, they will send many but they come as adults. We grew up with people in the region. So, as Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong said, let us have exchange programmes with Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, and so on. Let us maintain that link, which will be a value add.”
“In 1955, half the school-going population was doing Mandarin. They went on to university and they were the Chinese educated elite. They could produce these crisp pun wen yen - literary stuff. This has gone. They are a shrinking community. It cannot be helped. We will replenish them with people from China who become our citizens, PRs, work permit holders. But what we must do is to keep up Mandarin as a living language, spoken and read. Type pinyin, yes. But write beautiful essays in Chinese, very few. There are some who have done Chinese in NUS are now reporters in Zaobao or MediaCorp, some in Beijing where they brush up their Chinese. But are they equal to the Chinese in Beijing? No. I know the difference. They are passable. But English is 90%, Chinese is about 50% of my counterpart in China. Their Chinese is about 80% of their counterparts. But they have English which their Chinese counterparts do not have. You have to decide what is it that you want, what balance between the two. If you want your master language as Chinese, that it is more advantageous than English, the SAP schools will give more Chinese, and you go for the bilingual/bicultural programme. But if your English is not up to mark and you miss your job chances, that is your choice. Our system will evolve and adjust with changing circumstances. It is the best way to do it. Let me add this word of caution, a caveat. Let us assume that you spend all your time mastering Chinese to be as good as the Chinese in China - language, culture, poetry, history, whatever. What is your value add to China? They have 1,300 million. Do they need an extra Singaporean as a professor, journalist or businessman? Why are we useful? Ask the people who have been there.”
“I ask them, "Where did you learn your Chinese?" They said, "CL2". I asked, "Do you need a translator?" They said, "No." I asked, "Can you read the documents?" They said, "Yes." Not when they first started, but now they could. A woman lawyer, aged 40, was sent by her firm to Shanghai, a NUS graduate, with CL2. She decided to polish up her Mandarin, went to Fudan University. Today, she can do contracts in Chinese, because she had that second language base. They are testimony that the second language was a valuable foundation for them. Those who say that our second language policy has failed, I say you look at the TV and radio listeners and viewership. Every locally produced Chinese TV programme has more viewers than any locally produced English programme. Chinese TV news have more viewers than English. But in reading, Zaobao is losing out, because English is easier to read, faster, and they are reading English every day at work. They read the English newspapers. They buy the Chinese newspapers for their children to read, hoping that they will pick up their Chinese. They themselves find it a burden. I have read the comments in the pin lun (Commentary) page of Zaobao. I empathise with their sense of sadness, of resignation, that we are losing that core of people who will keep up high standards in written Chinese. Zaobao has to keep on lowering its level of literary excellence. It cannot be helped. You cannot maintain it. Ask the older editors and reporters, "Can your children do what you did?" They cannot. They are bilingual and their master language is English. So the sadness is that of a group that understands because our working language is English, that elite Chinese educated layer they had when half the population studied Chinese is gone.”
“But because we could get our ideas across, it made the difference. It is a difficult language but now we have the electronic tools which I am using. I've got Power Word. I can go to Lianhe Zaobao on line. Any word or phrase that I do not understand, I just point the cursor and the English translation comes out. If I do not know the pronunciation, I press the loudspeaker, an electronic voice reads it out for me. If I am not sure what tone it is, I click a little symbol and the character comes out with the pinyin and the tone. I've got another tool given by another teacher. I can write my speeches without anybody helping me in Chinese. If I do not know one word, I type it in English and it offers me a series of different words and phrases in Chinese, to choose from. I do not have to write the character. I just type in pinyin, it will come out. So, why do we want to get our children to sweat their guts out learning to write 2,000 or 2,500 characters? When I ask my teacher, "Write that word for me." From time to time - and he spent all his life teaching Chinese - he hesitates and says, ah wang le. He takes the dictionary to look it up because he is not writing any more. He is typing in pinyin with Microsoft software. So give them all these tools. They can listen, speak, read. Write, later on, in pinyin. Make it as hassle free as possible. Let them develop a facility in the language. Get them to like the language. Later on in life, they can pick it up and build on it. If I had all these aids when I started learning in 1942, how much easier it would have been! I would not have got my neighbour to teach me Mandarin that he pronounced in Teochew. But has our second language policy been a failure? No. When I go to China I meet our people doing business there.”
“So every time we deal with them, once we come to serious business, I speak in English. A very wise acknowledgement of my limitations. You cannot compare yourself with them. Let me give a simple illustration. My English, because I have spent all my life with the English Language, I would say, it is about 85-90% of my equivalent counterpart in England. Supposing I had been an Englishman, lived in England, worked the language, it would be 100%. I do not have that, because I am using other languages. How do I know? Because the class that graduated with me went on to become QCs. When I talk to them, I know they have beautiful phrases at their finger tips, when in court. Because they are working in their language. It is like playing tennis. They are playing tennis at Wimbledon and we are playing tennis at the South East Asian Games - a different level. When they smash the ball at 150 miles per hour, can you take it? It is very quick repartee, smooth, crisp. But I am happy. If you ask me to start all over again, I say that without Chinese and Malay, we are done for. Why do I say that? Without my Chinese, we would have lost the election in 1963 and the whole history of Singapore would have been different. I needed the Hokkien and Mandarin. Without my Malay, how could I speak to Suharto alone - no interpreter? How could I make a speech in the Malaysian Parliament in Malay? At the last meeting in the Malaysian Parliament, I said, "You are going to make Malay the national language." I spoke in Malay half way through. "You tell me how, my speaking to you now in Malay, increases the price of padi or the rubber tapper's salary?" If I had not been able to speak in Malay, they would not have considered the PAP a significant problem.”
“It was a bet on the future. The changes in this White Paper will remove the drudgery of learning Mandarin - the rote learning, memorising words, phrases, mo xie, ting xie. I do not write my speeches. I make my drafts in English. They translate and type it. I can read it. And I would say, "No. That is too literary (tai wen), change it, make it colloquial." I cannot write it, but I know that is not the way I want to say it. That is good enough. My advice to Mrs Gan is, do not negotiate with the Chinese in Chinese. My Chinese is very elementary. But I know enough to know that the other person's absolutely scintillates; his phrases are so precise, succinct; they sparkle. If you negotiate with them in their language, you will lose - always have an interpreter. When we have dinner, to chit-chat, that is fine. When we are talking terms and conditions, English is my language, please translate. My translator is not good enough, not as good as yours, you translate. But, of course, you have the empathy, the bonhomie over dinner and drinks; that is useful. Dr Winsemius, the Dutchman who helped us with our economic development, advised me before I went to China. He said, "Never negotiate in any language other than the one you are most capable in." He said he spoke French, German, Dutch, English. But he negotiates in Dutch. Our two ambassadors in Beijing, No. 1, Cheng Tong Fatt and No. 2, Chin Siat Yoon, both Chinese school educated - xiao xue, dao gao zhong san. Their Chinese is OK. But can they compare, are they equal to the Chinese officials they deal with? Not a chance. How can you? They spend all their time, from the day they are born with that one language and in a very rarefied literary atmosphere. Jiang Zeming quotes Tang poems, can you do that? He can just rattle them off.”
“That is why we have offered this series of options. You decide. What is best for a good future for your children? We have to abandon this one-size-fits-all. Motivation is the crucial factor. I learnt it because I was powerfully motivated. It was a matter of life and death. If I did not learn Mandarin, how could I hold Tanjong Pagar? How could I be an Assemblyman? How could I be Secretary-General of the PAP? I simply had to learn it. If I did not learn Hokkien, how could I have fought in Hong Lim in 1961, the Referendum in 1962, tour all the constituencies and carried the ground because I got my ideas across? It is motivation. What is the motivation now? As Mr Low Thia Khiang rightly pointed out, China now makes it a language with economic advantages. So we do not have to tell parents, you better do that. When we talked about culture, roots, they were thinking of jobs, security, future. They will not tell you this in public, because it is loss of face diu lian, but that is their calculation. My advice to them is: you decide, but do not aim too low. If you aim too low for your child, you may regret it. Nobody can predict which language will be of the greatest value. I thought I knew, so I advised my elder son to do Russian. Having mastered Chinese, English and Malay, I said, "Do Russian." So he did Russian for his 'O' levels. I said, "You are going to do mathematics. Russians are good mathematicians and chess masters. Learn it." He passed his 'O' levels. Took dictation in Russian, got a distinction. Today, it is lost. I asked him, "When you were sitting next to Putin, did you understand him?" He said, "No." Because since 1971, when he went to Moscow, on his way to Cambridge, he stopped using the language. That was 30-plus years and it was only at 'O' levels.”
“My Chinese teacher said, yes, his children, when they have a real argument with him - his son who was completely Chinese-educated, speaking Chinese at home, went to NTU, went abroad for his education, he would break into English because English is his master language. What has happened to our society? Every parent wants the best for their children. So they are switching to English at home to give their children that added advantage. If you start learning English at home, then your Chinese will go down, unless they are very sure that they are able to pick up English on their own, which is not very easy. What has happened to my grandchildren? They went to the same kindergarten and primary school, Nanyang Kindergarten (you zhi yuan) and Nanyang Primary School (xiao xue). But when I speak to them in Mandarin, they give short replies and they switch to English. They are more comfortable in English. I met Wee Cho Yaw. He said, "Terrible. I speak to my grandchildren, they reply to me in English." And his sons are Chinese-educated at Hwa Chong. What has changed? Because the children in Nanyang you zhi yuan and Nanyang xiao xue now speak to each other in English. Where is the language environment? Is it the children's fault? No. So I think Koo Tsai Kee is quite intelligent. He sent his children to a heartland kindergarten, HDB housing estate kindergarten. I do not know whether he will also send them to a neighbourhood primary school. You need that language environment, but that is vanishing. As more and more of those parents become English-competent, they will switch. Why should my child lose the chance of that scholarship or that job because he is speaking Chinese all the time and his English is not as good and he cannot score as much? That is the problem.”
“I used to believe that you can learn two languages at the same time, whatever your IQ. I was wrong. You have to master one language enough to read and to absorb knowledge, lessons in all the other subjects. If you have no master language, and you cannot absorb your mathematics, history, science, geography, either in English or Chinese. You are done for. I did not know that. I said, spread the time. If you spread the time, the child has not got the mastery of any one language, so he is lost. How does he learn his geography, history, mathematics, science, biology, etc? Once we make English a working language, he has to master English. And not all, as I have said, will master it properly, because at the lower end, 10-15% will still have Mandarin as their master language. Another fact which I learned was that you can have the same IQ, score the same marks in science, mathematics and other subjects, but your linguistic skills are different. Girls are better at languages than boys. That is statistically proven. And even between boys, some are more able linguistically. Now, with MRI scanners, they have found that those who are good at the second language have got an extra bit of the brain which is active when they use the second language. Did I know all this? I did not. My ambition was high. I shared with Pierre Trudeau, to make all bilingual. He wanted French and English and I wanted English and Chinese, or Malay or Tamil. It is difficult. Let me explain how difficult it is. I learnt Mandarin and I spoke to my children in Mandarin. They spoke to their mother in English. I was practising my Mandarin, she was making sure that they understood English. But when they were age 15-16, my Mandarin was not enough to get my intellectual concepts across. So I had to switch to English.”
“Many Members have been to Hong Kong and Taiwan. They speak Chinese - Cantonese in Hong Kong; Mandarin in Taiwan, but now going back to Hollow Whey - Hokkien, creating a new language. How many are bilingual? In Hong Kong, because it was a British colony, about 5-10%. Really bilingual and competent in both languages? Less than 5%. In Taiwan, many have gone to American universities, PhDs - some 3% of population. Can they speak fluent English? Recently, I met Ma Yinjiu, Harvard-educated. He is now the Mayor of Taipei. He was Jiang Jingguo's English secretary. He used to tell me, "I read all your letters to Jiang Jingguo", because I wrote to Jiang Jingguo in English, Jiang Jingguo replied in Chinese. He translated my Chinese. Because I was not confident of our translation, I sent mine in English for them to translate. When he came recently, he was more comfortable speaking to me in Mandarin, because Mandarin now is his master language. When campaigning, he has learned Hollow Whey, the native dialect to win votes. In Hong Kong, they want to learn Mandarin, Cantonese and English. They teach Cantonese in schools, and want to learn English and Mandarin. It is quite an ambitious project for the general population. What will happen in Singapore? My guesstimate: If we do this right, we will have about 10% of the population reasonably good in English and Mandarin, another 40% reasonably competent in English and Mandarin, the lower 50%, so-so in English, and so-so in Mandarin. But the lowest, maybe 10-20%, their Mandarin better than their English, because that is the language that they use at home and they will read the Chinese papers. Am I confident we can do that? Only if we make the effort and have that desire to keep the language alive. Let me explain the depth of the problem.”
“I am very interested in this, because I was experimenting with Singaporeans. I went to Luxembourg in 1975 or 1976. The Luxembourgese are very proud. They speak Luxembourgese, their native dialect; they also speak German, on the east, and French, on the west. And because of their banking and financial centre, they were learning English. They go to universities either in Germany or France. They do not have any of their own. I thought a wonderful place. I looked at their newspapers, each is an apology of a newspaper. I do not know French or German, but I know English and when I looked at the English, I said, "Oh, this is not a newspaper." It is rudimentary. Only the top few speak two languages well, not three, and they know a little bit of the others. I went to Mauritius in 1979. Mauritius was French. After the Napoleonic wars in 1824, the French surrendered it to the British. The British undertook to allow the French to continue teaching the French language. So the French kept sending teachers. The Prime Minister was a good friend of mine, a nice Indian gentleman called Dr Ramgoolam, educated in Britain, spoke English with a French accent. He was an ambitious man. Once they got independence, he said, "We will have a third language" - Hindi, Tamil, Gujarati, Chinese and Creole. Creole is their pidgin, descendants of the slaves and the mixed blood speaking a French pidgin with native languages. You would have thought it is wonderful. I looked at the newspapers. No, it was only a few at the top who were bilingual. Some of their ministers, because the British charged full fees, went to France for their university education. Half their ministers were French educated. But what about the general populace? Campaigning, was in Creole and English. We can go on ad infinitum.”
“When he gave a press conference in Ottawa and was questioned in English, he spoke like an Englishman - understated, stiff upper lip, restrained. When questioned in French, he gesticulated with expressive fingers like Jacques Chirac. I watched him in amazement. He wanted to solve the Quebec separatist problem by making all Canadians bilingual in French and English. And they are closely related languages. I shared his view and ambition. Yes, English and Chinese, more difficult. But I now know it is not possible. Because 40 years on, Canada has not succeeded. It is taught in schools. You can in any Canadian court speak in French and they will have to produce you a French-speaking judge. You can give your evidence in French. In parliament, you can speak French. All documents are in English and French. English-speaking Canadians are fed up with it. It is over-loading them. I once asked him, "What is your master language?", because he is so good at both. He said, "When I am campaigning in Quebec and speaking French, French is my master language. When I am campaigning in the west, speaking English [which is Columbia, Alberta] English is my master language." I did not understand him at that time. I said, "I thought you are both. They are there." No, it is there and it is not there, because you are not using it every day. I was happy Members were honest and said, "Look, I lost it." As John Chen said, now he goes to China, he can do it in Chinese. He has improved. He went to Chinese schools for 12 years. Using English, his Chinese declined. But he did it young, so easy retrieval. Revival is easier. The roots have gone deep. My roots are those of a transplanted tree, not deep. The tap root is not deep enough. Now I know that to make a whole society bilingual is not possible.”
“That was in 1939. In 1946, I started law studies and had to revive my Latin. Can you do this? English, Malay, Mandarin, Hokkien, Japanese, Latin - six languages? The language environment has changed. In the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, I had ample opportunities to speak in Mandarin - at my CC, MCs, the people I meet - in Hokkien and Mandarin. Now, 95% of my time is English. If I am not careful, my investment in Mandarin will rust away. So, every week, I meet my teacher - he has been teaching me for 30 years - not teaching, just chatting, making sure that it is kept alive. I watch television and read the papers. Do I read the Chinese paper Zaobao thoroughly? No. The speed at which I read English is three times the speed at which I read Chinese. It is as simple as that. So what do I do when I read Zaobao? I see how they have displayed the news, because I have read the news already in English - Wall Street Journal, Herald Tribune, Straits Times and others online. I want to see how they have presented the news, which headline, what picture. Then, the pin lun, the commentary page, who is commenting on what. That I will read, because that is special - commentaries about Taiwan, China and Hong Kong which are not carried in the English press. So, bilingualism is not easy. I recount this to show you how I shared this ambition of a bilingual population with the late Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. I was in Canada on my way to Harvard in November 1968. He sent an aircraft from British Columbia to take me to Ottawa to chat with me for a few days. He had just come into office. He was a French Canadian, with a French father and an Irish mother. He spoke both languages brilliantly. He was educated in Quebec, LSE in London, and a Paris university.”
“Nevertheless, till today, come election time Low Thia Khiang is able to carry Hougang because kong Teochew wa. But that is a vanishing generation. Twenty years from now, few will understand it. You will have to speak English or Mandarin, and you will have more listeners in English than Mandarin, because we are multiracial. So it is a changing language environment. Let me add that you can learn all these languages but, to be able to use them, you have to have them at your fingertips. In other words, you have to use them frequently. I refused to learn Japanese. In the end, I was forced to, because I could not get a job. So, I became a copy typist in a Japanese firm. The owner was a friend of my grandfather. It was a textile firm called Shimoda & Co. Fortunately for me, as a copy typist, I learned how to write Chinese characters, and I learned touch-typing. So, when I went to the computer, it was a great help. I revived my typing skills. But can I speak Japanese now? At the end, in 1945, I could translate Japanese into English, and not so well from English into Japanese. After I became Senior Minister, no longer Prime Minister, when in Tokyo, I toyed with the idea of reviving my Japanese. So I told our Ambassador to get me Japanese books to revive my Japanese. He bought me the books. I started re-learning. Hiragana katakanan and so on. After a while, I said to myself, "What am I trying to do?" I am talking to the Japanese in English, and his English, not as good as mine, or he gets an interpreter. Why I am learning Japanese and pushing out my English, Chinese and my Malay, that I need. So I closed the books. Anybody who wants to learn Japanese, I will let him have the books. I learned Latin. I was the only boy in class to pass with a credit. Self-taught. Forgot all of it.”
“" I can tell you - this was in March 1961 - if I did not learn Hokkien, the rest of history would have been different. Every day, in spite of my work, I learned Hokkien. My basis was my Mandarin. And my teacher was a real Hokkien scholar, Seah Cheng Tit, producer of Radio Singapore Hokkien programmes. And he could teach me the pronunciation and the tone, seven different tones in Hokkien, romanised by missionaries. I learned like mad. My first speech was in China Street, a street rally. Lots of kids around - first meeting was in March/April - because they all lived in one-room cubicles, there was nothing to do at night, they would go and watch an election rally, crowd around a lorry. I spoke in Hokkien. They laughed hilariously. I said, Gin nai mia chio, wah bai oh, chia wu bian kai lo kong, in wee gua wu chit kwa chu tiong yar ei tai zi beh hor lo chai yan. I practised this with Seng Han Thong to bring it back. Because I used Hokkien frequently, Hokkien become my second language. From 1961 to 1963, touring all the constituencies, and at every National Day Rally I spoke in Hokkien. I reached out to the largest crowd. But we were teaching Mandarin in schools and I was setting a bad example speaking in Hokkien. Many parents believed their children could learn Mandarin, speak dialect at home and learn English. It did not work out. So, I decided to stop Hokkien. I wrote off my investment of 20 years of effort. I switched off all dialect programmes from television and radio. It was very harsh. I started a "Speak Mandarin" campaign. I heard Goh Choon Kang recently explaining why the "Speak Mandarin" campaign was a failure. He is wrong. It is a success. The first "Speak Mandarin" campaign was to get people to switch from dialect to Mandarin. It succeeded.”
“For the other children, kindergarten, Nanyang Xiao Xue; the girl, Nanyang Nu Zhong; the boy, Catholic High and National Junior College. For their "A" levels, the two decided to switch to English. My daughter did not want to learn biology in Chinese and then learn to be a doctor using English textbooks. So there are limits. I realised that quickly. I encouraged them but never pressed them to breaking point. They learned Chinese in school, learned English at home, and they also learned Malay. It was not just the teacher teaching them Malay, the cikgu who was teaching in Kampong Jagoh got my son, Hsien Loong, to join a Malay group. I said, "Get him into a Malay group." So, he joined the Kampong Jagoh Wolf Cub Troop. It was a living language, talking to people in Malay, to young boys like him. So it was not just lessons in Malay. He was young, he picked up the rhythm and the accent. He took his "O" levels, never used it. He went into politics, and it came back. But my Chinese, if I lose it, it goes rusty, it is very difficult to get it back. By the 1959 general elections, I could make speeches in Mandarin. Unfortunately, at that time, the majority of the audience understood Hokkien. You reached the largest number of people in Hokkien. So our Hokkien speakers, the first was Lim Chin Siong. He was arrested and detained. Then we had Ong Eng Guan, a good Hokkien speaker. He became the first Mayor of Singapore. By 1961, he wanted to be the leader, found some excuse, quarrelled with the party and resigned. A by-election in Hong Lim. By that time, we could not trust Lim Chin Siong because we knew he was on the other side. So Goh Keng Swee saw me and said, "No choice. You better learn Hokkien. You will be our Hokkien speaker. Otherwise, we will have no end to this problem.”
“But my next crisis was in 1955, because my opponent, Lam Thian, a Hakka, like me, challenged me to a debate in Mandarin in Tanjong Pagar. What could I do? Should I speak Cantonese? Because I could speak some Cantonese with my maid servants at home. I debated this furiously with my wife. She said, "Don't. This is kitchen Cantonese. Don't try this." So I got hold of a Chinese left wing reporter from Sin Pao, a pro-communist newspaper. I said, "Can you do a speech for me in Chinese, one page in Mandarin." He did. I said, "Make it simple, so I can read the characters." The problem was the pronunciation. I furiously learned the pronunciation. And I remember one phrase that he put down, one little proverb gua yang tou mai gou rou to criticise my opponent, Lam Thian, who was a capitalist pretending to be a socialist. I sweated blood - 20,000 people in Kreta Ayer - and my first speech in Mandarin. They saw me struggle, they cheered me. I knew, I would win. And I did. I slogged like mad every day - because I was the Secretary-General of the PAP, I was a Member of the Legislative Assembly, I had to meet people; every day one to two hours, I learned Mandarin. Who was my teacher? A PAP branch member who was a communist. He was told to convert me. So we had a simple textbook - Ren Sheng Guan, very interesting little book - Marxism made easy. So, I learned all the left wing phrases which were most useful, because I knew what they were saying, and I could also produce them. At that time, I had to decide what to do with my children. I said, "Don't send them to English school. They will suffer like me." Starting with my eldest boy, lessons began at home at the age of 3, then kindergarten, two, three years, Nanyang Xiao Xue, then Catholic High, 12 years.”
“Here was this teacher mumbling away in some dialect-accented Mandarin, I did not understand a word of it. So after two months I persuaded my mother to send me to Telok Kurau English School. She did. Sometimes, I regretted having done that because I paid for it later on - in 1955, when I went to Tanjong Pagar to contest my first election - and I have been paying for it ever since. My grandmother said, "Go to the village school." There was a small fishmen's village behind my house in Siglap. It was a one-man teacher in an attap house, and all the fishermen's children were learning brush work. I sat there for two, three months, learned nothing. I gave it up. I scored well in English, did not need Malay, learned Latin in school because I wanted to be a lawyer. I did it for my Junior Cambridge and Senior Cambridge, without that, you could not become a lawyer in those days. My first crisis was when the Japanese captured Singapore. I did not know Japanese and I got smacked and hit. But I hated them so much that I did not want to learn Japanese. I saw that they had these notices with Kanji on it. So I said, "Okay, I'll learn Chinese to understand what they are saying in the written form." I bought up the books - there was a school in Prinsep Street teaching Chinese through English - four books. There was Chiang Ker Chiu "Mandarin Made Easy", and "advanced Mandarin", and so on. I studied it with a dictionary - Chinese/English, English/Chinese - self-taught, learned how to write the characters. I must have learned about 2,000 words in about six to eight months. I had a neighbour who spoke Teochew, got him to teach me. But he was teaching me Teochew. So I refused to take it in because I would learn the wrong pronunciation.”
“Those who achieve that level are simultaneous interpreters at the UN; they spend all their time juggling with words, grammar and idioms from one language to another. Then how do you make a living. How to learn hi-tech, the economy, and so many other subjects. I will begin by describing the learning of languages that I went through, and I put my children through. The acid test is, what would you do to your children? Think that over carefully. I thought it over very carefully with my wife, and I decided we would make them Chinese educated. They would learn English at home. We were confident of that. We thought, at that time, when they went to Chinese kindergarten that they would be more fluent in Mandarin than in English. In the end, it turned out the other way, because the home influence was profound and, after university, in English, they worked in English. So their master language today is English. I tell all parents, "Look at your child carefully. Consider how much he can take - one or the other - and decide what you want." I will give you a series of options. You want Chinese as your master language, go ahead. You want English, how much. And how much Chinese. A series of options. But remember the choice is yours. If you make the wrong decision over your child's capability, do not blame the Government. The teachers will give you their recommendations, "Do EM3, EM2, EM1, your choice, but you take the consequences." Why do we do that? Because this is a highly emotive issue. I started off in a Chinese school, Choon Guan School in Joo Chiat. My grandmother wanted me to be educated in Chinese. I hated it. At home my mother spoke to me in English and some Peranakan Malay. I spoke to the village kids in Hokkien and Malay.”
“But Rajaratnam was aiming too high - it cannot be achieved easily. Had I known all the difficulties of bilingualism in 1965 as I know now today, would I have done it differently? Yes, in its implementation, not in its policy. I do not regret the stress and the heavy burdens I put, because the other way would have been a destruction of our whole cultural base, the chance to build up some form of culture which is worth preserving. This way, over time, we will learn, maybe in 100 years, five generations. We may be able to evolve a certain Singaporean culture, but not one which will bridge all the races. Not possible. We might bridge some of the other races, but religion is a very powerful cultural factor. I know of no non-Muslim society in this world that has been able to assimilate its Muslims into their society. Not even China. The Chinese absorbed the Jews. There is a place in Jiangsu called Yangzhou where there were Jews. But there are no more Jews. They have been absorbed into Chinese society. But you can go to Beijing, you can go to Yunnan, you can go to Xinjiang, and there are mosques. They are not assimilated. So there are limits. Within these limits, we find a way forward. Many views have been expressed. I do not intend to reply to what Mr Chiam or Mr Low Thia Khiang have said. This is my view and the people of Singapore have to decide who has the experience, the knowledge and the judgment to do the right thing, whose view to take. I am satisfied, if they just read me. I say, "You decide." What I am saying to all parents is: you make up your mind, just how much English you want for your child and how much Chinese. But, remember, the more English, the less Chinese; the more Chinese, the less English. There is no such thing as 100% English, 100% Chinese.”
“Would you want to go to a national type school and be taught in Malay and increasingly, also caught up in teaching of the Koran and so on? I have been berated all these years by the Chinese-educated in Malaysia for having killed Chinese education. I am a convenient excuse for letting off their frustrations. They are not really hating me. They are saying, "Look. Please don't go that way in Malaysia." If you have a unified system based on the national language, that will be a big problem for the Chinese community. It is not a problem here because I never forced anybody into the English stream. They could have chosen Chinese as their primary language and English as a secondary language. But career prospects determined what they chose. Will we ever become completely homogeneous, a melange of languages and cultures? No. Why did we take this route? Because we have no other choice. If we have only English and we allowed the other languages to atrophy and vanish, we face a very serious problem of identity and culture. We are learning the English Language, but we are not absorbing western culture. Western culture, just incidental, over TV, and higher culture in the higher literature. But the basic culture is still native. Therefore, an understanding of your native language, even though it is not your master language, gives an appreciation of the proverbs, of the sayings, of the aphorisms, gives you that sense of identity. How do I know this? Because I learned Chinese late in life, and I rediscovered snatches of what I heard when my parents, my grandparents said, "Ah! yes, that was what they meant." It resonates, pulled at my heartstrings. Would I want to see it lost? Absolutely not! So I sympathise with you, I empathise with you.”
“Bashi nian. Zuihou yipi. Last batch. It was so bad that when a Nanyang graduate applied for a job, he would produce his school certificate. Because employers knew that the Nanyang graduates of the 1950s and 60s were not the same as the Nanyang graduates of the late 70s. The quality students had moved across to English schools. Do we allow this to go on? What was the solution? We tried to convert Nantah from within, get the teachers to lecture in English because they all had American PhDs. They could not. They had lost their English fluency. So we moved the whole campus into University of Singapore. The students had a terrible time! I met them, I encouraged them. But 70% made the grade and passed their final examinations. When they passed, we asked them: do you want a Nanyang University degree or a University of Singapore degree? They chose a University of Singapore degree, because there was a market for that. We decided to merge the two universities and made it the National University of Singapore. You can see from the coat of arms, the Nanyang's five circles and the University of Singapore's lion. It is now 20-plus years since the first batch of NUS students, 1981. Has it ceased to be an issue, politically? I do not think so. Endless requests to go back to old Nanyang University, to drop out the "Technical" from the university name. Why? Sentiment. Not only that, the Malaysian graduates want teaching to be restored in Mandarin. It is a very powerful, emotive issue. And it is a very powerful, emotive issue still in Malaysia where nearly 100% of Chinese students are now in Chinese private primary schools without any government support or very little of it. Why? Because it is a question of identity, of culture and of future prospects.”
“For Malays, nearly all of them spoke Malay at home; so they were happy. Was that policy right or wrong? If you bring me back to 1965, I would say that is the policy I would still adopt. So I take primary responsibility. The whole Cabinet deliberated on this - we agreed on this - but I was the Prime Minister and I took primary responsibility. Did I legislate it; you go to English school, and Chinese as a second language. I think we would have lost the next election. Because after Independence, the enrolment for Chinese schools increased; 1966, over 55%. Many parents thought, "Yes. Let's do Chinese now. We are out of Malaysia." I left it alone. By the 1970s, the job market decided what parents chose, and the rush began to English schools. You can look up the statistics in the Education Ministry, and you will know what decided the parents' decision. It became so rapid that I had no choice but to urge parents to go slow, because we could not produce enough English teachers. How do you convert Chinese language teachers into English language teachers? Anyway, from a trickle, to a flow, to a flood. So I faced the problem of Nanyang University. By 1978, Nanyang University was in dire straits. I do not know when Low Thia Khiang graduated. Ji nian qian?”
“We introduced mother tongue in the English schools for those who are in English schools, and we gradually introduced English into Malay schools and Tamil schools. When we became independent in 1965, the Chinese Chamber of Commerce committee came to see me in my office then at City Hall. They urged me to have Chinese as our national and official language. I looked them in the eye and said, "You must be mad, and I don't want to hear any more of that from you. If you do, you are entering the political arena. I have to fight you. Because Singapore will come apart." Supposing I had been otherwise inclined, which my colleagues would not have allowed, and had said, "Yes, OK." What would have happened to Singapore? Where would the Malays be, and the Indians, what future would they have? The English-educated Chinese would also be against us. The country would fall apart. Let us assume that we were all Chinese, no Malays, no Indians. Could we make a living with Chinese as our language of government and our national language? Who is going to trade with us? What do we do? How do we get access to knowledge? There was no choice. Having made English the working language of government and administration, what do we do about the mother tongues? If we had no set policy and allowed free market practices, free choice, all mother tongues would have eventually vanished. Because the first business of any parent is to make sure that his or her child can make a living. It is as simple as that. Therefore, we decided that however unpleasant, however contrary to the concept of a homogeneous society, each racial group would learn his mother tongue as a second language. Most unhappy for English-speaking Chinese homes and, I am sure, also for Indian homes.”
“You can see them on television; they make an effort. So CNN has an anchor woman who is an Afro American. The person who presents the weather forecast on CNN is an Afro American. The British are trying the same. They have Indians now broadcasting on BBC. But go to Britain, is it really like that, or is this some form of affirmative action? So it is a very gradual process. Start off from where we were, let us say after the war, 1945, or even 1965. We were in different communal groups - Malay kampongs, Chinese villages. You would see Hainanese at Lorong Tai Seng, Malays in Kampong Ubi, and so on. Mr Rajaratnam was the exponent of "we can create a race of Singaporeans". Idealistically, I would go along with him. But, realistically, I knew it was going to be one long hard slog; maybe we'll never get there, but we should try. Ask yourself this question. If your child brings back a boyfriend or a girlfriend of a different race, will you be delighted? I will answer you frankly. I do not think I will. I may eventually accept it. So it is deep in the psyche of a human being. Before we entered Malaysia when we negotiated the terms of entry, education, language and culture were such important subjects. We knew the way Malaya was going with Malay as the national language. Had we not had education excluded from Federal jurisdiction, there would have been a no vote in favour of merger. Right from the start, 1961-1962, education was already a red hot issue. What did we do as a Government? From 1959 to 1965, we had a laissez-faire policy. We inherited from the British, English schools, Malay schools, Tamil schools and other schools.”