Tony Tan Keng Yam
Singapore
“One of the problems which they have in Britain is that, up to recently, they have no means to stop people coming into Britain and preaching in their mosques messages of hate, jihad and violence. Here, MUIS monitors our mosques very carefully, what is being preached at Friday prayers.”
“Sir, I am not going to enter into a debate about whether the war in Iraq is justified or not. That is another issue. But I would say, Sir, that with all the measures which have been taken over the last three years since 9/11, including the war in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq, the arrest of the Al Qaeda leaders, the detention of the JI lea…”
“Sir, we are extending the CCTV coverage in our bus stations, MRT stations and other places in Singapore where people congregate. It is a part of life now. For example, at our MRT stations, all our CCTV cameras are those where the films are recorded and we can analyse them. Surveillance is one of the effective ways of deterring terrorism.”
“The Muslim community in the UK has contributed to the healing process and has worked hard with the other communities to strengthen the moderate voice of Islam.”
“I would say again, Sir, that what we should do is when you see something which is suspicious, if you see a bag which is left unattended, report to some authority. We will look into it. We have to. And I am glad that we are getting more reports today, be vigilant.”
“It could reach here. We have to live with it. We support the war in Iraq. We believe that it is good for us to join the coalition led by the US against terror. The fight against terror is worldwide. We cannot opt out by not taking part. We are in it. We must continue whatever the difficulties.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,158 lines we hold for Tony Tan Keng Yam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 24.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, having been Chairman and CEO of OCBC, I would like to speak on whether it was proper or improper for Senior Minister and DPM Lee Hsien Loong to purchase a unit each in Nassim Jade and Scotts 28. First, a little background. During the period, January 1992 to July 1995, when I served as Chairman and CEO of OCBC, the Bank sold the following properties: (a) 87 apartments in a condominium development at Tanjong Rhu. These apartments were sold by private treaty to various members of the public; (b) 156 terrace and semi-detached houses in a landed-property development along Lentor Avenue. The houses were sold in two phases. The first phase comprising 81 properties was conducted on an open launch, first-come-first-served basis. In the second phase, 51 properties were sold by closed tender and 24 properties were sold by private treaty to various members of the public. In the above sales, OCBC, when necessary, gave discounts to list prices to effect sales, but no director or employee of the Bank was allowed to book units ahead of the public or given discounts which were not available to the public. This was in line with OCBC's established policy which seeks to maximise the return to the Bank in respect of properties sold by the Bank. Sir, the purpose for my relating how OCBC sells properties is not to promote OCBC but to make the point that developers use a variety of methods to sell their properties in order to get the maximum return. Buying and selling of properties is an inexact art, not a precise science. And even experienced developers find it difficult to read the market accurately. Sir, I was away from Singapore when OCBC launched the first phase of the landed development at Lentor Avenue, the Countryside.”
“In addition to a robust network of bilateral relations with our friends, both in the region and elsewhere, Singapore also contributes to regional stability by actively supporting and participating in multilateral political, economic and security arrangements such as ASEAN, APEC, the ASEAN Regional Forum, and the Five Power Defence Arrangements. We believe that a regional security architecture grounded in strong bilateral relationships, interwoven with multilateral arrangements, is necessary for regional stability. This security architecture will form the framework for building confidence and for promoting regional cooperation. We see that the US military presence in the region as an integral part of this architecture. The United States will continue to have a very important role to play in maintaining peace and stability in the region.”
“Unfortunately, military modernisation in the region has led to concern that regional countries have embarked on an arms race. This, Sir, is a wrong perception. The modernisation of their armed forces by regional countries is part of their efforts to enhance their national resilience. The ASEAN approach is for each country to build up the capability to defend itself and strengthen its national resilience, while at the same time deepening and strengthening bilateral defence cooperation with one another. This approach contributes to regional resilience which is enhanced when all the countries in the region feel secure. Finally, Sir, on regional security arrangements, a point brought up by Dr Lau Teik Soon and Mr Chandra Das. Defence diplomacy is an important part of Singapore's defence strategy. Through defence diplomacy, we develop understanding and rapport with our neighbours as well as with countries outside the region by facilitating open and frank communications and building on areas of common interest. Interactions and cooperation, especially among the military establishments, create trust and confidence. Our approach to defence diplomacy is to develop ties with all countries who want to be friends with us. Singapore has good defence relations with our ASEAN partners. The range of our defence interactions with our ASEAN friends is extensive and includes cooperation in military training and defence industries. Our defence interactions with countries beyond ASEAN have also increased. Notable among these are our Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA) partners - Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom - and the United States, in particular with the US Pacific Command. The SAF trains regularly with the US Armed Forces, both in the region and in the United States.”
“In addition to providing the Government with alternative viewpoints on the regional strategic situation and security environment, the Institute will also help SAF officers to broaden their outlook and give them a deeper understanding of strategic developments in the region. Barring unforeseen circumstances, the Institute will be inaugurated by the second half of this year. Sir, we want peace but to avoid war, we must be prepared to fight and demonstrate that we have the will and the capability to fight. We cannot rely for our security on the hope that other countries will come to our assistance in times of trouble. A strong SAF, complemented by the commitment of all Singaporeans to the defence of our country, is the best assurance that we will be left in peace to cooperate with our neighbours for the betterment of the lives of our people. Sir, I now go on to the other points raised by Members. First, on regional arms modernisation, a point raised by Mr Bernard Chen. Singapore is not the only country concerned about regional uncertainties. The other countries in our region are also very conscious of the potential problems in the region and they have started programmes to upgrade their defence capabilities. They recognise that they now face different challenges. During the cold war era, their primary threats were from the communists. Their defence forces were therefore geared to fighting insurgents and communist rebels. The situation has changed with the end of the cold war. The security challenges which regional countries now have to prepare for are conventional in nature. This requires their defence forces to be trained and equipped to fight conventional warfare.”
“The other measures recommended by the Committee will be implemented expeditiously. Sir, the speed with which these changes have taken place is a reminder to us that we have to continue to keep a close watch on the strategic environment in the region. The assumptions which underlie our defence strategies and SAF operational doctrines for the past 30 years have served us well. But we need to review their continuing relevance in the light of developments in the region and the uncertainties posed by the ending of the cold war between the United States and Russia. New insights and new ideas are needed if we are to successfully lead the SAF into the 21st century and effectively position Singapore in the emerging multilateral security architecture of the region. The Ministry of Defence, together with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), has therefore agreed to sponsor the establishment of an Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, IDSS for short. 1.30 pm IDSS has three objectives: (1) to research the impact and implications of the rapidly changing post-cold war environment on Singapore's security and defence; (2) to participate in teaching a postgraduate programme in strategic studies; and (3) to keep Singapore in the loop of the growing number of regional security networks and conferences. The Institute will be registered as an autonomous body within NTU under its statutes and regulations, like most of the other 10 research centres which NTU has established in collaboration with other institutions. As an extension of NTU, the Institute will adhere to NTU's academic standards of scholarship.”
“To maintain the SAF at a high level of readiness and capability, we need to continue to invest in our defence effort so as to develop the SAF to become an integrated defence force incorporating the capabilities of the Army, Air Force and Navy to work together as an effective fighting machine during war. To achieve this, we must recruit able people to join the SAF, continually improve our training standards and have the best and most effective equipment and weapon systems that are suited for our environment. With our manpower limitations, we have to rely on technology and state-of-the-art systems to act as a force multiplier to maximise the effectiveness of our troops in battle. As a National Service army, the majority of our soldiers comprise Operationally-Ready National Servicemen (NSmen) who play a vital role in the defence of our nation. All Singaporeans should appreciate the efforts and sacrifices that our national servicemen have put in to ensure that they remain operationally-ready and are capable of rising to the nation's call when the need arises. The RECORD II Committee, under the Chairmanship of the Minister for the Environment and Second Minister for Defence, RADM Teo Chee Hean, was established in May last year to look into ways the Government and Singapore can show our appreciation to our National Servicemen for their sacrifices and their unstinting efforts. The recommendations of the Committee were made public in January this year. I am happy to announce that the Government has accepted all the recommendations put forward by the Committee. Increased tax incentives and asset enhancement schemes for National Servicemen were announced by the Finance Minister on 28th February 1996.”
“Last year, economic relations between Taiwan and China were very good. Taiwanese companies were investing billions of dollars in China. There were increasing contacts between China and Taiwan. The Straits Exchange Foundation of Taiwan and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits of China had held two meetings. All look fair for China to continue to develop economically and for China and Taiwan to reach peaceful agreement on reunification. In just one year, all this has changed. The tension and uncertainties across the Taiwan Strait now threaten to destabilise the security and prosperity of the whole Asia-Pacific region. Sir, it can take only one year for the strategic and security situation of a country to change significantly, but it takes more than one year to build a credible defence force. To have a credible defence force, you must invest for many years in people, equipment and in the development of doctrines and tactics. The best time for such an investment is when the country is doing well and everything appears to be peaceful. By the time the situation becomes tense and the need for a credible defence force becomes evident, it is too late to talk about investing in defence. When the need arises, the SAF must be ready and capable of fulfilling its mission to defend Singapore. Otherwise Singapore will pay a heavy price for our tardiness and our lack of foresight. Because of the efforts and investment which we have made over the last 30 years, the SAF is today an effective and credible defence force.”
“Sir, I would like to speak first on the security situation in the region before I go on to the specific points raised by Members. Sir, this is the first time that I am addressing the House as Minister for Defence. If I were to address the House at this time last year in my present capacity, I would be able to paint a picture of a region that was peaceful and stable with no major areas of tension or uncertainty. Today, Sir, the picture is different. As we speak in the House this afternoon, China has massed more than 150,000 soldiers together with air force and naval elements in Fujian province, opposite Taiwan. The Chinese soldiers are engaged in a major military exercise which includes the firing of missiles to land in an area just 20 nautical miles off the coast of Taiwan. Sir, 20 nautical miles is a very short distance. It is shorter than the distance you have to travel to get from Changi to Jurong. In response to the Chinese military exercise, particularly the missile tests, the Taiwanese Government has put its armed forces on full alert and has warned that it will retaliate if the Chinese Government uses force on Taiwan or any Chinese missile lands on Taiwanese territory. We are monitoring the situation closely. Should the situation warrant it, we have put in place the necessary steps to ensure the safety of SAF personnel training in Taiwan. Sir, it is not my intention on this occasion to go into the reasons which have led to the tension between China and Taiwan. The point which I want to highlight in this debate is the speed with which the strategic situation of a country can change and how quickly uncertainties, and even the possibility of war can arise in an environment which to everyone's eyes appears to be peaceful and stable.”
“We fine-tune the system. We try and solve the COEs by building more MRT, providing better transport, tinkering with the system. We are also dealing with a younger generation of Singaporeans who are more careful, whose options are wider, who consider more carefully before they decide to take the plunge into politics. Sir, these are the realities of life. You cannot change them. I think that it is best for the House to take the bull by the horns. Have a system of remuneration which would pay Ministers and political office-holders well, so that at least you mitigate that difficulty, make it less unattractive for younger people to go into politics and take up office in Government. If you do not do that, in the long run Singapore will be the loser. I support the motion to pay competitive salaries for honest and competent Government. I say, support the Prime Minister, give him the tools. He has a very difficult job. We should not make it more difficult for him. I hope that answers Dr Wang's question.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate. I had not intended to speak in this debate originally, because I had spoken last year, when the subject of Ministers' salaries was discussed, and I thought I made my views clear. So I felt there was no need to repeat myself. However, since Dr Wang Kai Yuen has asked for my views, let me just say that whatever I said when this topic was debated at the end of last year, I am still of the same view. In fact, I am even more convinced that you cannot go back to the past. We are dealing with a new generation today. The Government is trying to tackle a very difficult problem, as my colleague, Mr Dhanabalan, said yesterday. The problem can be stated very simply. As the Senior Minister said, how do you ensure that there will be a continuing inflow of talent, of young people, into the Government to fill the ministerial ranks and the various offices in Government so that Singapore can go ahead. That is the crux of the whole issue. The first generation leaders were motivated by the desire to build Singapore. That was the great challenge. For myself and my colleagues, when we were asked to take up office, the challenge that was put to me by the late Finance Minister, Mr Hon Sui Sen, was how to ensure that Singapore could go ahead, that the success of Singapore will not crumble and will not vanish with the passing of the first generation. That was a great challenge. That was something that could motivate people to go into Government then, to give up their private sector jobs. I can say, quite honestly, as with my colleague, Mr Dhanabalan, that when you are faced with a challenge like that, salary is not a consideration. But what do we have now? We have a successful Singapore. What are the great challenges?”
“These are the Ministers who have contributed to make this possible. They make contributions to the country so that we are enjoying what we are enjoying today. I hope that we can adjust the salaries of the Ministers regularly and not just once in a long while. I support the statement.”
“I am in the private sector, and I feel that it is very unfair to our Ministers, especially today, when Singapore is doing its best to seek the right people to go into politics. Without a reasonable pay package, it will be very difficult to attract talents into politics, especially in Singapore. There is no reward which is capable of matching the contributions made by the Ministers to the country. If it is necessary to measure them in terms of value, then I can say that they not only live up to the value for money, they have also lived up to the value beyond money by the contributions they make to the country. We all know that in some countries, the Ministers' salaries may be much less than those of our Ministers. But their real income is much much more than those of our Ministers. This is a very unhealthy abnormality and it is not what Singaporeans would want to see happening in Singapore where we have a clean and efficient Government. Today, our Government has provided Singapore and Singaporeans with an "invisible gold credit card". So when Singaporeans travel overseas they enjoy great convenience. Wherever Singaporeans go, whether on travel or on business, they get the respect from people outside Singapore. The people outside regard Singaporeans as a people who are creditable, who are trustworthy, who are honest and they want to do business with us. This is helpful in providing us with the kind of convenience to develop our "second wing". Many CEOs of large companies, because of this "invisible gold credit card" provided by the Government, earn a lot of overseas contracts and make a lot of money for their companies. While Singaporeans are enjoying this "invisible gold credit card", they should not forget the isssuers of such cards, ie, the Ministers.”
“And surely, the responsibility of a Minister in the Government, or a top civil servant, is much more than that of a stock broker, or of a senior executive in the private sector. Let us, therefore, not begrudge this salary revision. Let us not be hypocritical about paying our Ministers, our civil servants, our office-holders, adequately and in line with the responsibilities which they carry. This revision in salaries is our investment in the future of Singapore. I support the revision and I hope that all Members will do likewise. Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Ministerial Statement by the Deputy Prime Minister, BG Lee Hsien Loong. With our economic growth and the improving standard of living of our people, it is only wise and prudent for us to regularly revise the salaries of the civil servants in order to maintain a clean and efficient civil service. I am very glad to hear the Deputy Prime Minister saying that when the Government is looking after the civil servants they have not forgotten the Ministers who have contributed much to Singapore's progress. The talent and the character of our Ministers are well known. They are the top talents in the country but, in terms of salaries, they always lag far behind the CEOs of big corporations. This is a pity. As I said way back in 1989 when we were revising the salaries of the Ministers, we cannot expect horses to run well while feeding them with less hay. We cannot attract good talents to become Ministers and yet refuse to pay them salaries which are comparable to or higher than those of the CEOs in the private sector.”
“One needs to have a sense of public duty, a sense of mission if you want to go into politics, whether as a Member of Parliament or as a full-time office-holder. But it helps, Sir, for those who are serving in full-time office that they should be paid adequate salaries so that they can look after their families and they do not have to worry that their families will suffer as a consequence of their going into office. And this will help the Government, as I said, to attract good people to continue to serve in the public sector. The second point, Sir, which I want to make is that we have never shied away from paying our Ministers and other office-holders openly. We have not adopted the practice, which is common in some countries, of making secret payments, or having undisclosed perks in order to compensate our Ministers adequately. This openness is very important because it forms the basis for the honest and corruption-free Government for which Singapore is admired throughout the world, and which forms the basis for our progress and prosperity. We should, therefore, in my view, continue with our present system of regularly revising the salaries of our civil servants and our political office-holders so that our reputation as a country which is free of corruption can be maintained. Finally, Sir, we have to look at the revised salaries announced by the Deputy Prime Minister in perspective. The salaries of the top civil servants, Ministers and the other office-holders are not exorbitant. They are in line, in fact lower than the salaries which are paid to senior executives in the private sector. Indeed, a remisier today in a stock broking firm can, in a good month, earn more than what a Minister can earn in a whole year.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak because the matter under discussion today is very important. It concerns the quality of the people we want in Government. I think that everybody should be quite clear about why these salary revisions are being made, so that no doubts are left in the minds of the public. There are only three points which I want to make with regard to the salary revision. The first point, Sir, is that I have served in the Cabinet for 13 years from 1979 to 1991 when the Prime Minister kindly agreed to my request to step down so that I could return to OCBC and resume my banking career. I have worked with the Ministers closely, daily, for 13 years and I can say, from personal experience, that they are honourable people, and for anybody to question the motivation and intention of the Government in making this salary revision will be, to my mind, quite absurd. Indeed, Sir, I am quite sure that in making the salary revision, the Ministers had in mind not so much the desire to increase their own salaries but the overwhelming need to ensure that the salaries paid in the public sector, to civil servants, to judges, to office-holders, are kept roughly in line with the salaries in the private sector so that the Government can always attract a continuing flow of talent. And attracting new talent is critical if the Government is to remain competent, fresh and active. So paying adequate salaries is just one way of helping the Government in its efforts to ensure that the public sector will not be starved of talent. Of course, we should not use high salaries as a means to attract people to public service, particularly, in the case of political appointments.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg leave to withdraw the motion. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. BILLS INTRODUCED 3.12 pm PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS (AMENDMENT NO. 2) BILL "to amend the Parliamentary Elections Act (Chapter 218 of the 1989 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Law and Home Affairs (Prof. S. Jayakumar) (on behalf of the Prime Minister); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PUBLIC UTILITIES (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261 of the 1990 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Mah Bow Tan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. INCOME TAX (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Income Tax Act (Chapter 134 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Finance (Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. FINANCIAL PROCEDURE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Financial Procedure Act (Chapter 109 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. NATIONAL ARTS COUNCIL BILL "to establish the National Arts Council and for matters connected therewith", presented by the Acting Minister for Information and the Arts (BG George Yong-Boon Yeo); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. NATIONAL PRODUCTIVITY BOARD (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.45 pm”
“And provided that Government sets the lead by way of substantial initial donation and possibly by way of dollar-for-dollar contribution until the target is reached, I am confident that with the traditional generosity of Singaporeans and the strong support of the alumni of NUS and NTI, we should be able to reach our target of $1 billion for the endowment funds for the two universities within a period of five years. Much obliged, Sir.”
“By making them pay a little bit, I think it helps to concentrate the mind wonderfully, that you are there, you are paying for something, therefore, you should make the best use of your life, whether it is in school or university. Under those circumstances, I think they would turn into better students and eventually better citizens. Sir, before I conclude, one last point made by Mr Chandra Das about letting students know and consulting with them. I met with the student leaders of NUS and NTI last Monday, 29th April, to discuss about the increase in university fees and the impact on students in NUS and NTI. On the whole, it was a good meeting. The student leaders pressed their case with determination but also with a sense of responsibility and a sense of politeness. Some of their suggestions and requests, we have been able to accept, as I just announced in the Ministerial Statement. Other suggestions and requests, I explained to them that we could not consider at the present time because they were not in accordance with present Government policy. The student leaders took the point well, and a few days after the meeting they very kindly sent me a courteous letter to thank me for taking time to meet with them and listening to their suggestions and requests. Sir, I think we can take pride in the students who are now being educated in the National University of Singapore and the Nanyang Technological Institute. They are a credit to themselves, to their families, to their universities and to the fine young men and young women of Singapore. NUS and NTI deserve the support of all Singaporeans.”
“All these huge surpluses have come about because we have had a very thrifty generation. We have had a lot of surpluses because we have worked hard and we have saved money. I do not think that we want to be the generation which has spent all the money which was accumulated by the first generation. We are in a sense new rich in Singapore. And looking at all our vast surpluses, it appears to us that there is no limit and that we can spend on anything we like. But believe you me, it only takes a few years to spend what your fathers and your forefathers have earned. And I believe that it is prudent for us to manage our finances properly, spend where it is necessary and, as I said, the Government has been most generous with regard to spending on education as well as with other social services like health, looking after the aged and so on. But if we have free education, if anybody can go to school or university and does not pay anything, will we have a better education system? I do not believe so. There is psychologically an advantage in making people pay for a service, even if the payment is only a nominal one. Of course, we have to make sure that any payment which people make will not cause distress and, particularly in the case of education, will not make it difficult or impossible for poorer children to go up the education ladder. That is why we must have a wide variety of safety nets, Government loan schemes, private loan schemes, university loan schemes, to help any child who needs financial assistance, whether this is in independent schools or at university level.”
“We know that it is worth our while to spend money on education and I can say quite frankly that the Ministry of Finance has been most generous in financing education in Singapore and we should not quarrel with the money which they have given us. The amount of money which we now spend on education in Singapore constitutes some 4% of our GDP. We have put it as our objective that we will raise the amount spent on education to 5% of our GDP in the coming years as the various schemes for upgrading education in the primary schools, the secondary schools, the post-secondary education and universities come to fruition. 5% of our GDP means that essentially some 20% of total Government spending, $1 out of every $5, will be spent on education. I think this is a very generous amount. Although I am the Education Minister and, of course, every Minister likes to get as much money for his Ministry as possible, we have to be responsible. There are other vital Government Ministries such as Defence which have to be allocated their fair share of money. Education is vital, so are a lot of other Government Ministries. And the Ministry of Finance must make a fair allocation of money to all the various Ministries. I am of the view that 5% of our GDP or 20% of total Government spending on education is a generous allocation and should be enough to finance all the schemes which will be implemented by the Ministry of Education. Sir, I am worried about one particular comment which he has made, ie, why does the Government with all its huge surpluses need to raise fees and cause anxiety to parents and worry to students and some trouble for Members of Parliament? Why do we not give the universities more money and save us all this trouble? I think this is a very dangerous philosophy.”
“But I believe that if we increase the ceiling of the loan to 65% plus the money which is available from NUS and NTI from their own loan funds, there is actually enough finance for the time being to meet the needs. But we will keep that point under consideration. There are two points brought up by Prof. Maurice Choo. One is whether the banks can offer lower rates of interest to students, because this is a preferred group of customers who later on would go out and earn a lot of money and be very good customers of the banks and the banks should therefore take this opportunity to cultivate their custom. I am sure that the banks will take this into consideration. And if the banks would like to do it, I have no objections. Similarly, whether we can have some educational insurance, I would like to inform him that there are quite a number of insurance companies in Singapore which already have got educational insurance schemes. The students' union also raised this with me. What I told them was to write to the various insurance companies and find out all the terms. I am sure the companies will be very pleased to provide the information. If they want, they can distribute and disseminate this to all the students and the students, if they like, can take it from any of the insurance companies. I think I have dealt with all the points here, except for one point raised by Dr Lee Siew-Choh as to why the Government does not essentially just provide a bigger subsidy to the university instead of raising fees and that we should spend more money on education. The Government, as I have repeated many times, not only I but all my colleagues including the Prime Minister, has said that education is our top priority. Our only resource is our people here. We are quite sensible people.”
“The major part of the revenue increase will actually go to hire more teachers in order to keep the staff/student ratio at a reasonable level. Every year we have got NWC increases and wage costs go up, and the university costs must go up and therefore fees must go up, but in future years it will be at a much lower rate than in the last four years. The point brought up by Dr Low Seow Chay and Prof. Maurice Choo regarding the use of the CPF of siblings to help pay the fees, I believe this has already been announced by the Ministry of Labour in the papers this morning. I think they said that this is possible on a case by case basis. The other suggestion is that after the students have graduated they should be allowed to use their CPF to pay off the loans which they got from the Government. The Minister for Labour has informed me that the students' union has also written to him about this. He is replying to them and there is no doubt that he will be very happy to send his reply to the Members who have asked this particular question. If Members are not satisfied, they can always raise a Question for Oral Answer in Parliament. On the point brought up by Encik Wan Hussin regarding the particular problem of Malay students and whether consultations have been made with MENDAKI, I would assure him that this has already been the case and that no Malay student will face undue financial difficulties about this. MENDAKI is well aware of the fee increase and they have been in consultation with NUS and NTI. So that has been taken care of. Dr Vasoo asked whether the ceiling for loan can be increased to 70% or 75%. 65% seems to be quite adequate at the present time. In fact, the university students are quite happy with 65%, but we can always consider a loan increase, if necessary.”
“Dr Low Seow Chay and Mr Choo Wee Khiang made the point that if there are students who still need finance even after their parents have used their CPF or after they have borrowed from the Government, we should make sure that if they need money for other expenses like this it should be available. I would assure them that this would be available because the universities have got their own loan funds and bursary funds. And both the universities and the Government share the same objective, and that is, to make sure that no student who deserves to get a place in the university will be prevented from having a university education simply because his or her parents cannot afford to pay the fees. If the Government loan is not enough, then the university will make available finance from its own funds to enable the student to pay the fees so that no student will be deprived of a university education simply because of the fees. The point brought up by Mr Lau Ping Sum and Dr John Chen concerning the allocation of costs between the various faculties as well as between the undergraduate and the graduate courses and to make sure that these costs are properly apportioned; in other words, I believe, to make sure that undergraduates are not subsidising research students, this is a valid point. The universities try to keep these costs separate. I will just point out that universities, like all other educational institutions, are people intensive institutions. The major part of their costs is actually in salaries. And the major reason why the universities require so much money is that they have low staff/student ratios. We can always run universities in a much cheaper way by having more students to each staff member. But then the quality of teaching will deteriorate.”
“So we should, therefore, not try to put unnecessary obstacles in the way of foreign students to come and study in Singapore. What we should do, Sir, is to make sure that there are enough places for our own Singapore students so that no Singapore student who deserves to go to the university will be denied a place and that we have done by expanding NUS, by upgrading NTI into a full university in July and, if necessary, in the years to come, we will start a third university. So there will be ample places for Singaporeans to go to university, and I do not think the right way is to cut down the number of foreign students but to make sure that there are more than enough places for our own local students. Sir, the Chairman of the GPC on Education, Dr Ong Chit Chung, has made a point that we should try and spread out the fee increases so that parents and students will be able to manage their budget. As I have said, in future, I do not expect to see fee increases of the same magnitude as in the past few years and, therefore, the universities will be able to have fee increases which are more manageable and perhaps spread out over a few years. His suggestion for NTU to take over the alumni roll of Nanyang University to help in raising money for their endowment fund is an excellent suggestion which I will convey to NTU. There is a strong bond or sentiment among Nanyang University students. I hope that the university will be able to build on this bond in order to help raise funds for its endowment fund and that the graduates of Nanyang University would respond to this call.”
“This must be the first priority. Why should we go out of our way to educate the children of other countries? So our first priority must be to make available as many opportunities as possible for Singaporeans and permanent residents to go to universities and for their children to have the opportunity of university education. Why then, Sir, do we make it a point to try and attract foreign students to NUS and NTI? I have dealt with this point in other debates but it is worthwhile to repeat the same points again. The purpose is not so much for the benefit of foreign students. The purpose is to benefit ourselves, our students and Singapore. It is good for our students that in their university education, they should have the opportunity to mix with students whose backgrounds are different from theirs, so that they will be able to have a more rounded education, their horizons will be expanded and I think their education will then be more meaningful. At the same time, Sir, there are considerabe benefits to Singapore in having foreign students educated here. When they go back, there will be an automatic network of former students who will, in the course of time, occupy important positions, both in the private sector as well as in the public sector, particularly in the countries around us. That is why we have made special provision to try and encourage ASEAN students to study in Singapore. Indeed at one time, Singapore was the educational centre of Southeast Asia. Students came from all over Southeast Asia, primarily from the countries around us, to study in Singapore. And I think the benefits of having Singapore as the educational centre in Southeast Asia have been manifested over these many years.”
“It is not that the NUS and NTI are allowed simply to spend as much as they like and if they run short of money, then they just increase their fees and the Government automatically increases its loan funds and they have essentially a blank cheque to do as they like. Before the university is allowed to increase its fees, it must present a budget which has to be approved by the Ministry of Education as well as the Ministry of Finance because, after all, even with the fee increase, the major part of the university's revenue comes from the Government in the form of a Government grant, which accounts for 75% of the university's revenue and expenditure. We cannot simply give money away without making sure that the money will be well spent for the purposes for which the money is specified. Those of you who have dealings not only with my Ministry but also with the Ministry of Finance will know that it is not so easy to get money from the Ministry of Finance. So I would reassure Mr Chandra Das that this matter is well in hand. But again it is a good point and I am glad that he has made it and the universities, both NUS and NTI, should take note of this and make sure that the costs are kept as low as possible so that no unnecessary expenditure is incurred. Sir, the Member has made the point about foreign students which some members of the public have brought to him. Dr Low Seow Chay and Mr Wan Hussin also made the same point that we should increase the fees for foreign students so as to make it unnecessary for local students to pay more and make sure that local students have got enough opportunities to go to our two local universities. There should be no doubt that the purpose of having NUS and NTI in Singapore and funding them so generously is to educate our own people.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, let me first extend my thanks to all Members, who have spoken this afternoon, concerning the Ministerial Statement on fee increases and for their many comments and suggestions. I am happy to note that this subject has been thoroughly aired this afternoon and Members can be assured that the points which they have made will be taken up seriously by my Ministry and by NUS and NTI. Now let me deal with some of the points in greater detail. First of all, the feedback which Mr Chandra Das has received that in order to encourage more students to take up the loans, we should look into the reasons why they are not taking up the loans . The reason is possibly that the students are not familiar with the loans and documents which should be produced so as to make the loans more user-friendly. I am happy to inform him that this is a matter which is being taken up by NUS and NTI. They will be producing brochures to tell the students about how the loans can be taken up, the terms of repayment and any other technical issues which the students will need to know before they decide whether or not to take up the loans. So this matter is well in hand. Sir, his next point is that there should be audit committees to make sure that the universities are spending their money wisely. I think, Sir, this is a very pertinent point. Universities are very expensive institutions. They consume large amounts of money. For this financial year, they will spend over $400 million and it is incumbent on the universities, on the Government, on Parliament, to ensure that this money is well spent and not frittered away. But I would like to inform him that, in fact, the expenditure of the universities is very closely monitored.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the House do now adjourn. Question proposed. UNIVERSITY FEES”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand that some Members would like to debate on my statement and following practice, I propose to move an adjournment of the House to enable them to do so. Before I move the adjournment, may I first seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the debate on my Ministerial Statement be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 1(8)(b)? Mr Speaker: I give my consent. Is it the pleasure of Hon. Members present that the motion be moved? Hon. Members indicated assent. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the debate on the motion for adjournment to be moved for the purpose of debating the Ministerial Statement made by the Minister for Education be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 1(8)(b) at this day's sitting. - [Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam]. ADJOURNMENT MOTION”
“The officials said that even though the alumni had already graduated from the University, they retained a stake in Princeton to ensure that the quality of the University continued to improve. This is because the alumni knew that the value of their degrees was dependent on the continued high quality and standing of Princeton University. In other words, Sir, if the University deteriorates, then the value of their degrees goes down. If the university continues to improve, then the value of their degrees goes up. So the alumni had an incentive to contribute to make sure that the education which Princeton offered continued to be of high quality and recognised to be so by the community in America. I think that this is a very sensible attitude of mind. NUS and NTI will, in the coming months, make public their plans to raise the endowment fund income. And my Ministry is now discussing with NUS and NTI as to how the Government can help to get their endowment funds off to a good start but alumni should respond positively and indeed generously. I hope that Members here, particularly those who are graduates of NUS and NTI, will rally round the two institutions and encourage their fellow graduates to contribute generously to the endowment funds of their alma mater. DEBATE ON MINISTERIAL STATEMENT (Motion)”
“If NUS and NTI can build up endowment funds large enough to generate income amounting to 10% of their operating expenditure, this will enable us to bring down the Government grant to NUS and NTI to 60%, that is, 25% funded by student fees, 5% by miscellaneous income, 10% from endowment fund income and 60% from the Government grant. Sir, the budget of NUS and NTI for the financial year 1991/1992 is $459 million. If 10% of this expenditure is to be funded from endowment income, this would mean that NUS and NTI would need endowment income of $46 million for the financial year 1991. At an interest rate of 5%, this would mean an endowment fund of some $1,000 million. Sir, can NUS and NTI build such large endowment funds? I think that it will require a lot of work but I am confident that with the support and generosity of Singaporeans, this can be achieved. Last month, I had the opportunity to visit Princeton University, together with the Vice-Chancellor of the NUS and the President of NTI. We were told, Sir, by Princeton University officials that Princeton raised some US$80 million each year, of which US$50 million came from individuals, principally alumni of Princeton University. And Princeton is not unique. Cornell University, which we also visited, raises US$160 million annually, with US$100 million (or two-thirds) coming from individuals, again principally alumni of the University. And Harvard, Sir, is launching a drive to raise some US$2.5 billion to add to its endowment fund which is already very large. Sir, when we asked the officials at Princeton University why their alumni were so generous in contributing, their reply was instructive.”
“Members], this would mean that, other than Medical and Dental students, students will not have to pay any additional amount in cash as compared with last year. Medical and Dental students will have to pay an additional $180 per year; Annex B - TUITION FEE LOAN SCHEME (Cols. 85 - 86) (2) We will extend the repayment period of the loan from the current 15 years to 20 years; and (3) The period before commencing repayment of the loans will be extended from one year to two years after graduation. These revisions will make it substantially easier for students to repay the loans and I hope that students who have financial difficulties will be wise enough to take the loans. Sir, now that the Government grant to NUS and NTI has been reduced to 75% of their operating expenditure, with 21% being funded by student fees and 4% by miscellaneous income, it is my view that we should now shift the focus from increasing student fees to building up of large endowment income for NUS and NTI. University fees will continue to increase in future years to take account of rising costs, particularly wage costs, and to increase the percentage of operating expenditure funded by fees from 21% to eventually 25%. However, this can be done over a period of years so that the fee increases in future years can be smaller and not as large as in the last four years. Sir, NUS and NTI are of the view that the percentage of operating expenditure to be funded by miscellaneous income can increase from 4% to 5%.”
“As I said in 1989: "We must ensure that fee increases do not have the effect of limiting access to NUS and NTI particularly for students who are bright but who come from poor homes. These students have as much right to university education as children whose parents are in more comfortable circumstances." Sir, there are many avenues for students to get access to money. The Government has liberalised the use of CPF funds for education. In addition, the Government proposes to raise the maximum percentage of the tuition fee loans from 50% to 60%. As of last year, the number of students who took advantage of our tuition fee loans was 20% of the student population in NUS and 26% in NTI. Those who have required additional finance from the university's own loan funds represented half percent of the student population in NUS and 2% in NTI. Sir, I met with the student leaders of the NUS and NTI last Monday and discussed with them concerning the increase in university fees and the impact on students. To lessen any hardship that students may face, the student leaders requested, among other things, that the Tuition Fee Loan Scheme be revised by further increasing the loan amount so as to reduce the amount in cash that the students have to pay as well as extending the repayment period and the period before commencing repayment of the loan. Sir, I am happy to inform Members that we have considered the requests of the student leaders and will revise the Tuition Fee Loan Scheme as follows: (1) The amount of the tuition fee loan will be raised to 65% of the tuition fee. Sir, as shown in Annex B (Cols. 85 - 86), which I shall ask the Clerk of Parliament to circulate [copies of Annex circulated to hon.”
“Sir, in other words, 20% of total recurrent expenditure on education in Singapore was spent on NUS and NTI and the number of students in NUS and NTI represents 5% of our student population in Singapore. Put it another way, the Government was spending in 1990/1991 some $14,000 to educate each student at NUS and NTI as against $5,000 for each student at the post-secondary level or $2,500 per pupil in primary or secondary schools. Sir, we have to be fair. Students who make it to university have good prospects in life. Most of them will earn good salaries after they graduate. Some will earn very large incomes. It is surely only right that, after the students have graduated from university, they should pay back part of the Government's subsidy in order to lessen the burden of financing university education from taxpayers' money. And this is the reason, Sir, why it is Government's policy to ask the universities to reduce their dependence on direct Government financing and to earn more of their income through charging appropriate fees and the raising of donations and endowment income. Even with this policy, Sir, I would point out that the actual grant by Government for NUS and NTI has increased significantly. For the financial year 1989, the Government grant to these two institutions was $271 million. For this financial year 1991, the grant will be $342 million, an increase of $71 million or 26% in two years. I think, faced with these figures, it is quite clear that Government has been generous in financing university education and no one should quarrel with the allocation. Sir, I now come to Members' worry as to whether the increase in fees will limit students' access to university education.”
“It is for this reason that the Singapore Government has placed top priority on raising standards of education and providing quality education for our children." We want as many of our students as possible to go as far as they can up the educational ladder so that they can improve their prospects in life and thereby make a contribution to Singapore. Why then do we raise university fees? Sir, the answer lies in the schedule which I had circulated in 1987 and 1989 and which I have updated. I shall ask the Clerk of Parliament to circulate Annex A (Cols. 83 - 84). [Copies of Annex circulated to hon. Members]. Annex A - 1990 RECURRENT EXPENDITURE AND ENROLMENT (Cols. 83 - 84) Sir, this schedule is a very simple one. It shows how money is spent by the Ministry of Education. And if Members will note from the schedule, they will see that the greater part of the educational expenditure, some 65%, is spent on primary and secondary school education and vocational training. This is as it should be because the majority of our students, 440,000 students or 85% of our total student population, are in primary and secondary schools or in the VITB. It is therefore right that the largest amount of education expenditure should go towards this group. For post-secondary education (junior colleges, centralised institutes and polytechnics), the figures are as follows: 51,000 students, representing 10% of our total student population, and accounting for 15% of total education expenditure. Finally, university students, NUS and NTI, 24,000 students (5% of the total student population), and 20% of our total education expenditure.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the increase in university fees, announced by the National University of Singapore (NUS) and the Nanyang Technological Institute (NTI) last month, has predictably drawn a number of comments from members of the public, Members of Parliament and University students. This is to be expected. Increases in fees or charges are never popular and the public, parents, students, MPs are naturally concerned about any increase in fees or charges, what effect this will have on students' budgets and whether the increase in university fees will have the effect of limiting access to university education for poor but deserving students. Sir, to allay Members' fears, let me repeat again Government's policy regarding university fees. I will quote from the speech which I made in Parliament on 17th March 1989 [Hansard Vol. 53, No. 6, col. 455]: "In a nutshell, Sir, the policy of the Government is and will continue to be to make sure that no bright student who has been accepted by NUS or NTI will be prevented from acquiring a university education simply because his or her parents cannot afford to pay the fees and we will do what is needed to maintain this policy including, if necessary, reviewing our loan schemes or providing other forms of financial assistance, such as awarding more scholarships or bursaries if this is shown to be necessary." Sir, I think that no one should have any doubt of Government's determination in this respect. As I said at the inauguration of the JCCI Singapore Foundation function at the end of last month: "For a small country like Singapore, education and training are vital. Our only resource is our people.”
“They will train degree-level teachers for the primary and secondary schools, but they will also take in teachers, for example, who will take a two-year programme and get a certificate in pre-school education or in early childhood education. Having Education in the form of a separate institute but as part of the NTU gives us more flexibility in the awarding of certificates or diplomas which are appropriate to the level of training taken by the various categories of people who will be studying in the NIE. Finally, Sir, on the creative arts, with the development of the arts as envisaged by my colleague, BG George Yeo, yesterday, I think there will be a demand for such people in the coming years. After NTU has settled its courses in hotel administration and communication studies in 1992 and 1993 respectively, I think they will be in a position to provide courses in the creative arts, fine arts or design from 1993 onwards. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. ROAD TRAFFIC (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“Sir, there had been a tremendous debate within the NTI Council and between the staff as to what should be the new name for NTI, and the possibility brought up by Dr Wang Kai Yuen was in fact discussed. The final result, Sir, was that, as the first choice, we should call it the "Nanyang Technological University", and I think for a very good reason. The words "Technological University" reflect, as it were, the origin of NTU, that it started off as a technological university concentrating on professional disciplines which would be of use in Singapore. Now that it is going to develop as a comprehensive university and would add new courses, I believe that it is still useful for the word "Technological" to remain within the name of the University to remind future administrations of how the University started and why it was started. This would mean, I would hope, that in future years, courses to be developed by NTU, while deriving from the technological roots, will have a strong professional bias so that it will be seen as a professional university quite different from NUS which is a general university along the British model and this will thereby give Singapore students and their parents a better choice. Next, a few points brought up by Mr Nasser Kamaruddin. Regarding the courses, I believe I have already stated that we will look into adding new courses which will be useful for Singapore and which will be in demand by students. Regarding the course in Education, yes, there was a choice as to whether we should have a National Institute of Education (NIE) or whether we should have a Faculty of Education within NTU. The final decision was to have a National Institute of Education because the NIE will also have to provide for Education courses for quite a large clientele.”
“In the long run, this will neither be good for the students nor for Singapore. With regard to the third university, I believe I have spoken on this point in the Committee of Supply during the debate on the estimates of the Ministry of Education. For the time being, I believe we should concentrate on the development of NTU and Temasek Polytechnic. But perhaps in the later part of this decade there may be a need for a third university. When that comes, Members can be assured that the plans will be ready. In this connection, perhaps it might be useful to give some general idea about the orientation of this third university. We have two universities now. With the establishment of NTU, the NUS, which is based very much on the British model, can be used to cover essentially perhaps developments in Britain and in Europe, while NTU will develop consciously on the American model, and in a sense will strive for closer contacts with American tertiary institutions. It would seem to me that if we were to set up a third university, as I said, perhaps in the later part of this decade, it might be sensible and useful for the third university to link up with a Japanese tertiary institution. In that sense, with NUS, NTU and the third university, we would have links to America, to Europe and to Japan - the three economic centres which will predominate in the coming decades. This would be in line with the growing internationalisation of Singapore and will provide us very valuable links to the three main economic power houses which will predominate in the world in the coming decades. Dr Wang Kai Yuen has asked why we still use the term "Technological University" and not just call it "Nanyang University" by dropping the word "Technological".”
“So there will be no change in admission standards, for example, at the present time. I believe that one has to be conservative in such matters, but no doubt, in due course, as NTU develops, they may be able to incorporate some of the consultative type of administration which Dr Ong has spoken about. Regarding Alumni ties, yes, I agree with Dr Ong that this is very important indeed, and his suggestion that NTU should set up an Alumni office is a good one. This is being done now and the people whom NTU can contact need not only be the graduates of NTU, but could also go back to Nanyang University, which was the predecessor of NTU. With regard to mature students, a point brought up also by Mr Nasser Kamaruddin, now that we have got two universities and we have a better capability to cater for the needs of students who are leaving our schools and junior colleges, I would envisage that in due course both NUS and NTU will be able to take in more mature students. With regard to new methods of assessing students for admission, like interviews, this is already being done by NUS. There is no doubt that as NTU settles down they will look into such matters. Dr Vasoo has asked whether the number of places will increase in response to demands for university places in Singapore. This will certainly be done. As I said, the undergraduate population in NTU will grow to a maximum of 15,000 students, which will be more than double what NTI has today. But I would just like to remind all Members that this expansion has to be done without lowering academic standards. Our two universities - NUS and NTU - have reputations which are quite enviable and I do not think their standards should be compromised just to let in more students.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Members for their support of the Bill and for their many valuable suggestions and comments on how NTU should develop. If I may, Sir, I would like to take the points raised by the Members in turn and clarify some of them. First of all, the points made by Dr Ong Chit Chung, the Chairman of GPC on Education. He has asked for some comments on what flagship activities will be taken by NTU. These will be in areas which are related to the strengths and capabilities of NTU and will be focused particularly on technological and professional areas which are important for Singapore. One example of a flagship activity is the Institute of Manufacturing Technology which will be set up by NTU with the assistance of the Fraunhofer Institute in Germany. We all know, Sir, that manufacturing is a very important sector in our economy here. It accounts for about just under 30% of our GDP, and the need for our manufacturing enterprises to be always on the cutting edge of technology is a must if we are to continue to upgrade our economy. I believe this Institute of Manufacturing Technology to be set up by NTU will prove to be of great assistance in assisting our industries here to upgrade themselves and to utilise automation and robots effectively so as to reduce the use of manpower in our manufacturing industry. The next point regarding whether it is possible for NTU to adopt the American style university administration, I think here we should progress slowly. As I have stated just now, NTU will consciously try to develop itself on a model based on the American Ivy League universities so as to give Singaporeans a choice. But in the case of university administration, I think the wisest move is to make haste slowly.”
“The graduates of this University return year after year, not just to give their money, perhaps they have plenty, but also to cheer their football teams and to meet old friends. We must create this sort of spirit in the new University. A good university cannot just depend on Government grants or Government direction or Ministerial statements and Ministerial directives. It has to draw upon the larger pool of graduates and philanthropists for funding as well as ideas on how to improve and excel. NTU should also look into this area of having a well-run Alumni Office and expand its links with the community at large. Indeed, NTU need not go beyond our shores, but go back to its roots to Nanyang University before it, draw upon the support and goodwill of the community at large in Singapore. It can, I believe, rekindle the same pioneering spirit which led to the founding of Nanyang University, but with a new and wider horizon, with a new purpose and new heights to climb in higher education. I would like to ask the Minister whether NTU would widen its selection criteria and consider mature students who have worked a number of years, but who have missed out in higher education due to financial or other constraints earlier on in their lives, and whether NTU would consider interviewing potential candidates or students so that a more accurate assessment can be made of their motivation as well as inclination. Sir, it is always exciting to be at the birth of a new University. I wish NTU every success. I hope that in time it will develop into a centre of learning and scholarship. It will not be a second University. It should and I believe it will be a University second to none. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“NTU should give NUS a good run for its money. Healthy competition will break the monotony and bring out, I believe, the best in each institution. As they run the next lap together, they can spur each other on and see who can run better. NTU should develop its own character and ethos, its own niche in higher education, building upon its strength. As Lord Dainton pointed out, to earn its spurs and gain recognition in the academic world, NTU has to "have some flagship activity of world class." May I ask which area would this be? This, I believe, should be the aim, for it will not only be put beside NUS for comparison, but be measured against established universities around the world. For a start, NTU can expand its ties with reputable universities overseas, and I am glad to hear that this is being done. Sir, I note that NUS has a Vice-Chancellor, but NTU prefers the more American title of President of the University. I hope that this is more than a matter of style or fashion, and signals a different approach to University management. Perhaps a more approachable and consultative style, we have yet to see. I believe that NTU should go further, and adopt the more flexible American style of university management, eg, the American credit system for courses and course accreditation, and place more emphasis on all-round education. It should also break new grounds in areas such as hotel management and librarianship. I am glad that this is also being considered and other areas like PR, journalism and the fine arts. Another good feature of American universities which NTU can learn is the close nexus between the University and the Alumni.”
“I suggested then that the Universities should seek to lessen their dependence on direct Government financing by charging appropriate student fees and by establishing endowment funds. I am therefore pleased to note that this suggestion has been taken up by NTU. Clause 29 of the University's Constitution provides for the setting up of an Endowment Fund Committee for the administration of any endowments established for or in connection with the University. NUS, Sir, is also considering setting up an endowment fund and the Ministry of Education is discussing with the two Universities as to how Government can assist them to build up their endowment funds. Sir, NTU will build on the current strengths of NTI which are closely linked with industry and business. With the implementation of the above measures, NTU will develop into a significant institution of learning which can make an important contribution to Singapore's progress. When fully developed, NTU will play a crucial role in training the highly-skilled manpower which will help us to run successfully the next lap in our social and economic development. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. Dr Ong Chit Chung (Bukit Batok): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. The Education GPC welcomes the upgrading of NTI into a full-fledged University. This, we believe, will provide young Singaporeans with more opportunities for higher education in a wide spectrum of disciplines. NTU is our second University, but it must never be allowed to be second rate. Neither should it be a Cinderella to NUS. I therefore urge the Ministry and the NTU Council not to stint on resources, nor spare any effort, to give NTU a good start, to be able to compete fairly and on an equal footing with NUS.”
“NTU's strategy in this field will be to extend collaboration with both local agencies and international centres of excellence. NTU has linked up with the MIT Sloan School of Management to establish a five-year programme in management teaching and research. NTU is collaborating with the Loughborough University of Technology in the area of teacher training. NTU will also set up the Institute of Manufacturing Technology as a flagship activity with assistance from the Fraunhofer Institute in Germany. NTU presently has an enrolment of 6,800 undergraduate students. As NTU increases its courses, the undergraduate student population will expand but will be limited to a maximum of 15,000 students. The experience of NUS shows that beyond 15,000 students, the management of the University becomes difficult and the University becomes impersonal. To support the teaching and research facilities and housing of students, NTU will consciously seek to develop a campus village to provide facilities for social interaction of students, staff and the local community. NTU will also provide residential facilities for students in view of the distance from town and to enhance the quality of campus life. The cost of the development to provide for the academic, teaching and student facilities for NTU is estimated to be in the region of $500 million. In August last year when I spoke at the 10th Anniversary Dinner of the National University of Singapore, I mentioned that it would be prudent for Universities in Singapore to prepare for the day when they would have to compete with other tertiary institutions or other sectors of education for a limited pool of Government funds.”
“Universities in America have been prepared to offer tertiary education in new and important areas such as business studies, hotel management and communication studies long before British Universities came to accept the academic credentials of such disciplines. Sir, the character of a University is determined by the courses that it conducts. NTU will build on its present strengths in engineering, accountancy and business and add new courses based on these strengths. Due to the limited manpower of NTU, the introduction of these new courses will be prioritised and will be in stages. From 1991, NTU will offer courses inEducation through the National Institute of Education. In addition, NTU will offer courses in hotel administration in 1992 and communication studies in 1993. A degree programme in hotel administration will be in high demand as there are good prospects in the tourism, travel, hotel and leisure sectors. The degree programme in hotel administration will provide the manpower needed to sustain and further develop Singapore's international eminence in this sector. Similarly, the degree programme in communication studies will produce graduates for public affairs and public relations departments in Government Ministries and the private sector, advertising and media consultancy, journalism, printing and publishing industry and the audio, video and film industry. Beyond 1993, NTU could set up degree courses in fine arts and design, architecture or other professional areas which are considered to be important for Singapore. Postgraduate studies and research are key factors in determining the international standing of NTU as a University. A good postgraduate and research programme is necessary to help the University to retain good staff.”
“The University will have an Academic Board which will have the responsibility for the control and general direction of instruction, research and examinations and will have the power to award degrees, diplomas and certificates. The President of NTU will be the Chairman of the Academic Board. Sir, to guide the development of NTU as a comprehensive University, I appointed a Committee in May last year under the chairmanship of Dr Michael Fam, Chairman of NTI Council, to take stock of NTI and to recommend the broad future directions for NTU. The Committee has completed its deliberations and its recommendations have been approved by Government. The full details are being released by NTI today but I would like to highlight the main points for the information of Members. Sir, the overall aim for NTU is to develop it as a comprehensive University with general academic excellence and niches of international eminence. As a comprehensive University competing with the National University of Singapore (NUS), NTU will offer courses from a wide variety of disciplines and break away from the mould of NTI which offered only technology related courses. To compete effectively with NUS and to offer Singaporeans a choice, NTU will not seek to copy NUS but will consciously develop on a different model based on the American Ivy League Universities. The significant difference between the British model, which influences NUS, and the American model lies in the preparedness of the American Universities not to be tied down to traditional disciplines.”
“As in the case of the Constitution of the National University of Singapore, the Minister is empowered, on the advice of the University's Council, to amend the University's Constitution by order publicised in the Gazette. This flexibility is necessary as occasions may arise in future when the University's Constitution has to be amended. Clauses 8 to 12 which relate to the accounts and the audit of accounts of the University, the submission of an Annual Report to the Minister and the grant and acquisition of land for the purposes of the University are standard provisions. Clause 17 deals with the transitional provisions. All property, assets, rights and liabilities of the NTI will be transferred to NTU. All staff of NTI will become staff of NTU. In addition to the above transitional provisions, clause 15 will empower the Minister to make rules to provide for the removal of any difficulty which may arise by reason of the establishment of the NTU and the dissolution of NTI and generally for the purpose of effecting the transition from NTI to NTU. Sir, the Constitution of NTU follows closely that of the National University of Singapore but again with appropriate modifications. The President of the Republic of Singapore shall be the Chancellor of NTU. The Chief Executive of NTU will be its President. The governing body of NTU will be the Council which will have 16 members. Of these, five members, inclusive of the NTU President, will be appointed from among the University's academic staff. Four persons will be appointed by the Chancellor and the other four persons will be appointed by the Government. Three persons will be appointed by the Council, of whom one shall be a graduate of NTU or the National University of Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, 10 years have elapsed since the establishment of Nanyang Technological Institute (NTI) in August 1981. During this period, NTI has made significant progress. The Institute has expanded its physical facilities and increased its student enrolment from just under 600 students in 1982 to the present enrolment of just over 7,000 undergraduate and postgraduate students. Starting with courses in Civil, Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, NTI has since expanded its course offerings to include Accountancy, Business and Computer Technology. In the past 10 years, NTI has produced over 5,600 graduates in Engineering and Accountancy. These graduates have been well accepted both locally as well as by the international academic community. It is timely to upgrade NTI and establish it as a full-fledged comprehensive university. The Bill before the House seeks to formally establish the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) by legislation. The Bill is patterned along the lines of the National University of Singapore Act but appropriate modifications have been made where necessary. Sir, I shall now deal briefly with the significant provisions of the Bill. Clause 3 of the Bill formally establishes and incorporates the Nanyang Technological University. The functions and powers of the NTU are specified in clause 5. The University's functions and powers include the provision of facilities to carry out instruction and research in various disciplines and the conferring of degrees, diplomas and certificates including honorary degrees and other distinctions. Clause 6 provides that the University shall be governed by the provisions of the University's Constitution as set out in the Schedule to the Act.”
“The number and percentage of students in Pre-U centres who passed the Singapore Cambridge GCE 'A' level examinations (passed 2 'A' level and 'AO' level subjects including GP) are as follows: ______________________________________________________________ YEAR NO. SAT NO. & % PASSED ______________________________________________________________ 1988 1974 932 (47.2%) ______________________________________________________________ 1989 1776 685 (38.6%) ______________________________________________________________ 1990 1618 581 (35.9%) ______________________________________________________________”