Sia Khoon Seong
Singapore
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Code LD 1500 of the Main Estimates. Earlier, I stated that the morale of the teachers is dependent on their conditions of work.”
“For one thing it must be clear to the parents that the Day School is not just another name for a day care centre. Neither does the Day School scheme diminish parental role and responsibility in the moral upbringing of their children. Children can and will do just so much during school hours.”
“I must urge the Ministry of Education to allow as many serving non-graduate teachers as possible, who have the ability and qualifications, to join the degree programme and attain graduate status. Those who have proven their worth in the service more than deserve the opportunity to further themselves.”
“I have not finished. Of course, the underlying reasons for the teaching of Religious Knowledge are always valid since time immemorial - to teach man to be good. After all, our moral education basically wants to achieve that. Since 1959, not just 1982, the underlying reasons for moral education have always been the same.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to ask the Minister of State, is it not true that prior to 1982 Religious Knowledge was also an optional subject? Prior to 1982, all along Religious Knowledge was taught as an optional subject. In 1989, we are going back to pre-1982. The mistake in 1982 was to make RK compulsory.”
“With the introduction of caning for traffickers and employers who employ illegal immigrant workers, I am quite sure it will act as a strong deterrent to them from doing so. With the passing of this Bill, employers and traffickers will now find it not worth the while to take risk in employing foreign workers illegally.”
The complete record
Every one of 624 lines we hold for Sia Khoon Seong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 13.
“Sir, it looks like next year I have to raise the matter again to ask for the outcome of the Finance Ministry's decision on the matter. With that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Code LD 1500 of the Main Estimates. Earlier, I stated that the morale of the teachers is dependent on their conditions of work. Last year, I raised the problem of the teachers with regard to the non-professional duties that they had to shoulder, and I asked the Ministry to look into the question of providing additional non-teaching staff. The reply to my request was that the Ministry was looking into the matter. On the other matter about air-conditioning of the staff room, I also raised whether the Ministry would air-condition the staff room. The reply was also that the Ministry was looking into the matter. I just want to know whether the matter has been looked into and whether there is any positive result from their looking into these matters that I raised last year.”
“For one thing it must be clear to the parents that the Day School is not just another name for a day care centre. Neither does the Day School scheme diminish parental role and responsibility in the moral upbringing of their children. Children can and will do just so much during school hours. There is a limit to what they can absorb within that time. Their parents must continue to supervise and encourage them in their work at home and complement the work done in the school.”
“In making these changes, the Ministry of Education has maintained rightly that the element of parental choice will remain and be respected. This is important. While the proposed educational changes are welcomed, I must, however, point out that these changes alone will not by themselves bring about the desired effect of improving the quality of education. What is also important is the morale of the teaching profession which, to some extent, is dependent on their conditions of work. I have raised two matters regarding the air-conditioning of staff rooms and additional non-teaching staff. I will bring these matters up when the amendments come up for debate. Let me just end by making a brief comment about the Day School pilot project. There are several highly commendable features in the proposed Day School pilot project. What is necessary is for the Ministry of Education to present these as an attractive package deal to both parents and teachers. It is heartening to note that the Ministry met the principals and teachers in the pilot schools to give them more information and win their support for the project. If it is well-managed and properly run, the Day School programme will undoubtedly benefit the children. We must carefully monitor and nurture the scheme to ensure that this is so. The Day School programme must bring about a qualitative improvement in primary school education. The key factor in this regard would be the principals of the schools involved. They must not overdo things, as this would over-burden both children and teachers. I would like to further propose that the Ministry should also meet the parents of the children in the pilot schools, so that they too can have a proper understanding of what the scheme can and should achieve.”
“45 pm I therefore welcome the move to give all primary school pupils the opportunity to continue to complete four years of secondary education in a stream suited to their individual ability. Ten years of general education will better prepare the academically less inclined young Singaporeans, both physically and mentally, to enter the VITB. They will be more mature and better equipped for the training they will receive. With the upgrading of its courses and entry requirements, VITB's image will be enhanced and the stigma associated with premature school leavers and dropouts will be removed. This, together with the introduction of the Normal (Technical) Stream in our secondary schools will give our students a positive attitude towards technical education and vocational training. I am particularly encouraged by the move to provide those who are less academically inclined with a programme that concentrates on the learning of English, Mathematics and Computer Applications and that excludes the cramming of other subjects. This move recognises that we must provide future workers with meaningful basic skills which will stand them in good stead in an increasingly high-tech world. I see the changes as a bold initiative to help weaker pupils make the grade and to give them the opportunity to acquire useful and relevant skills so that they too can play an instrumental role in our society. Another change which is significant is the shifting of the streaming year from Primay 3 to Primary 4. There is no denying that the streaming is and will always be a contentious issue. It is nonetheless gratifying to note that more maturational time will now be given to each child before his or her placement is determined. I am sure parents will welcome this move.”
“Sir, the twin pillars of our education system ever since the PAP Government assumed power have been, first, to ensure our economic well-being and progress through the teaching of English, Mathematics and Science and, secondly, to strengthen our moral and cultural ballast through the teaching of the mother tongue. The fact that we have achieved so much as a nation politically, economically and socially is due in no small measure to our strict adherence to these two fundamental educational objectives. Throughout the years, despite the many changes that have been made to the education system, these two fundamental objectives have remained constant. In the latest overall review of the education system, the Education Minister has reiterated his Ministry's commitment to these two fundamental objectives. I commend the Education Minister for this. For any shift from these fundamental objectives will be a disaster to Singapore and Singaporeans economically, particularly when our only means of livelihood and improving our economic well-being lies in the skills of our people to compete on the global market for trade and foreign investments, on which our economy is heavily dependent. We succeed because of the keenness of our competitive edge. Soon this competitive edge has to be further sharpened as our neighbours and the rest of our region become poised to enter the next phase of their economic development. While these two fundamental objectives continue to make our education system an effective whetstone for our competitiveness, there is no denying that there still remain certain inadequacies in our primary school system, for example, the denial of secondary education to the monolingual cohort and the early streaming at Primary 3. 1.”
“I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn”
“An important element of the Education Ministry's efforts to enhance and upgrade the professional image and status of teachers must be the improvement of the working conditions of teachers in schools. For sometime now, we have heard of the intention of the Ministry of Education to implement a scheme to provide executive and clerical officers as well as technicians to relieve teachers of the administrative chores that burden and detract them from the main task which is to teach. So far, we have seen no concrete steps taken to carry out this intention. In the meantime, the non-professional chores of teachers continue to increase and no assistance is forthcoming. In primary schools especially, the demands of various educational programmes put an almost unbearable amount of preparatory work on the shoulders of our teachers. They need assistance to prepare their lessons well. Perhaps a good idea that merits consideration is the employment of technicians who can assist in the preparation of teaching materials and other areas as well. Teachers will then have more time to concentrate on teaching. Something also ought to be done to give teachers a more comfortable and conducive working environment. Firstly, I am sure that the Ministry of Education will agree that principals and teachers should have their offices and common-rooms air-conditioned. Each teacher should be given adequate space in which to sit and work. All these things may seem almost mundane but they are important factors which contribute to work efficiency and job satisfaction.”
“So irrespective of whether it is a Chinese or English medium school, you must have sufficient English medium teachers to man the classes as form teachers if it is a English medium school. If it is a Chinese school, you must have sufficient number of Chinese teachers to man the classes as form teachers. Of course, not just only second language teachers can inculcate moral values, everybody should - second language teacher, PE teacher, form teacher, whoever he is. They all have their role to play in as far as inculcating moral values is concerned. But by the nature of things, the way the school is structured, the form teacher is someone who is in attendance with the key subjects in the class. I think all of us have attended schools before and we knew what a form teacher did. I do not have to explain that. I think to have a second language teacher, whether the second language teacher is an English medium teacher or a Chinese medium teacher, is not the most effective way of manning the classes as this will crete disciplinary problem. The Ministry may not be able to solve the teacher shortage straight away, but the Ministry is spending a lot of money on so many things, which is a good thing. And in the areas of priority the Ministry should look at this problem, maybe not this year, but perhaps a start next year and the year after.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister of State said that I was trying to exaggerate the problem. I think her Ministry is trying to underplay the problem on this question of international class. If you take a school, with just only two classes that are international and, as explained in my statement earlier, these are the kind of classes that pose a lot of disciplinary problems. 80 children in two classes, not only do they pose disciplinary problems themselves, they also infect the rest of the children. The discipline will become very difficult to manage. Therefore, it is not a small problem. It is a big problem. Now, on the question of the number of teachers. Of course, with regard to the question by Mr Chiam See Tong on the reduction in class size the Senior Minister of State gave an example and he mentioned the figure of 7,000. But the problem that I am posing and suggesting a solution does not need 7,000 more teachers. In most cases it is only a question of one or two more teachers per school. That's all. And it is only a question of 200, 300 or 400 more teachers in order to take care of this problem. I think it is not unmanageable. Secondly, I am not talking about English medium teachers as such. I am saying that in English schools, where English is taught as a first language, you have to have the EL1 teacher as a form teacher, simply because the core subjects, English, Science, Mathematics and Social Studies, are important subjects, and these subjects have to be handled by that particular medium teacher. In a Chinese school, Chinese is taught as a first language. Likewise, you need to have enough CL1 teachers to be form teachers.”
“The permitted teacher complement formula is such that it does not allow for one EL1 teacher per class in schools where English is taught as the first language or one CL1 teacher per class where Chinese is taught as the first language. If we believe that primary education is important, we must provide our schools with adequate manpower so that they can be run well. A more liberal staffing quota, in addition to the present complement of second language and other teachers, which will enable every class to have a form teacher to look after the pupils for the greater part of each day is extremely desirable. In our secondary schools, the staffing quota is a little more generous but with the teachers specialising in certain subjects and unable to teach all subjects, there are also problems. Giving a couple more teachers to schools involved in special projects like pastoral care and off-loading technical and domestic science teachers does not help, again because these teachers are limited by their specialisation. The workload of those who teach the core subjects of English, Mathematics and Science and subjects like Literature, History and Geography is still a very heavy one. Just as in the primary schools, there is a good case for the more liberal staffing quota in secondary schools. All efforts to improve our education system will be seriously hampered if in our schools we do not have adequate manpower to do the job better. Will the Ministry of Education not consider increasing the staffing quota for schools with suitable teachers?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it used to be that in all our primary schools, each class had a form teacher. This form teacher taught the core subjects of English, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies and remained in that class for the greater part of each day. He or she was the father or mother figure to the pupils of that class. The form teacher and his or her pupils were able to build between them the kind of relationship and rapport, the lasting bond which is an essential element in a desirable teacher-pupil relationship. The form teacher knew each of his or her pupils well and the pupils in turn knew their teacher. This helped to improve discipline and enhance the opportunities to inculcate sound moral values. Today, in all our primary schools there is the emerging phenomenon of the multi-teacher or "international class" as it is commonly called. The class has no form teacher in the sense that I have described. The chores of marking the attendance and collecting the fees are undertaken by a second language teacher who spends very little time there. And for the rest of the day, several different teachers come in and out of the class to teach the various subjects. Hence the label "international class". It is a well-known fact in our schools that the international class usually lacks discipline and is difficult to manage. These children do not benefit from the permanent stabilising effect of having a form teacher as a father or mother figure. We have international classes in our primary schools because the staffing quota or the permitted teacher complement, as it is called, is inadequate.”
“I must urge the Ministry of Education to allow as many serving non-graduate teachers as possible, who have the ability and qualifications, to join the degree programme and attain graduate status. Those who have proven their worth in the service more than deserve the opportunity to further themselves. This incentive will no doubt serve as a catalyst that will motivate them to excel further.”
“A selection procedure based on an interview alone is inadequate. Surely one cannot accurately assess a person's ability to be a good teacher purely on an oral interview. What is required, I believe, is more substantial evidence of a person's ability to handle real pupils in the context of the classroom. I would like to propose that an internship scheme of at least six months' duration be introduced in the first part of all our teacher-training courses. During this period, the novice teacher would be closely supervised by an experienced teacher. I am aware that at present, those in the Certificate-in-Education programme, for example, undergo 10 weeks of teaching practice per year in their 2-year course. I think that this teaching practice segment of our teacher-training courses should be perfected into a proper internship scheme. Such a scheme will also serve as a useful early warning system. We will not have to waste a great deal of money to pay a person and train him, only to see him resign from the service in frustration after he is posted to a school because he finds he is not cut out to be a teacher. The six months in school will give the student-teacher a flavour of what the life of a teacher is like, and allow him the opportunity to decide whether that is what he wants for himself. It will also allow for an assessment of his teaching abilities so that at the end of the internship, it will then be decided whether he should or should not proceed with the course. I must also put in a word for the many serving non-graduate teachers in both our primary and secondary schools who are anxious to know how they will benefit from the proposed degree programme.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the proposal to initiate a degree course for 'A' level holders which will equip them to become primary school teachers is both timely and laudable. It will not only serve to enhance the professional status of teachers but also attract into the teaching profession bright young people who want both to have a university degree and to teach in primary school. This move will also allow serving non-graduate teachers the opportunity to acquire a degree and will enhance the career prospects of serving officers. The Ministry of Education is adopting a very bold plan in its efforts to upgrade the quality of teacher-training. It must ensure that when this is implemented, optimal results are achieved with minimal wastage, especially now that the training course for primary school teachers will be a 4-year degree course. Then benefits can be more quickly realised and seen in our schools. To begin with, the people who choose to enter the profession must be carefully selected. It must be recognised that the teaching profession has unique requirements and that the ultimate test of a good teacher is what he can do when left alone and on his own, in front of a classroom of pupils. Can he communicate in such fashion as to get his pupils to think, to react and to contribute to the lesson? Can he get students to 'discover' things for themselves and to become 'thinking' and 'feeling' individuals? At primary school level, all this is even more difficult because he is dealing with very young children. So, in addition to good communication skills, the selection process must take into account the aptitude and attitude of the candidates. The primary school teacher must love to be with and to take care of little children. This is absolutely essential.”
“I have not finished. Of course, the underlying reasons for the teaching of Religious Knowledge are always valid since time immemorial - to teach man to be good. After all, our moral education basically wants to achieve that. Since 1959, not just 1982, the underlying reasons for moral education have always been the same. And that is why from 1959 to 1982, in the mission schools particularly, Religious Knowledge was an optional subject. But the Education Ministry made it compulsory in our schools. That was the mistake. So today we are going back to pre-1982 and do not try to absolve from the mistake. It is quite all right. It is a genuine, sincere mistake made with a good intention. It is quite all right.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to ask the Minister of State, is it not true that prior to 1982 Religious Knowledge was also an optional subject? Prior to 1982, all along Religious Knowledge was taught as an optional subject. In 1989, we are going back to pre-1982. The mistake in 1982 was to make RK compulsory. So how could the Minister of State say that there was no mistake. Dr Tay Eng Soon rose -”
“Therefore the system of education and the course contents of the Civics subject taught will determine what type of younger generation will be produced. We all hope that our next generation will be of good quality imbued with good ethical spirit and sense of citizenship with refined cultural standing. Therefore, I hope the Ministry of Education in compiling Civics course will pay great attention to culling and harnessing the various aspects and scopes of the deeper essence and values from various sources without undue religious colour as education is a sacred task. To educate the people, four aspects of education should be stressed, they are moral, knowledge, physical and social education. Without RK as a curriculum subject in school will not make our younger generation walking corpses as alleged by the Member for Potong Pasir. On the contrary, with the subject Civics introduced into the schools, I believe, our people will be imbued with more Eastern traditional cultural values and more able to promote our economy and the advancement of our country a step forward in our nation building.”
“The learning of Civics in place of RK is very appropriate and timely. But what is important now is to look forward, not to look back. What we should do now is to talk about how is the Ministry of Education going to compile a series of textbooks for the teaching of Civics in schools in order to meet the requirements of our society, a plural, multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural society and to bring up a new generation of educated, cultured and loyal citizens. I hope that the new Civics course will include the following. Other than emphasizing the teaching of moral education, I hope we should also teach the younger generation about the principles of life, concept of the family and so on, introduce to them our history, our people and their customs, and also introduce to them the principal teachings and the truths of the various religions existing in our country and, of course, also inculcate Confucian thoughts, as the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has just said. Confucianism is not just confined to the Chinese society. Its universal teaching is applicable to all people and countries. It meets our local situations also. Or, we can teach them some suitable thoughts and ideology befitting our situation. Since we do not have a long history, I also hope that the Ministry can also adopt the deeds and achievements of some historic figures as good teaching materials from various countries such as, say, Yue-Fei from China and others to cultivate the spirit of national consciousness and patriotism in our young. We also know that different types of music used for different situations will produce different moods and atmospheres.”
“So we could go back to pre-1982. The Christian schools could still continue to do whatever they had done before 1982. The Muslims, with so many mosques now and through Mendaki, MUIS or whatever body, because they are interested in the children's education and since so much efforts have been made, they can do that. I want to make it very clear. I am all for religious education. I believe that religion is very essential for an individual, for those who believe in it. A religion can make a man a much better man and I think we want that. But there is a right place to do it and a wrong place to do it and the Singapore school is the wrong place to do it. Mr Choo Wee Khiang (Marine Parade GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, basically I agree very much to the Minister's exposition and I welcome his proposition very much. In terms of Singapore's educational history this is a very important milestone. It is a very important decision. I hope the Minister will also consider and adopt the opinions expressed by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary Mr Ho Kah Leong, Dr Aline Wong and Mr Goh Choon Kang. I believe that when the subject Religious Knowledge is changed to be an optional subject and the new subject Civics is introduced in the schools these changes will be acceptable to and get the support of the parents, the teachers, principals and the people of our society. The subject of Religious Knowledge taught in the past few years may not now meet the requirement of our present circumstances. Times have changed. Everybody knows that Singapore is an oriental, multi-religious, multi-racial and multi-cultural society. If we continue to allow our young people to take RK as a curriculum subject in school it will be limited in scope.”
“If you want to be serious about making sure that our future generations are properly imbued with the right values and the right religion, I think the choice is not with the State. The choice is with the individual. And every parent, if he is serious about what his son or daughter should profess in regard to religion, the first responsibility is to make sure that he goes to the right place to be taught by the right people on religion. I say without fear of contradiction that the Singapore school is not competent for such a role because we are not made up that way. Our school is a secular school manned by teachers who are well trained to teach English, Mathematics, Science and all the secular subjects. Did the Ministry of Education or the PSC recruit teachers on the basis of their religious qualifications? It is nothing like that. If you want to put the moral future of your children in such an unsuitable situation, that is not the right way to do things. Therefore, I think the decision in 1982 to introduce compulsory teaching of Religious Knowledge was a wrong decision and today I am more convinced that it is a wrong decision. At least, now the Government has got the courage to say that it is a wrong decision. We should encourage the churches, the temples, the mosques, and the parents to take a greater responsibility in the religious education of their children. We should help them. And although this is not the responsibility of the State, there are ways and means in which the State can help indirectly. Before 1982, as Mr Chiam mentioned, the Christian schools did a great deal by making great contributions, particularly in religious education and things like that. They did that without going through the formal curriculum. They found other means of doing so.”
“Because it is only with this recognition that finally it is the parents who take the responsibility to ensure the moral well-being of their children that we will ensure that our children are brought up properly. To pass it to the schools will be the wrong place. I come to the last point which is that the Singapore schools are not adequate to teach religion. In certain countries where they have a state religion, because it is a state religion, it is part of their responsibility as a state to make sure that that religion is propagated and that religion is taught in the schools. It is essential in such a situation. What do they do in such a situation? Apart from setting aside periods for such religious knowledge studies, they make sure that they employ the right type of religious teachers to impart not just knowledge but also the religious values. Therefore, if you look around, in some countries where they have a state religion, where they teach religious knowledge as part of the responsibility of the state, they employ competent and qualified religious teachers to teach. It will be disastrous if you get religious teachers to teach Mathematics, English and Science. Equally, it will be disastrous if you get secular teachers who are trained to teach English, Science and Mathematics to teach religion. It is not just another subject that you read up, because you must not take religion as a trivial matter. You must not let teachers take religion as a trivial matter where they just read up and go to class and teach. Many of the problems of religious fanaticism and deviant behaviour is a result of people teaching the wrong things about religions.”
“Look at the number of criminals in the prison. Ask the Minister for Home Affairs. Do you mean the prisoners do not know what is right and what is wrong? Do you mean they do not know the different types of religions? In fact, if you examine their background, many of them are not ignorant of religions or ignorant of what is right or what is wrong. I think many of them went in because they lacked the moral fibre, the courage or the morality to take the decision not to do the wrong thing at the time when there was a great temptation. Therefore, if religion is to be of any use to inculcate this moral fibre, to give this moral value and to bring about a better citizen, I think religion cannot be taught in the school in a secular state where there is a total absence of this religious element. Because without faith, without the practice of that religion, a person will find very little value to just know of Religious Knowledge, if the objective is to make him a better person. Therefore, the school as compared to the church, mosque or temple is the last place where Religious Knowledge should be taught. The right place is in the church if you are a Christian, in the mosque if you are a Muslim, in the temple if you are a Hindu or Buddhist. Because, apart from the knowledge, it is strengthened by the atmosphere, by the element of faith, then there is a value. I fully support the Minister's point that parents must recognise that ultimately it is their responsibility. Now we are telling the parents squarely and emphatically and I think they must not abdicate from this responsibility.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Minister's move to remove the teaching of Religious Knowledge from the curriculum. I think the decision to introduce the teaching of Religious Knowledge as a compulsory subject in 1982 was a wrong decision. To answer Mr Chiam's point whether this actually changes the Government's decision on religion, the answer must be no, because the position is very clear with regard to religion. Everybody is free to practise whatever religion he wants to practise. The state is secular. On that fundamental, there is no change. In 1982, when Religious Knowledge was introduced as a compulsory subject at Secondary 3 and 4, it was not to propagate or to enhance the religious status of certain religions. That was not the purpose. The purpose was in one of the twin objectives of education. The twin objectives are to teach every child the three R's and to make sure that he is morally sound, he has got the moral fibre to be a good citizen, a good father, a good member of the community. While in the past there were subjects like Civics and Moral Education to ensure that this aspect of education was achieved, it was thought that perhaps Religious Knowledge could better achieve this second objective of education and that was why it was introduced. I had certain reservations then because it was a direct contradiction of the State philosophy, ie, the State is a secular state and therefore it should have nothing to do with how religion should be taught. Now that it has taken place for the last six years, the more I look at it, the more convinced I am that it was a wrong decision. The question is whether a person can be a better person with Religion Knowledge. The mere knowledge of a religion itself does not make a person a better person.”
“With the introduction of caning for traffickers and employers who employ illegal immigrant workers, I am quite sure it will act as a strong deterrent to them from doing so. With the passing of this Bill, employers and traffickers will now find it not worth the while to take risk in employing foreign workers illegally. It is with this in mind that I support the Bill before us as a further measure to eliminate the problem of illegal immigrant workers working in Singapore. What it finally means is this - even if there were foreign workers who take the risk of entering Singapore illegally to work, they would now find difficulty in getting employers or traffickers who are willing to employ them. This makes coming to Singapore illegally to work a very unattractive and unrealistic proposition.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. No one can dispute that the presence of a large number of illegal immigrant workers can pose serious social and security problems. When caning was introduced for illegal immigrants entering Singapore to work in January this year, many Singaporeans were surprised to find that more than 10,000 illegal immigrant workers surrendered themselves during the amnesty period. This certainly was a very large number and if left unchecked, more illegal immigrant workers will enter Singapore to work. With the benefit of hindsight, it must be obvious even to opponents of caning that the introduction of caning for illegal immigrant workers was effective in flushing out the illegal workers. More than 10,000 of them were subsequently sent back to their respective countries. The measure taken had initially caused some flurry in Thailand over the issue of Thai illegal immigrant workers. Nonetheless, the matter has for the time being amicably resolved. However, there still remains a residue of the problem of illegal immigrant workers. This problem will not be solved completely if we do not take the stronger action to deter traffickers or local employers from hiring illegal immigrant workers. Despite the stringent measures in our legislation for illegal immigrant workers, there could be some who are still prepared to take the risk of entering Singapore illegally to work, hoping that they would not be detected, especially when there are still employers who are willing to hire them illegally in order to save the payment of foreign workers levy to the Government. This is because the law at present is not stringent enough to deter unscrupulous employers from doing so.”
“We have invested a great deal in our educational system in terms of financial and manpower resources. We must not allow this to go to waste for want of competent and an enlightened management at critical levels of the system. Most of all we must not fail because the future of our children and of our nation are at stake.”
“' The principal who is a people centred manager is one who recognizes that the teacher is a key factor in the school. Such a principal would devote his time and energy to developing his teachers and to creating an environment in which they become self-motivated to give of their best. The net result of this enlightened approach will be that the teachers will be positively motivated to do their best for the school and the ultimate beneficiaries will be the pupils under their charge. Two significant developments have prompted my concern. The first is that the Ministry is giving greater autonomy and discretion to the principals to run their schools. And the second is the provision by the Ministry of training for aspiring principals and vice-principals to attend the Diploma in Education (Administration) courses. I welcome the move to give principals greater autonomy and discretion in the running of the schools. But I wonder how prepared some of the new principals and vice-principals are in accepting and properly exercising such powers. I am therefore anxious to know about the training the Ministry of Education is providing in their EDA courses and also the way these aspirants to positions of leadership in our schools are selected. How much emphasis is placed on the importance of understanding and dealing with the human factor in people management? By what criteria are they judged to be fit to be principals and vice-principals of our schools? What are the qualities they possess that make them special and worthy of selection? I firmly believe that as the older and experienced principals retire and leave the service, we must carefully select their successors and train them well.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Education is the largest employer in Singapore with a staff of about 20,000. Among them, a large number of younger people in middle management positions in the Ministry and in the schools, many of whom are new and lacking in experience. The problem at present is that the teacher sometimes perceives the Ministry of Education as a large unwieldy bureaucracy, which is insensitive and unresponsive to his personal needs and aspirations. The teacher sometimes sees his principal who is his immediate supervisor as a purveyor of instructions from the Ministry or from the Instruction Manuals, and not as a person who provides professional leadership in the school. The problem is this. The Ministry has not developed principals who are their first-line managers fast enough to meet its needs. We need in our schools principals who will treat their teachers in ways that lead to high performance and career satisfaction. Many large corporations in America and Japan have had to deal with the problem of ensuring that every individual member of the corporation sees himself as an important part of the whole organization and as having a vital contribution to make to it. Perhaps the Ministry of Education should learn how to manage and motivate people from the experience of such corporations. This approach has become known as people centred management. J. Sterling Livingston of the Sterling Institute, USA, said: 'The difference between employees who perform well and those who perform poorly is not how much they are paid, but how they are treated. All managers can learn to treat their employees in ways that will lead to mutual expectations of high performance. The most effective managers always do.”
“These values, to be effective, must constitute the school's ethos, its beliefs and its practices. It is only when society, parents, Ministry of Education officials, principals and teachers themselves subscribe to the value system, that it will become a living reality. A value system only begins to function when there is a community of believers subscribing to it. However, if there exists only a superficial acknowledgment of the system, it is destined to fail. People who lack conviction will not reflect the value system in their daily conduct. What will become apparent mo all then is the existence of a double standard - do as I say but not as I do. Hypocrisy of this kind will neutralize all attempts to promote the system. These are warning signposts that I would like to set up along with the accolades of moral values.”
“One challenge that is facing us is to put up a creditable team of experts who will not only be able to identify and prioritize the values we have, but also arrange for their introduction into our schools. Another challenge is to provide a definition of core values that transcends ethnic differences, reconciles incompatabilities and encompasses a universal outlook. I will venture to suggest that in its search for core values, the Ministry should first look at its own backyard. Over the years we have had a whole host of values education programmes, from Education for Living and Good Citizenship to Being and Becoming and Religious Knowledge. I am sure that the Ministry will find a wealth of materials and information in its own archives. Our problem has been that we have always relegated values education to an unimportant, secondary position in our school curriculum. The answer is not only to make the teaching of core values merely a subject in the school time-table, but also to make our core values a part of the ethos of every school community. The inculcation of core values, if they are to have a life-long effect, must be internalized in each child. In order to achieve this, our core values education programme must build upon the real life examples and experiences that children can see, practise and understand. The teaching of the values must not only be formal but also pervasive, otherwise it will sound like shallow moralizing and will lack the ring of authenticity. These values must permeate the school system and be reflected in its organizational structure, its daily transactions and routines, the way staff and pupils are dealt with, the school rules, and the manner in which critical situations which will arise from time to time are handled.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, the Education Ministry's decision to incorporate the teaching of core values in the primary school curriculum is to be applauded. The move is timely to check the insidious erosion of traditional values that is taking place today. Recently, the Ministry of Education sent a Study Team to Taiwan and Hong Kong to learn how they have kept their core values amid change and modernization. While there is no denying that we can always learn something from the experience and experiments of others, I hope that the superficial impressions formed from glimpses of two homogeneous societies will not be the basis on which Singapore's core values are formulated. Singapore is a multi-racial, multi-lingual and multi-religious society, quite different in composition from Taiwan and Hong Kong. It is obvious that the core values which should be taught in our schools must serve the objectives of promoting social cohesiveness and developing a Singaporean identity out of the diverse groups of Singaporeans. That these must be essentially Asian is axiomatic. They must also be values which uphold the three most dearly held Asian institutions of family, community and country, besides the values which promote self-development. I hope that in its eagerness to draw up a core values progrmame, the Ministry of Education does not go about it the wrong way. There are certain values that we cherish in Singapore and which have served us well. They have sustained us through turbulent times. Otherwise, we would not have survived and prospered as a nation. These are the values that we must identify, preserve and teach our young.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I ask the Minister three questions, I just want to make a brief point. I welcome the Minister's statement that this pay revision is across the board and not just confined to Administrative Officers. My questions are: (1) Why 7% for the Superscale Officers and 4% for the Timescale and the others? (2) When he talks of 4% increase and 7% increase, is it of the basic salary or is it of the gross, that is to say, basic plus the 1982-84 NWC component? (3) I believe the Minister mentioned that the Government has decided to give 1ª-month variable bonus based on the assumption that the economic growth will be between 5-8%. Supposing the economy grows by 9-10%, will it be more than that? Mr S. Chandra Das (Cheng San GRC): Mr Speaker, Sir, like Mr Sia Khoon Seong, I also welcome the Minister's statement for the across-the-board payment of 4% to all the people in the public service. This clearly indicates that the Government takes into account not only performance of Permanent Secretaries but also daily-rated workers. Sir, I have two questions for the Minister. Firstly, is the Minister aware that increasing the salary alone is not the total solution to this problem? What is really required in the service, I believe, is more accelerated promotions to narrow the gap. Has this problem been studied by his Committee and, if so, what measures have been recommended? Since the civil service is an extremely large organization, it may be difficult for the Public Service Commission to have frequent promotion exercises. My second question to the Minister is: are there any plans to decentralize the functions of the PSC, eg, having separate commissions, say, for the Police Force, the Teaching Service or the Engineering Service?”
“Reading the amendment in the context of the Government's stand one must conclude that what he means is groups outside Singapore. 2.37 pm”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I did not anywhere in my speech say that Francis Seow has some secret American funds tucked under somewhere. I never said that. What I merely said was the fact that the Government of America's assurance that no American government fund was used should not preclude us from later on coming to the conclusion that there could be some American money involved somewhere, not necessarily from the American government. I have also stated that the Minister for Trade and Industry said yesterday in this House that the matter on the financial position of Francis Seow is under investigation. The truth will be known. So I am making no judgment as to whether Francis Seow received any fund from anywhere. But what I am trying to tell the Member for Potong Pasir is not to be so naive just because the American government says that it does not use its funds, therefore no other sources of American money were involved. They could not necessarily be involved but it should not preclude us from that conclusion. That is my point. In the investigation I think we have got to be thorough, and not on the basis of an assurance from the Americans, therefore we keep out the American source from the investigation. That is my point. He said that in his earlier speech on his amendment he had already indicated that "pressure groups" did not include foreign pressure groups. So I wonder why did he move that amendment in the first place? Because I think the Government's position has been very clear - Singapore politics is for Singaporeans, including individuals and groups. So if that statement is very clear, the Government's position is very clear, why is he moving that amendment?”
“Just as the form of democratic government differs from one Western country to another, our form of democracy must therefore suit our circumstances. What is important is not the form, but the spirit of democracy. And to keep the spirit alive, we must ensure that every five years every citizen is given the right to elect his leaders according to his wishes through the secret ballot.”
“The question we must ask is: Human rights for whom? In the Singapore context, should we not think more of the collective human rights of 2� million Singaporeans whose basic concerns are: (1) that Singapore be a free, yet secure, place to live in, free from want and poverty, free from the fear of being mugged while walking in the streets, especially during the night, and secure in the hope for a better quality of life for themselves and for their children; (2) their right to be protected in their labour and their property; (3) their right to religious freedom; and (4) their right to live in peace and harmony. Why should the human rights of a few individuals who are out to cause mischief through subversion, religious fanaticism and racial strife, thereby transgressing the collective human rights of 2� million Singaporeans, rank supreme? Commonsense tells us that no rights of the individual, whether human or civil, are absolute. Rights are always relative to the larger community interests, whether they are in the West or in the East. So let us not be conned and cowed by these so-called champions of human rights. Their motives are suspect. Let me now deal with a final point - the exportation of American ideology, or to be precise, the exportation of American form of democracy to foreign countries. The United States has no right to impose any imitation of its political and economic order on any other country. Firstly, the American model is far from perfect. Secondly, our different stages of political and socio-economic development, our different cultural values and traditions must necessarily require us to find our own to our problems. No doubt, democracy is a political philosophy we have adopted.”
“So the Member for Potong Pasir must not think that it is laughable that the Government of Singapore should find some American bureaucrats, some disgruntled Singaporeans and some Marxist conspirators involved in a network to subvert Singapore. True, their objectives and dreams may be different but their target is the same. It might not have started off as a joint operation by all the parties concerned. The Marxist plot was probably hatched without the Americans knowing it, neither did the Marxist know of the American activities. What Hendrickson tried to do was to get Patrick Seong and Francis Seow, apart from instigating some professionals to stand against the PAP, to exploit the issue of detention without trial and not to advance the ulterior objectives of the Marxist conspirators. The amendment proposed by the Member for Potong Pasir also contends that under our democratic system, legitimate pressure groups do have a say in our domestic affairs. By this, I suppose he includes the so-called Amnesty International, the Asiawatch Group, the Committee of 100 in Australia and so on. Is the Member aware of their record of activities? Does he not know that the list of persons whose rights they champion includes members of terrorist organizations? Mr Chiam See Tong rose -”
“If the PAP were to do that, for example, would he and other critics of PAP not accuse the PAP of adopting foul tactics and subverting the SDP? At a rally at the Toa Payoh Stadium, and also just now, the Member for Potong Pasir claimed he could not see any link between the subversive activities of the Marxist conspirators and the First Secretary of the American Embassy. And therefore, according to him at the Stadium, the charges against them were laughable. The Member for Potong Pasir could not be so naive as to believe that just because the two groups have widely different motives and ideologies, they could not act with a common purpose against the national interests of Singapore. The Member must know that in politics anything is possible. It is not uncommon to find strange bedfellows in unholy alliances if it suits their purpose. Call it whatever you like, political expediency or alliance of convenience is nothing new under the Singapore sun. Take, for example, the antics of the Opposition politicians in Singapore, particularly during election time. We would see most Opposition parties coming together, not because they have the same objective or ideology but because they have to join hands temporarily if they wanted to down the PAP and win seats. Is this not a classic example of an unholy alliance? The Member for Potong Pasir must surely be aware that, in the Philippines, there are some priests and nuns giving assistance to communist insurgents. Would the Member for Potong Pasir not agree that this is the unholiest of the unholy alliances? Here we have one group which believes in God and Love and another group which not only does not believe in God but believes in violence.”
“On the other hand, there is another couple where the husband batters the wife and causes serious injuries, and the wife's life is in danger. Don't you think that it is the duty of the neighbours to restrain him or report this to the police, or the Social Welfare Department? Perhaps interference in this case is justified. Isn't Singapore a happy and relatively prosperous country where the citizens are well provided and have the right once in five years to decide who they want to govern by secret ballot? Singapore is certainly not like Vietnam, South Africa or any such like country where rights and freedoms currently enjoyed by Singaporeans do not exist. Singapore can be better, of course, but what Singapore should be ultimately should be Singaporeans' business. Singaporeans fought and achieved independence some 25 years ago from the British because we wanted to regain our dignity and self-respect as an independent nation and to have a complete say and control of our domestic affairs and destiny. Without foreign interference, we can best prosper and progress. The axiom that "Singapore politics is for Singaporeans only" must therefore forever remain sacrosanct to us in order that we can continue to prosper and progress as Singaporeans with a sense of pride and dignity. How can anyone with any commonsense disagree with that? Can pressure groups outside Singapore have a right to meddle in our affairs? Will anyone, for example, allow an outsider to have a say in his own domestic affairs? Or will the Member for Potong Pasir, for example, allow the PAP to have a say as to who should be elected into the SDP Executive Committee? And better still, to field a few proxies to stand for office in the SDP?”
“The fact that today we are making this issue an important issue and keep on reminding ourselves and Singaporeans of the gravity of the situation is merely to ensure that Singapore's security and future will be ensured. I think the purpose is not to sour up the relationship more than necessary. The Member for Potong Pasir also said the statutory declarations of Patrick Seong and Francis Seow were made under duress, were made while under detention. And because of their concern for their families, they had no choice but to spill the beans. The question is, are they spilling the right beans? Are they telling the truth, or are they not telling the truth? Anyone, whether it be Patrick Seong or Francis Seow, who is genuinely concerned about the well-being of his family, I think, in the first place will not want to get involved in anything that he knows will end him in trouble. Of course, the Member for Potong Pasir has also picked the point that the Minister for Trade and Industry has said yesterday about Hendrickson's background when he was in the Philippines. He said, "Well, he helped Aquino to power. But what is wrong with that?" In other words, he is saying that interference in the political affairs of a country is justified. First, in the Philippines situation, in the case of Aquino, it was a popular uprising against a dictatorial regime. The circumstances were different. Interference from outside is only justified under certain circumstances. Let me, by way of illustration, give this example. A happy and loving couple next door quarrel now and then over family matters. It would be wrong for the neighbours to interfere and, worse still, to take sides and instigate one party against the other.”
“Actions were taken by officials without the sanction and the knowledge of the government. That was why President Reagan and Shultz and other political figures absolve themselves from those actions. So my point is that there could be genuine non-government interference. There could be sincerity in what the government as such said, but the officials down the line do not quite act what the government policies sometimes are. Therefore, the fact that the statement was made to the effect that no American government fund was used does not preclude the fact that some other American money was involved. But we are at this stage not in a position to say anything because, as the Minister for Trade and Industry has said, the matter is still under investigation. And whether the truth will be found later or not, time will tell. The Member for Potong Pasir and the Member for Ayer Rajah, who seldom agrees with the Member for Potong Pasir except this time, said that we should not keep on with the rhetorics because we may make the relationship between America and Singapore worse. I think to a point they are right, and I think the Minister for Foreign Affairs has put the position in very good perspective. We value the relationship on a government-to-government basis between Singapore and America because there are certain common ideas, common interests that we share. But if certain errant officials had committed certain acts detrimental to Singapore's interests, we should take the opportunity to point out the danger of what these activities could mean, not so much what has happened but much more: what could happen in future if we do not register the point that on matters like this we should take them very seriously.”
“And other operations of the CIA. People in the world know that funds could be obtained through other means, like the illegal sales of arms in the case of the Iran-Contra scandal.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Member for Potong Pasir can clarify later on when I have finished.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the original motion and reject the amendment proposed by the Member for Potong Pasir. Considering the eloquent defence put up by the Member for Potong Pasir for America and the actions of America, it would appear that Hendrickson made an error in his political judgment. He should have cultivated the Member for Potong Pasir rather than Mr Francis Seow. Perhaps he should continue with the lunches that he often had with the Member for Potong Pasir without going through other devious offers of political asylum, because we understand that the Member for Potong Pasir did not ask that. It would have been less troublesome for Hendrickson and American interests would still be advanced. The Member for Potong Pasir made a song and dance about the point made by the American Government - that no Government fund was used and that the Singapore Government accepted the position. Because of that, anything about American involvement should therefore not be linked. I think the Member for Potong Pasir cannot forget the Iran-Contra scandal from the revelation. Mr Chiam See Tong rose -”
“So why can it not be that education also be one of those schemes which the contributors can make use of, so that when their children grow up they can be in a better position either to look after their parents or to be less dependent on their parents? If you look at the proposal from the GPC (Education), there are safeguards and the safeguards include: (1) That this is to come from the investible portion of the CPF, not from the whole CPF savings; (2) There is a list of approved institutions and safeguards which the contributors must satisfy before they can be allowed to withdraw from the CPF; and (3) That some arrangement be made where the children will return whatever they have taken from their parents from their own CPF savings. I think the Minister has got to look at the proposal in that light when he is reviewing the whole policy again.”
“Sir, I welcome the Minister's announcement that he will review the issues involved behind the proposal by the GPC (Education). He mentioned that he saw the GPC proposal as nothing more than a loan scheme and he was concerned that it might be difficult to enforce the repayment part of it, and this might deter him from taking a decision in favour of allowing CPF to be used for education. If he were to see this purely from a banker's point of view, purely as a commercial proposition, perhaps that is a valid argument. But this is much more than that. This has got social implications. It is just like the Government, through the HDB, rents out HDB flats. There are a lot of HDB flat dwellers on rental who are in arrears of rental to HDB. Does that prevent the Government from renting out HDB flats? The answer is surely no because there is a social objective behind this. As he has said, the fundamental objective of CPF is for old age. On that score I think every one of us agrees. The question is to allow CPF to be used for education, is it in some way consistent with this policy? In my view, I think the answer is yes. If CPF is used for old age, if we were to interpret it in a rigid and a straightforward manner, it must only mean that CPF savings can only be withdrawn after the age of 55. But the fact that the Government has devised schemes like allowing the CPF contributors to withdraw their savings well before their retirement age to purchase properties - that itself is meant for old age. The Government has come up with a scheme to allow the CPF contributors to invest in shares and gold so that the savings can be enhanced when they retire - that is consistent with its fundamental policy for old age.”
“Sir, are the library facilities, for example, in the Pre-U centre as good as the library facilities in the junior college, a factor very essential for good education?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, has the Minister of State himself visited a Pre-U centre and a junior college to see the facilities in the classrooms? I am not talking about sports facilities. I am not talking of just the peripheral comparison. It is the teacher/pupil ratio. Has he made a comparison of that?”
“Sir, would the Minister of State not agree that the poor performance of these 3-year Pre-U course students is the result of the lesser attention paid by the Ministry of Education on these students as compared to the junior colleges, in terms of the facilities provided and so forth?”