Low Thia Khiang
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, my question is for the Minister for Health. The official communication channel to the people who subscribe to the WhatsApp group quoted the Prime Minister saying that "Experts think that the Wuhan virus may be less deadlier than SARS". So, can we have some verification whether this is true so far?”
“In Mandarin, Sir. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] So, Member Mr Gan Thiam Poh meant to say that although the Minister has the decision-making power under this Bill, you can still go to Court to challenge the decision.”
“Mr Speaker, clarification in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I have stated clearly that the Government already has a lot of power under existing legislation. They can even shut down websites.”
“(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] First and foremost, you must follow the Minister's decision to take down the message, you cannot go to Court. According to this Bill, you must comply with the Minister's order. Otherwise, you will be charged.”
“In Mandarin, Sir. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Our Secretary-General is in the Committee. He told us about the contents of the Committee's discussion, so we know what was discussed in the Committee.”
“(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] You assume that the Minister will not do this, but is your assumption correct? It may be correct now, but will it be correct in the future? Even the Minister cannot guarantee that, he said he cannot be sure that future governments will not abuse their power. Can you be sure?”
The complete record
Every one of 2,669 lines we hold for Low Thia Khiang, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 36 of 54.
“They pay special attention to look after the financial community and big companies, and to provide money making companies a lot of rebates and special tax tariffs, tax concession and so on and so forth and to be exempted from certain taxes like GST. But to the small and medium sized enterprises, the Government has not given any specific measures to help them tide over the present difficulties. Finally, what we must pay attention to is that there is a special feature in the Budget that the Government wants to provide for $125 million to provide for some new programmes. I feel, in principle, that all kinds of provisions must be clearly stated for their objectives. And without the specific objectives and it wants Parliament to give the provision, I think it should be debated in this House before it is approved. I want to ask the Government how we are going to use this money, what kind of services will it be spent on. Otherwise, this is amounting to giving them an open cheque of $125 million from the Government. This is not prudent and is against the spirit and principle of Parliament scrutinising and debating the budget before it is approved. On the whole, we must look at the people's difficulties from this present situation. In the good times, the Government continues to tax the people and to accumulate surpluses. But when times are bad, the Government continues to tax the people but to help the people it is only giving $2-$6. On the other hand, the media is playing up to say that it is alleviating the burden of the people. I can say that, to use the Teochew phrase, it is good looking but it is useless. All that glitters do not shine! Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.10 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 2.45 pm until 3.10 pm.”
“Rebates on utilities bills are to offset the impact of the increases in water tariff. The "Special SC/CC rebates" which will last for a year and announced at the budget this year is only a symbolic concern shown by the Government to the livelihood of the people affected by this economic crisis. This is only in real terms $2-$6 compared to the cost cutting measure implemented by the Government. The workers' wages have been reduced by more than 10% and their incomes have been reduced by more than $2-$6. Now, when there are more and more people becoming unemployed, with $2-$6 to help people, is it not ridiculous? Can I ask: what can this $2-$6 rebate do for such people? From the present economic crisis and the difficulties faced by the people, I am reminded of the year 1997 when the PAP brought up the platform to say with confidence that it would be able to achieve 5-7% growth every year and to create more wealth, and this was the main plank in the platform of the PAP for the elections. Generally speaking, the people do not have more wealth. Instead, because of the downturn in the property market and the share market, their assets will not appreciate but they have also lost a lot of money. And the so-called subsidised loan obtained by the people have to pay higher interest than the commercial banks. The share ownership scheme has become a share losership scheme. Worst still, the unemployed people and the business losers are facing bankruptcy and are in a helpless state. The PAP should apologise to the people. Sir, in this Budget, to help the business community, I think the Government is unfair.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the effects of the economic crisis and financial turmoil in this region are reaching into the economic field. The economy of Singapore is no longer enjoying more and more good years as said by the PAP in the last elections. This year's Budget will have more than $5 billion in deficit. Actually, this $5 billion is not a true deficit, because our estimated revenue is $24.1 billion and operating expenditure is $15.2 billion. So if we do not include the development expenditure, there will be no deficit of $5.1 billion as played up by the media. There is a deficit because of the increase in the development expenditure. If we maintain the development expenditure to the 1997 level of $9 billion, there is no need to touch our accumulated reserves. However, from the macro economic point of view and the future development of our country, we should make use of the time of the downturn to prepare for a better take off in the future. Also, at the same time, we can help the people to tide over the difficult situation. From the economic policy point of view, the PAP Government has all the time, whether the economy is good or bad, even when people are suffering from unemployment and the economy is in recession, not been prepared to use fiscal measures to lighten the burden of the people. Regrettably, the economy is now facing great problems and people are facing great pressure and the Government is not lowering the charges but is continuing to increase water tariffs, refusing to repeal the GST and do not care about the people's survival and they continue to tax the people. The so-called rebates on HDB rentals and S&C charges and so on are to alleviate and to cushion the hardship caused by the GST.”
“The Minister of State also says that the agency would like to interview or question him. I would like to know whether or not the Government still considers Mr Ho Juan Thai a threat to the internal security of Singapore. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: That is the very reason why we want to interview him. He has to come back, he would be interviewed, and then we would decide.”
“The content of lectures that I had heard during that course, about 18 years ago, ring familiar with the remarks made by the NMP today.”
“So, if there is any company or entrepreneur who wants to start a newspaper, I think the Government should take an open mind and issue a permit to him. Although now with advanced technology, there are different media, for example, the Internet, TV, etc., the newspaper is still the most popular news medium and a very important one. Whether it is independent, whether it is reliable, whether its reporting is balanced, would have a very important effect on the development of the society. Just now, Mr Peh said that the opposition parties were well covered in the newspapers. Let us look at the reports, particularly those covering the General Elections - the election rallies. This coverage is very important, because Singaporeans must be well informed before they make their decisions and cast their votes. If anyone is to sit down and do a thorough, objective analysis of the coverage of all these election rallies in the local newspapers, it will be very obvious where the balance was. At other times, of course, the newspapers have different emphasis and different focus. But I believe the readers are very clear. We have different views and different perspectives of the balance of reporting in our Singapore newspapers. Are the Singapore newspapers biased? Is their reporting balanced? I think the readers know best. This question is best answered by the general newspaper readers in Singapore. 7.00 pm The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Information and the Arts (Encik Yatiman Yusof): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise on behalf of the Minister to oppose the motion. Mr Deputy Speaker, I was in Nevada in the early 80s, being invited by the American Press Institute to take up a newspaper editing course at the University of Nevada in the west coast of US.”
“I do not know whether this merger was due to economic reasons or because of some political pressure causing them to merge. However, what is very apparent to us is, as what Mr Peh has said just now, it is a question of rice bowl. How much control there is on the newspaper, I would not be able to say. Only those who are working in the newspaper company will know. But very obviously under our Newspaper and Printing Presses Act there are certain restrictions, and the big bosses of SPH have close relationship with the Government. So, if you work in the newspapers, if your reporting causes some unhappiness to the Government, will it affect your rice bowl or not? Perhaps the Government would say, "In the past, although it was possible for us to do so, we have never directed the newspapers as to what they should do." Very often, we say, "Well, if you know how to earn a living; you should know what to do. You know who your bosses are, you know what their preferences are." But, of course, I am not saying that our reporters and editors are all like that. But I think everyone has his conscience. I believe they have their own judgement. But because of this law and this management structure, there is a certain psychological pressure on them. Although the Government may not have to direct them what to do, they have to form their own judgement. There is an intangible pressure on them. They themselves know there are certain things they cannot put in the newspapers. This is what they call self-censorship. The impression given to people is that the newspaper is just the voice of the Government. For different newspapers, whether it is Zaobao or Wanbao, reports on an event, more often than not, will turn out to be carrying the same mood, the same sentiment, the same view.”
“Mr Peh Chin Hua says the newspaper in Singapore is eventful, with a hundred flowers blossom, and a hundred schools of thought contend. But we must not forget that there is actually only one newspaper, that is, the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH). Our Secretary-General has mentioned a while ago that the Chairman of SPH was a former PAP Cabinet Minister and its Executive Director was formerly the Director of the Internal Security Department. He said that the Singapore newspapers are like a hundred flowers blossom. But in fact, it is only one single flower blooming. One solitary stalk. Mr Peh also talked about the readability and readership of a newspaper being dependent on whether a newspaper is responsible, independent or not, and he used the daily circulation figures to say that our Straits Times and Lianhe Zaobao have great support from a very large readership. But he has forgotten, in Singapore, our readers have no other choices - Straits Times or Lianhe Zaobao. If you want to read the newspapers, these are the only newspapers you can get! So if you are talking about circulation figures and say, well, they are supported by a large following of readers, and you say they are independent, I think there is no logic to it. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if we are talking about the present situation of newspapers in Singapore and claim that our population now is too small to support more newspapers here, then let us not forget that long before our population has attained the present state, we had at least two major Chinese newspapers, the Sin Chew Jit Poh and the Nanyang Siang Pau. Later on, we had Shin Min which was originally independent, but eventually it also became part of the Singapore Press Holdings.”
“Sir, are there enough facilities to help families who are unable to --- 1.30 pm”
“Sir, in view of the quite significant increases in the number of applications for assistance, has the Ministry sufficient staff to actually process the applications expeditiously?”
“SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE BILL "to provide for and regulate the construction, maintenance and improvement of sewerage and land drainage systems, to regulate the discharge of sewerage and trade effluent and for matters connected therewith, and to repeal the Water Pollution Control and Drainage Act (Chapter 348 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by Encik Sidek bin Saniff; read the First time; to be read a Second time at the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Central Provident Fund Act (Chapter 36 of the 1997 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Manpower (Dr Lee Boon Yang); read the First time; to be read a Second time at the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. CARRIAGE BY AIR (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Carriage by Air Act (Chapter 32A of the 1989 Revised Edition) to give effect to the provisions of Protocol No. 4 signed at Montreal on 25th September 1975 which further amend the Warsaw Convention concerning international carriage by air as amended at the Hague on 28th September 1955", presented by the Minister of State for Communications (Dr John Chen Seow Phun); read the First time; to be read a Second time at the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PREVENTION OF POLLUTION OF THE SEA (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea Act (Chapter 243 of the 1991 Revised Edition)", presented by Dr John Chen Seow Phun; read the First time; to be read a Second time at the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PROBATE AND ADMINISTRATION (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“However, I would like to seek clarification from the DPM. According to him, in principle, our language policy is such that the level of Chinese can be lowered but the standard of English cannot be lowered. Is that what he meant? BG Lee Hsien Loong(In Mandarin): Our policy is that the level of any language should be determined by the ability of our students. Whether our standard of English language should be lowered or not, it is for the parents to decide. Do you want to lower the standard of English and maintain the standard of Chinese by cutting the English periods and transferring them to the Chinese periods? Alternatively, should we offer a Chinese paper at a realistic level to alleviate the burden of those who have real problems with their learning of Chinese? Let the parents decide, and I believe we can have a very clear answer from them. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to withdraw my motion. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. 6.22 pm BILLS INTRODUCED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Presidential Elections Act (Chapter 240A of the 1992 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister of State for Law (Assoc.Prof. Ho Peng Kee); read the First time; to be read a Second time at the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION CONTROL BILL "to consolidate the laws relating to environmental pollution control and for purposes connected therewith, to repeal the Clean Air Act (Chapter 45 of the 1985 Revised Edition) and to make consequential amendments to certain other written laws", presented by the Senior Minister of State for the Environment (Encik Sidek bin Saniff); read the First time; to be read a Second time at the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.”
“We are giving some incentives and some disincentives to discourage the students from taking the CL `B' as a "soft option", or an easy way out.”
“Perhaps the DPM did not quite understand my question. In the past, for Chinese school students to go from Secondary 4 to Pre-University, they had to score a credit in the Chinese Language, otherwise they did not even qualify for a full certificate. In those days, even the ordinary Chinese language paper was of a much higher standard than the so-called Higher Chinese paper today. My question was: what about those students who come from Chinese-speaking families? If their English is no good, they are disqualified from enrolment in a junior college. Will the Government also consider setting a English `B' paper for these students to pass at a less demanding level for admission to a junior college? BG Lee Hsien Loong(In Mandarin): If you have a junior college where all the subjects are taught in Chinese, then such a policy would be feasible. But now, in all the junior colleges and Pre-U centres, the medium of instruction is English. If your English is no good, then it will be difficult for you to cope with the learning of the various subjects. This is a basic principle that we must accept. As to whether it is fair or unfair to allow those who pass their CL `B' to go further in their studies, we must first of all understand that there is a price to pay for these students. This is because the CL `B' result cannot be taken to calculate their aggregate. This will affect their chances of getting into the more popular junior colleges because they lose one subject for consideration. Likewise, in the `A' level results, CL `B' result cannot be included in the score for entry to the university, and they may have difficulty getting places in the more popular disciplines.”
“This is an objective fact of life. We have looked at the quality of our students. We know their abilities, we can assess them and say that they can more or less attain this level. We are not taking the weakest student as a benchmark. We are looking at those students who are weak in Chinese but whose other academic results are not too bad. Chinese is not the only second language subject our students are taking for their examinations. Some students are doing German, French, Japanese and Malay as a second or third language. They have to reach a certain level of competence to pass their examinations. There must be a certain level which is attainable by them. I feel that we would be able to set a level that is reasonably attainable.”
“Sir, could I seek some clarifications from the Deputy Prime Minister? According to DPM Lee, under the new policy, the Government will allow children from an English speaking home who have encountered difficulties in coping with Chinese to opt for a new CL `B' paper. So long as they pass the Chinese paper at this level, it will be good enough and they can carry on with their studies in a junior college. I would like to know whether the Government would also consider allowing those children from Chinese speaking families, and who encounter difficulties coping with English, to sit for an English paper, such as EL `B', at a lower level so that they could pass English at a basic level and proceed to a junior college? BG Lee Hsien Loong(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, actually the question has already been answered by the Minister just now. The answer is quite straightforward. The Government does not have any particular view on it. But, I believe it is the parents who are more concerned with the matter. As the Minister has said, we do have a ME3 course where the students can take his mother tongue as the first language and English as a second language. We offer this option, but there is no taker. For students who cannot get through the normal streaming, then they can opt to to do ME3 - take mother tongue as the first language and English as a second language. We let the parents have a free choice. However, it has been eight years since 1991 when we introduced this option, and the number of enrolment is still zero. Nobody has enrolled for this type of course. We are looking for a realistic approach. What are the expectations of the parents? What can we teach the students? If we put all these together, we would be able to settle on an appropriate level.”
“They may engage a tuition teacher, even two or three tuition teachers, to coach their children. Some even send their children to Taiwan or China for "immersion courses". They offer all kinds of incentives and rewards - score 90 marks in your Chinese dictation, and I will buy you a Chinese software. They use all kinds of incentives, ways and means to encourage their children to learn Chinese. But if the pressure is too great, I think the children's attitude may change or their parents' attitude may change. Although they say they support, the feasibility must be studied. We cannot overlook or neglect the feedback from such parents. Today, the changes that we are making to the Chinese curriculum will help maintain our mother tongue education policy in the ever-changing circumstances. We must frequently discuss and review our mother tongue policy. This debate will not be the last one in this House. But so long as we continue to adjust our policy according to objective circumstances and make realistic approaches, we will be able to maintain the Chinese culture, Chinese traditions and Chinese values in us.”
“But with our past experience in handling the level of Chinese teaching and learning in Singapore, we are confident that the situation will improve, because the parents are supportive of the idea of their children learning Chinese, albeit some may wish that the burden would not be too heavy. But, as the Minister has mentioned, according to our guidelines, at the Primary 4 streaming, about 13% to 14% of the cohort of students should qualify to take Higher Chinese. But because of the insistence of the parents, there are about 22% of ethnic Chinese students actually taking Higher Chinese, and most of them can cope with it. Parents encourage the students to take EM1 because they believe that it is better for their children to learn more. Moreover, most parents feel that their children are intelligent and should be encouraged to do EM1. I think this is some good social pressure which is acceptable. In our recent survey, 88% of parents feel that Chinese is an important subject. Students may or may not like Chinese but 80% to 90% recognise that it is an important subject. They may not know that they have to use Chinese to make big money in China. But they share the views of their parents, teachers, and the whole society. So we must take Chinese. If we do not do Chinese or do not do Chinese well, although you may not be denied a place, you will feel a little uncomfortable or rather ashamed. Why do more than 90% of the parents endorse the values from the Chinese culture? All these facts prove that the parents know that a knowledge of Chinese is an important and helpful thing to their children. They also know they want their children to learn Chinese. They are using all kinds of methods to supervise and encourage their children to master the Chinese language.”
“But I also know that there are many other students who are just like me, finding it difficult to learn Chinese. Our teachers have already known this as a fact. When I studied this problem, I asked some teachers, some Ministry of Education officials to introduce articles from the ancient Chinese classics in the curriculum of Higher Chinese. I told them that some of these Chinese classics were very meaningful and could have great impact on the students. If we can expose our students to these articles, this essence of Chinese literature will be of great benefit to them. But the teachers told me that this was not realistic, not quite possible. The simple reason is that the students may be taking Higher Chinese but if you want them to study classical Chinese, they just cannot cope with it. In formulating the curricula for our Higher Chinese, we face this restriction and constraint. Therefore, we must fix the level of Chinese at an appropriate and suitable level. This level cannot be decided by our likes or dislikes. It must go according to our experience and the level that is attainable by the students. If we can incorporate advanced technology into our teaching methods, then the level can be enhanced. If you tell me that you want to raise the standard of teaching, improve the quality of teachers without adjusting the difficult level of the Chinese paper, I think it cannot be accepted. We have tried to improve the teaching method. Yes, we must do that, but it is not the panacea to all our problems. Many Chinese-educated Members of Parliament also show their concerns about the curricula of the Chinese Language for EL `B' in that it should not be regarded as a "soft option". I agree with their views and we will pay specific attention to this aspect.”
“If I had failed, there would be no scholarship for me. Fortunately, I passed. After that, one year, I went to NJC. I was not satisfied with my "6". I wanted to improve my Chinese. So I decided to take Chinese as a principal subject, or "A" level. For principal level Chinese, we had to learn classical Chinese (wen yen wen) and Chinese literature. After a few months, my teacher told me, "Your Chinese is not so good. Your lines of thoughts expressed in your essays are very messy." But I never had that kind of problem with my English essay writing. Why should I have this problem when I wrote in Chinese? It was not a question of content, but a question of language. However, the content and the language are closely linked because your brain has only a limited capacity. You are unable to express the idea clearly because you are too handicapped in your command of the language. So after a few months, I gave up. I did not take the principal Chinese paper in my `A' level examination. So I am convinced that learning Chinese is not an easy task. Even now, I read Lianhe Zaobao every day, and listen to news over Channel 8 every night. Yet, every time when I want to make a major speech in Mandarin or to be interviewed, I would still have to spend some time to prepare and practise in Mandarin. Otherwise, my expression, my sentences will not run smoothly and fluently. Expressions in English, and even English grammar will seep in, even the words I utter may not be in English. So I think it is not an easy problem to solve. Some students are learning their languages better than I do. I always admire those students who score distinctions in both languages, because I failed to do it.”
“Many of our Members of Parliament learn through their own personal experiences that it is not easy for our children to master both English and Chinese at the same time. Even those who were educated in Chinese and who speak Mandarin at home also discover that the standard of Chinese of their children is lower than the good old days. Mr Peh Chin Hua has expressed regrets that although his children have been doing well in their Chinese examinations, their standard was still not to his satisfaction. Just imagine, what will be the level of Chinese in Singapore at the time of our grandchildren. What kind of problems will they face? Although we have not come to that stage, the time will come. So we have to face this reality. For the primary schools, I do not think there is much problem. But when you come to the secondary schools, it is more difficult. Let me tell you my personal experience. I spent 13 years learning Chinese, six years in a primary school, six years in a secondary school, and one year in the Junior College. They were all Chinese schools: Nanyang Primary School, Catholic High School and National Junior College. At home, I spoke Mandarin to my father. I learned Chinese, and he was also learning Chinese. But when I reached the secondary school level, I began to find it difficult. For the primary school level, I had no problem passing my Chinese examinations. At the Secondary Four `O' level examination, I worked very hard, but I managed only a C4. I was dissatisfied with myself. I worked harder. When I was in junior college, I had tuition and worked even harder. For the General Paper, known as Comprehension and Essay Writing, I had only a 6. Comprehension, no problem! Essay writing, there were problems. In a Chinese school, a "6", almost failed!”
“Now that it has become a Special Autonomy Region of China, it is also in the process of transformation. China has been opening up after the cultural revolution. With the economic reform and open-door policy, their culture and values are also evolving and changing. Therefore, the Chinese elite cannot remain unchanged. Our Chinese elite should move with the development of the Chinese culture and play an active role to promote and shape Singapore into a metropolitan city and economy in the 21st century. Our mother tongue policy must be realistic with the standard level of teaching and learning set at a level relevant to our students. Because of the limitations to our human brains, not many people have the capability to master two languages effectively, just as our computer does not necessarily have the capability to run every type of software, and if you overload it, things do not work out so well. So this is a question of brain, not a question of mouth and jaw. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked what is the bottomline for our Chinese education. He seems to imply that the Government has been too accommodating and has fixed too low a bottomline. My answer is that our bottomline is one that is achieveable by our average students with reasonable efforts in learning. This is our bottomline. We all have children. Most of us have children. We all know there are children who may be strong in certain subjects, and not so strong in some other subjects. I believe that the children of Mr Low Thia Khiang are also studying in our schools. But what are their results? What kind of problems do they face? Can you keep on applying pressure on them, just like the way you pump up the balloons? Your blood pressure will rise too.”
“We are a multi-racial Singapore situated in Southeast Asia. Our working language is English and our international environment is also quite westernised. Therefore, it is not an easy thing to nurture a group of Chinese cultural elite here, but we are making efforts to make some changes to our education policy, and these are some of the examples. I think to increase the number of SAP schools and through other changes and all that I have announced, we can have positive results. I am confident of that. But we cannot go back to the old ways of the 1950s and 1960s. The Chinese schools then and the Chinese elites were products of certain historical circumstances. At that time we were a colony. The Chinese students were anti-colonialism and a mainstay in the fight for independence. Contributions from the English-educated in those days were relatively little. Amongst the Chinese-educated students, some were communists, some were not. After the merger with Malaysia, in the drive against communalism, the Chinese community also played a very important role. Because had the Chinese community bowed to the political pressure then, Singapore would be finished. But, now, that sort of situation has already passed us, it must therefore be put behind us. We all know that even in China or Hong Kong or Taiwan, values and traditions do not remain unchanged. So under certain political, social and cultural conditions, there are three different developments. The Chinese in Taiwan become "Taiwanised", even the Mandarin they speak is contaminated with the local Taiwanese dialects. In Hong Kong, you have a very strong local indigenous culture - the Cantonese culture with a very strong commercial flavour. This was because Hong Kong was a colony, an economy but not a sovereign nation.”
“Therefore, they also agree that it is necessary to revise the contents of the Chinese curricula and our policy on Chinese language. Of course, the Chinese community is very concerned about the adjustments to the level of Chinese language in our schools, and the proposed introduction of the CL `B' paper, and the impact, possibly negative impact, thereof. This concern is valid and quite understandable. We are making this adjustment to the level of Chinese language with two objectives. First, to nurture a group of Chinese elite, and secondly, to provide all students, especially those from the English-speaking families, a realistic level of Chinese for them to study and pass the examination set at this level. The bilingual education policy and the policy to learn mother tongue in schools will remain unchanged. The main policy will remain unchanged, but the details can be adjusted. In implementing this policy, we must do so in keeping with the changes of times and circumstances. We are a multi-lingual, multi-racial and multi-religious society. A Chinese cultural elite in this kind of a society has got a very important role to play. The spirit, the outlook in life and the social and political values of the Chinese-educated and Chinese elite are different from those of the English-educated. But, nevertheless, they complement one another. For example, the Chinese High School and RI are both excellent schools. Yet, the students they produce possess different characteristics and dispositions. We will be so much poorer if we have one without the other, and it will be a great loss. Therefore, in this regard, I agree with Dr Ker Sin Tze. We are not Japan. We cannot use Japanese as our national language. We are not Germany, we are not France.”
“But to want to maintain that, so that you not only have individuals who are very proficient in Chinese and can make speeches; not only teachers, journalists and Ministers but also a certain sub-segment of our society with a certain cohesion of itself, and with the individuals to be at the top of that segment to be teachers, to be principals, to be in the clans, to be in the Chambers of Commerce, to be in the literary arena to write, to paint, to put on drama; I think that is something extra and different. If you do not like the word "elite", you think it is elitist, change it to something else - Top of the Pyramid, those who are natural leaders of the community, if you will - but that is what we want to preserve and it goes beyond Chinese language, and it is a very important motivation for what we do. So, let me summarise in Mandarin, because I think the points which MPs have raised have already mainly been met and also because the MPs have been supportive and understanding of the purpose of this exercise. (In Mandarin) Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Members who have spoken in support of the Government's policy on the teaching of Chinese language. The response from the MPs is very encouraging. Teaching and learning of Chinese is a very important issue in Singapore. Before deciding on the changes, we have requested for and received feedback from the various quarters. I have personally spoken to the editors and journalists of the Chinese newspapers, the Chinese-educated MPs and listened to their views. Admiral Teo has also spoken and discussed with the Chinese Teachers' Union and their leaders on this issue. They all know where the crux of the matter is, where the question lies, where the problem is.”
“If we were homogenous as one Chinese-speaking society amongst the Chinese, I think we will be weaker as a country, because I think the link between the Chinese community and the minority communities will he harder to establish without English as a common ground. If we were completely English-speaking amongst the Chinese community, or minimally Chinese literate and mainly English-speaking, I think we would also be weaker, because we would not have that cultural anchor, that root, that strength, which hold us in time of difficulty. The people who come out from the different streams come out in different moulds. They are different. You look at him, you watch him walk a few metres, and you say, "This one is a Hwa Chong child or Hwa Chong alumnus." Or that is RI, and that one looks very much like ACS - Mr Chiam. You can tell, they are different. ACS is a very good school; RI is an even better school. Probably so, but if all of Singapore were ACSians and Rafflesians, I think we would be the poorer for it, because we would be without the Chinese schools, we would be without the people with the Islamic culture, we would be without the Hindu culture. And you would lose that ballast and that sense of continuity and Asian roots, which are important to our survival as a nation. I do not think in the future that Chinese component of our society will be exactly the same as it was in the past. Because the historical past is different, the circumstances are different, the situation which made the Chinese elite and establishment what it was before and after the world and in the 1960s has changed. We are in the 1990s, about to go into the 21st century. So the challenges are different.”
“May I seek a clarification from the Minister? The Minister has mentioned in his speech that there is a standard bearer of the Chinese language. I would like to know from him what is the basic standard of Chinese that will be attainable, let us say, under the new scheme of CL `B'. RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have just explained that we have to customise education in Singapore to students of different ability levels. So Higher Chinese is a standard bearer, CL is a level which the vast majority of students can reach, and CL `B' will be a basic level which students who face difficulties and have put in a lot of effort should be able to reach. We expect that the CL `B' standard will be somewhere about the Secondary (Normal) standard for Chinese, but with a heavier emphasis on aural and oral skills. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, Admiral Teo has addressed most of the points raised by the Members. I would like to sum up in Mandarin. But before I do that, I just want to take up one important point which Admiral Teo did not cover, and this was the remark by Dr Tan Cheng Bock that we should not talk about Chinese elite, and this was picked up by Mdm Claire Chiang. We can change the word, if you find another word more convenient. But I think the argument is not about vocabulary but about a very important concept, which is this - Singapore society is not homogenous. It is multi-racial; it is multi-religious; it is multi-cultural. And indeed even within the Chinese society, there is quite a clear differentiation between the Chinese language group and the English-speaking group. This diversity, this variation, is in fact one of the sources of our strength. It is like a rope with many fibres in it, wound together, and therefore deriving strength from one another.”
“So I hope this policy is one step towards redressing some of the challenges we faced decades earlier by creating cultural or language specialists that will be good in one language and reasonably and acceptably good in another, but first and foremost, they use the language to express themselves as Singaporeans.”
“And I would like to echo Mr Low Thia Khiang's call just now that we need to develop that interest first even for those English educated. If we have that interest, we will get to any culture. Like all of us know a lot about English Literature, we are not English. Some of us know a lot of French Literature, but we do not speak French. So I think we need to disentangle that. Having said that, I must say learning a language does create the intimacy and depth for learning the culture. My point is we must first define ourselves as Singaporeans, besides being Chinese, or Malay, or Indian. And I think being Singaporean is more than speaking a specific language. So on the concerns raised by Mr Simon Tay earlier on, I feel that if we all share in a common identity and try to hone that, specialising in a language is not a threat. And here, I would like to take up Dr Tan Cheng Bock's point on the Chinese elite. I am uncomfortable with the word as well because it reeks of class status. And I have in other occasions suggested the words "Chinese specialist", "Malay specialist", "Tamil specialist" instead of using the word "elite". My vision for Singapore is really a multi-cultural and multi-lingual Singapore characterised by all these specialists, who standing on their own cultural heritage, are able to appraise the world and the other cultures around them and help to nourish a Singapore identity that can be shared. Take my own example. I grew up in Little India. I was in a Chinese language school and my parents, being kiasu, pulled me out from Nan Hua and put me in Raffles where I learned English. I had wished that I had continued with a Chinese language school so that I will be steeped in one language because it is easy to pick up English.”
“Maybe we should encourage some watching of TV programmes in schools at certain hours and use that as a basis for discussion. The third point I would like to bring up is that I do not disagree about Chinese classics being important, as brought up by Mr Peh Chin Hua on Shui Hu Zhuan ( ) and Hong Lou Meng ( ). But I urge the Education Committee not to stress the messages in the stories but instead focus on the literary interest of the stories because it is very boring and, from the way I do it with my children, it is a hard uphill struggle. We need creative approaches and I think Mr Low Thia Khiang's suggestion like Hua Mu Lan ( ) is a very good one. We need new packaging. We need to review the whole lot of materials and find creative pedagogic materials for teaching this. The last point I would like to try and disentangle is the notion of a language and culture. When does learning or stressing a language become divisive? I feel learning a language is just another tool towards understanding one's culture. It only becomes divisive if we use language to exclude segments of Singaporeans from the mainstream agenda and programmes. I do not think this is what we set out to do. But I like to say that we need to be a little relaxed about language and culture. We can learn about Chinese culture without knowing Chinese, through translation. It will be better if we can learn a culture through the language. But today, in the newspapers, we learn of a whole group of scholars talking about Mencius. And they are Americans. Yes, some of them speak Chinese language but a lot of them do not. But they learn it. So I am saying that, besides looking at the language barrier, maybe we should look at our own interest.”
“We all know that the animated movie Mulan, which is a Walt Disney production in the USA, was taken from a traditional Chinese story. But it was translated and produced as a full-length Walt Disney animated movie. Students from Chinese-speaking background or English-speaking environment alike fall for the repackaged story. It is the new packaging that makes the difference! Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me these few moments. I just want to seek a few points of clarification and make some suggestions. Already there is a certain degree of stigmatisation amongst students in CL1 and those in CL2. By creating another syllabus `B' and category of students, will we create another stigma and risk overall demoralisation? I hope the Minister will comment on this. As I read here, he said that while a pass in CL `B' syllabus at the `O' and `A' level examinations will qualify students to enter JC and university, the CL `B' syllabus result cannot be used to compute the `O' level aggregate for admission into JC or earn any `A' level points used for university admission. Are we having another ranking order as to who is good and who is not good enough? Another point I would like to raise is: could the Ministry of Education take the lead in reviewing the methodology in teaching language in schools and commit resources for retraining of teachers and new pedagogic equipment to make learning more interesting? I suggest that the Review Committee involve student bodies to give their reflections and suggestions on their experience of learning Chinese. Take my own example. My children learn Chinese better with songs and by watching of Chinese TV programmes.”
“This is a basic question. It is not a question of whether it has any economic value or not. The correct attitude should be: I need to, at least, have a basic understanding, a basic level of competence, in handling the language. I think the question of level, how to adjust, to fine-tune and to adapt to the needs of the students from the different backgrounds, is secondary. Most importantly, we must cultivate the correct attitude. There are a few things that we have to pay attention to. First, the Government's stand on Chinese. What is the Government's stand? What is the Government's expectation of Chinese in Singapore? What is the basic requirement? Will this bottomline be changing all the time, and eventually it will come to a point where you may or may not have Chinese at all. So I think the Government should take a very clear stand on its required standard that is expected of the Chinese students in Singapore. Secondly, the Chinese language teachers are also a very important factor. Traditionally, Chinese teachers are more serious in nature. But it is common knowledge that when a student does not like the teacher, he or she will also hate the subject he teaches. So if you want the students to enjoy learning Chinese, the Chinese language teachers should also try to be more relaxed in their teaching. They should not be so stern all the time. They should introduce more lively materials. I think the Chinese language teachers should seriously look into this matter. Thirdly, for the people who work in the Chinese educational, cultural and journalistic fields, we should try to tell the stories from ancient China in a more lively mood, so that they can be accepted by the younger generation.”
“According to the survey report, when the students grow older, their interest in learning Chinese becomes more and more minimal. In Primary 2, 51.3% of students say they like Chinese very much. But when it comes to junior college, only 5% of students are very interested in Chinese. Why is there such a situation? I think we should look into this matter from liking, very fond of the language, until a point where they do not like the language, or even hate the language. We should find out what is the reason for this. If we want to cultivate a so-called Chinese elite or to enhance the standard of Chinese, it is not only just to speak Chinese but to attain such a standard where you will be able to read, understand and analyse some articles in Chinese. Teaching Chinese as a subsidiary subject in school is just not enough. The Government should consider having some other examination subjects, eg, history or literature, being taught in Chinese, and examined in Chinese. Through the learning of these subjects in Chinese, those students who are interested in Chinese would be able to attain a certain standard in the language that will enable them to read Chinese as a major subject in the university. Generally speaking, the crux of the matter is, basically, people who have very little contact with Chinese will have great difficulty learning it. I must admit that Chinese is not an easy language to learn because it is a very different system from English and the other western languages. The Chinese word, or character, is an ideograph, unlike romanised spelling like in English. Chinese is more difficult to learn, but then we should not emphasise on the economic value of Chinese all the time. I think we should ask ourselves this question: As an ethnic Chinese, should I not know Chinese?”
“If we want to train a Chinese elite, do we not want to have more ethnic Chinese students attaining a certain level of proficiency in their Chinese, or just a handful of elite who can attain a higher level of Chinese language proficiency? I think the Government should look into it, because different people may have different needs. If you say you require our students to learn only up to primary school level or, say, 1,000 words, then so be it. But let everybody be very clear about it. Let us know what is the bottomline, what is the requirement. On the other hand, for those who are very keen to learn the Chinese language, let them know the limits that can be offered in our schools, so that they will not have false hope. The Chinese language teachers will also have a good idea of the standard they must achieve. Another problem is, like what Mr Goh Choon Kang has said just now, the proposed CL `B'. There would be some inherent problems that come with the introduction of CL `B'. Would this be a new standard of requirement of the Government? Would this bottomline be further lowered because of pressure from certain quarters? If we look at the background of the students, they have this problem because they come from an English-speaking family. This is something that is inevitable, but it is a vicious cycle. Now, just because these students come from such a background, we provide a lower level CL `B' to suit them. Eventually, it would come a time when there are more and more students opting to go into CL `B'. Later on in life, when these students get married, have children of their own, the language of communication will again be English, and more and more families will be speaking English. So this becomes a vicious cycle.”
“But, on the other hand, for those who come from Chinese-speaking families, they cannot speak English well, and because of the second language system in our school, their standard of Chinese is also not good enough for them to express themselves well. So it results in neither here nor there. In the end, their Chinese is no good and their English is also no good. From the younger generation that I know, I have already noticed that this problem is very serious. In their conversation, they mix Chinese with English. They are unable to speak and express eloquently in one language. This is something that we should be worried about. With regard to the standard of Chinese language, first of all, the Government has to decide what is the bottomline for its desired level of the Chinese language. Is the bottomline such that Chinese, being one of the official languages in Singapore, will continue to be used in Singapore or do you want to promote Chinese as a gateway to understanding Chinese culture or to use it as a means to train the so-called Chinese elite? I think the different purposes will decide what will be the appropriate standard of Chinese language we want to have. If Chinese is just to be regarded as an official language so that it could continue to be used in Singapore, then very simply, a lower standard would suffice to serve the Government's policy. As long as you can speak and understand it, that is enough. But if you want to use Chinese as a means to enhance our understanding of the Chinese culture, what standard do you need? If you want to cultivate a Chinese elite, what would be the appropriate standard we must achieve?”
“Of course, the value will become the mainstream value of our society. So the direction we take will eventually decide what type of society we will develop into. So I feel that the language policy is not just an education policy. It is a national policy of great importance. In Singapore, we have been implementing the so-called bilingual education system for the past few decades. The question is: what is the definition of a bilingual system? In the old days, students in the Chinese schools used Chinese as a first language and English as a second language. For those in the English language schools, English was the first language and Chinese was promoted as one of the second languages or not promoted at all. Now we do not have the so-called "Chinese stream" or "English stream". The first language is English and apart from those taking Higher Chinese, mother tongue is basically a second language. So, is our so-called bilingual education a misnomer? It gives people the misconception that we are bilingual. But, in fact, the levels of our languages are vastly lopsided. So we should not call it a bilingual system. It should be more appropriately known as a mother tongue system where Malay, Tamil or Chinese is a second language. Actually, what we should be concerned with is the effect of the introduction of CL `B' on the future development of our society. I am more worried about the ability of expression of our people. For English-speaking people, they may not be able to speak Chinese because their standard of Chinese is no good. But most of the time, they will be able to absorb the essence of the English language. They will be able to express themselves fairly well in English.”
“Sir, I have three regrets. The first regret is that we have to debate such an important issue in Parliament without due notice in advance. There are so much materials for us to absorb and analyse, yet these materials were distributed to us only when DPM Lee was making his speech in Parliament. We have no time to digest all these materials. Secondly, I heard Mr Kenneth Chen talking about his son who was denied a place in our local university because he could not pass his CL2, and had to send him overseas to get his degree. In my generation, many of my classmates could not gain admission to university because their English was no good, and they did not have the means to go overseas for further study. This is my second regret. Thirdly, we need to bring this issue on the standard and learning of Chinese in our schools to this House for discussion. I have never heard of the Japanese complaining about their children having problems coping with the Japanese language in school, or the children in Germany having difficulty coping with the learning of their own language. I think the Chinese in Singapore should ponder over this question: why does this problem arise at all? Perhaps our situation is unique. This is something that we need to think about seriously. Mr Speaker, Sir, the language policy is a very important policy of the nation. It is not just a superficial policy that involves just the application of a language in our education system. It actually involves our people's ability of expression, their upbringing, and the differences in our values. What is the direction in which our language policy is heading? Shall we use Chinese as a mainstream language or English as a mainstream language, or any other language as a mainstream language?”
“Sir, my question is: what is the assessment of the Deputy Prime Minister on whether our financial institutions and systems are strong enough to manage the risks that may arise because of hedge fund speculation? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, we believe that we have good institutions but we are never satisfied, and I would not tempt fate to say that we are totally impregnable. You never know what developments can occur. We have to make sure that when they do, we are ready for them. WAGE COST REDUCTION MEASURES BY COMPANIES 9. Mr Ong Ah Heng asked the Minister for Manpower if he will indicate the latest development on wage cost reduction measures undertaken by companies since the announcement of the revised guidelines by the National Wages Council. 10. Mr Ong Ah Heng asked the Minister for Manpower whether the decision by some companies to return savings on employers' Central Provident Fund contribution to their employees will have any adverse impact on our cost reduction exercise. 11. Mr Ong Ah Heng asked the Minister for Manpower how many companies' senior officers had taken higher wage reduction, in support of the National Wages Council's call to moderate wage cut for lower income workers.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether our financial institutions and financial regulatory system in Singapore are strong enough to manage the hedge funds, especially now that we welcome the presence of hedge funds in Singapore. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, we are always watching carefully developments and tracking whether we need to make adjustments to our supervision and regulation policies. As I explained earlier, the point is not whether or not we welcome the hedge funds to Singapore, because even if we do not welcome them here, they can operate in the Singapore market from overseas. They make their decisions at headquarters which may be in New York or London. The entities are probably domiciled in Cayman Islands or Bahamas or some tax havens like that, and they operate around the world using agents, other banks, sometimes present in person to track what is going on. So the key point is not whether or not they are present here with an office, with a nameplate, but whether or not they are operating in the Singapore market, perhaps from afar. And we have seen evidence that our exchange rate movement has been partly affected by hedge funds which have been taking positions, as they do in all Asian currencies. So it is a position which we have to watch all the time.”
“In other words, may I confirm with the Minister that there is no commitment of Government funds or giving out Government funds under the scheme?”
“How about the Government's part? What is the budget allocated for this?”
“Sir, my question just now was whether any other hotels were given the funds besides Marina Mandarin. The Minister says that they will be generous. How generous are they? What is the budget? Does it mean whatever amount that they have applied for? Is this scheme also applicable to small hotels?”
“Sir, I would like to know what are the criteria for evaluation and it seems to me that priority will be given to hotels in the safeguarded area. Besides Marina Mandarin, which has been given the funds, are there any other hotels which would be given the funds?”
“Sir, what are the criteria for the assessment of the hotels which would qualify for funds under the scheme? So far, how many and which hotels have been given funds?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister what the Government would do if Malaysia continues not to acknowledge the sovereign rights of Singapore over the CIQ issue and at the same time they also fail to submit the legal arguments but want to continue to operate their CIQ here. What would the Government do?”
“Further clarification, Sir. How about cutting the employee's contribution in CPF so that they can tide over the period and allow companies the flexibility to decide on the correct percentage of wage deduction that will make them competitive, rather than a mandate across the board of a 10% CPF cut, whether the company is profitable or competitive, it is a 10% CPF cut? Give some money back to the workers and allow companies some flexibility in deciding. Do you not think this would be a better alternative?”
“Sir, may I seek clarification from the Minister without Portfolio? In his speech, he mentioned that there is a need to announce a percentage cut as a guideline, so that non-unionised workers will know how much cut is reasonable. What about some employers who take this guideline as an opportunity to cut, even though the company may still be competitive and there is no need to cut? The second clarification is: why is there a need to mandate a 10% cut in CPF? Why not leave it to the company as a guideline for a cut in wages rather than a CPF cut?”
“Does DPM Lee think it is sufficient to project political leadership by just taking a 10% cut? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, nothing will be sufficient to persuade Mr Low Thia Khiang that it is sufficient. So from that starting point, we have to judge what is the right number which makes sense and allows us to fulfill the principle of the NWC, which is, the higher levels, will have a deeper cut than the working rank and file, and also to maintain the principle that we really pay people for their job. And we have set Ministers' salaries and civil servants' salaries at levels which we think are sensible and justifiable and are right to get the sort of people we want for the jobs which we are looking to fill. And especially at times like this, I think we would be looking for good Ministers rather than cheap Ministers.”
“Further clarification, Sir. In view of the current situation where there are more people being retrenched, what is the view of DPM Lee on the need to set up a fund to help those who are sole breadwinners of the family who have been retrenched. Secondly, he has announced certain percentage cut on the salaries of top civil servants. What would be the estimated percentage cut that would be applicable to Ministers and MPs? BG Lee Hsien Loong: As I have explained, the way to help the retrenched people is to help them find a new job and if, in fact, despite all their efforts, they have not been able to find new jobs, there are a variety of people they can turn to for help, including the CDCs, unions, and the MPs who would put them in touch with the right agencies. If MPs have any specific problems, they should get in touch with the Ministry of Community Development or the Ministry of Manpower, and they would be able to assist. What is the cut of Ministers and MPs? As I have explained, they will follow the same as the civil servants. For Ministers, their cut is 10% per year in the annual wage bill and for MPs, probably something less than that. For the rank and file civil servants (Divisions III, IV and DREs) it is 5% of total annual wages.”
“But what we are trying to achieve is an across-the-board general shift in their wage level, not every company, but a general shift, and even companies which are not yet on the verge of disaster, we are saying, "Better make this adjustment now. I am already cutting CPF for everybody. And I think it is wise, if you are not performing exceptionally brilliantly, to be cautious and also to make some adjustment on your bonuses. After all, that is what they were built up for." If next year, things are better, well, good for you. Certainly, if there is no need for companies to cut bonuses, there is no need to touch reserves. But the same Member has been asking us why do we not touch reserves earlier. I think he may want to re-examine his position.”