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 6 of 24.
“In terms of the cost required to produce graduates through a part-time course, because many will enrol but very few would actually finish the course, it actually costs more to educate a person in a part-time course in terms of graduation than it is to put a student through a full-time course. Nevertheless, the provision of part-time courses is always under review by the two universities. As for fee increases, Sir, the schools and universities are people-intensive institutions and with rising wage cost, fee increases are inevitable. The Government has always endeavoured to make these fee increases as small as possible. I am sure we will continue with this policy. 3.15 pm”
“Mr Chairman, a few words concerning the point on a third university brought up by a few Members who have spoken just now. Sir, the development of tertiary education in Singapore will be guided by three basic principles. Firstly, academic standards must be maintained. Secondly, the expansion of tertiary education must be in line with the economic and the social needs of Singapore. For example, we do not wish to produce graduates who will be unemployed. And thirdly, any expansion of NUS or NTI or establishment of new universities must increase the educational opportunities and options that are available to Singaporeans. Sir, the Ministry of Education looks ahead in its educational planning. We have a broad planning horizon of 10 years, that is, we try to anticipate what would be the needs of Singapore and of our children in 10 years' time and plan accordingly. Detailed plans are made for the next three or four years but the basic concept plan has a 10-year cycle. We may need a third university or a fourth polytechnic by possibly the later part of this decade. The Ministry has started thinking about these needs. When the need arises for a third university or for a fourth polytechnic, the plans will be ready. In the meantime, Sir, we should concentrate on the development of the Nanyang Technological University and the Temasek Polytechnic as well asthe further upgrading and expansion of the National University of Singapore, the Singapore Polytechnic and the Ngee Ann Polytechnic. Sir, two points were brought up by the Member for Hong Kah GRC. First of all, part-time degree courses. The experience of the University with regard to the provision of part-time degree courses has not been encouraging, as I have stated in this House from time to time.”
“We happen to use English as our working language and I think that the correlation between the situation in Japan and our own circumstances in Singapore is, if I may say so, rather tenuous. My colleague, Dr Tay, will elaborate on some of the other points.”
“In our case, because our working language is not our mother tongue, it is necessary for us to give at the very least the same amount of time to our working language that German and Japanese children give to the study of their working languages which in their case would be their mother tongues, German in the case of German children and Japanese in the case of Japanese children. In Germany and in Japan, the amount of curriculum time given to the study of their working language, which is their mother tongue, is 31%. Here, in the case where our working language is not our mother tongue, I think that 33% is not too much. If you give 33% time for the study of the working language, 20% of curriculum time for the study of mathematics which is the time given for the study of mathematics in German schools and in Japanese schools, then you are only left with 47% of time. The present amount of time given for the study of the mother tongue including moral education is 27%. If we increase that, then we have got to cut down on the amount of time available for other subjects. So in the end, I think that the division of time proposed in the Report is one which is most appropriate for our unique circumstances in Singapore. Just one last point, Sir. Dr Lee has brought up the point that the study of English is not necessarily the only language which is useful for the acquisition of technology. He has brought up the case that in Japan, the Japanese do not study English and they also can master technology. If we were Japanese and we use Japanese as our working language, I think I would agree with him. But we are not Japanese. We are Chinese, Indians and Malays.”
“This is sufficient time for the principal and teachers to get a good knowledge of the child and what level of difficulty the child can manage and yet not too late that it is not possible for the schools to take remedial action whenever necessary. I think in matters like this, the best test is the test of time. The Germans, I presume, by trial and error over many years, have settled at Primary 4. Until the Ministry has got better evidence that this is the wrong age, I believe that the study done by the review committee has been very thorough and I think that Primary 4 would be the correct age to put children into the correct streams, in the orientation stage in Primary 5 and in Primary 6. Sir, the final point is regarding division of curriculum time between English and the mother tongue. Again, this is a matter of compromise. There is a certain number of hours that a child can concentrate on during any particular day. A child's attention span is limited, particularly in the earlier years of school. If you give more time for your mother tongue, there must be less time for English. If you give more time for English, there must be less time for the study of the mother tongue. It is a difficult dilemma, particularly in a situation like Singapore where our working language, English, is not our mother tongue. And for any child to get on in the world in Singapore, particularly with an open economy like ours, a good knowledge of English is essential. Again, as I have stressed many times, in addition to English, you must also make time for mathematics and also for the other subjects like music, social studies and so on in order to give the child a broad education.”
“The problem and the most difficult part of education, as I pointed out when I spoke at the Schools Council meeting last Saturday, is what happens when you have to deal with children whose capacity is limited. And I think there is no point in trying to get around this difficult aspect. This is a matter of trying to find or work out a system which will enable the child to cope with subjects that he or she can master. Should we abolish streaming until the child is in Primary 5 or Primary 6? Or should we have streaming at Primary 3 or Primary 4? You have to compromise. If you delay streaming until the child is 12 or 13 years old, and the child is not capable, he will be so far behind all his other school mates that it will be very difficult for him to try and catch up. If you stream too early, then you may not allow the child to get into the proper stream. So there is this compromise which you have to make. Early streaming means you can put the child into the right stream as early as possible. Late streaming means that you give the child maximum opportunity to identify his or her level of capability. Which is the right age? In such matters, my instinct is that this is not going to be solved through discussion or one man's opinion against another man's opinion. What we should do is to look at systems which have operated this system of streaming for many, many years. Over a long period of time, they would have settled at an age which would be about right, not too early and not too late. As part of the recommendations, the team headed by the Director of Education studied the German system very intensively and there they have settled for streaming at the end of Primary 4, at the age of 10 plus.”
“Also at the last Schools Council meeting last Saturday, I was gratified to see that the proposed changes have the support and backing of principals. I think this augurs well for the success of the proposed changes. On the point brought up by the Member for Bedok GRC concerning flexibility, yes, this would be possible within the new system. What we have tried to design is to make the system flexible or permeable, as is stated in the German Ministry of Education, ie, the system should not be a rigid one whereby if students go into one stream, then they would be in that stream for the rest of their school career. We all know that children grow at different rates. Their intellectual abilities will develop in different ways. And if a child's ability changes, then there is provision to allow the child to transfer from one stream to another stream, or for the child to repeat a year, if necessary. What we want to do is to give maximum opportunity for every child to develop his or her potential and I am confident that the new system now is sufficiently flexible to make this possible. Finally, a few words concerning streaming at Primary 4, as brought up by the Member for Potong Pasir, and the division of curriculum time between English and the mother tongue, as brought up by Dr Lee Siew-Choh. Sir, one of the fundamental aspects which we must realise in educating children is that the capacity of children is limited. If a child is bright, there is no problem. He can learn English, Chinese, a third language, mathematics or science. There is an unlimited amount that you can teach a child and which the child can absorb. Even if the child is above average, there is a lot that you can do.”
“Regarding the specific suggestion from the Member for Jalan Besar GRC that for those pupils who are weak in English and proficient in their mother tongue they should be allowed at Primary 5 and 6 to offer mother tongue as the first language and English as the second language, as stated in the Report, this will be provided by the Ministry of Education if there is demand. So if there are parents who would like to send their children to a stream whereby they learn English as a second language and mother tongue as the first language, the Ministry will make this possible. The only point I would make is that I would advise parents to think very carefully about the long-term prospects for their children before they put their children into this particular stream. It is something which they will have to consider very carefully. But the basic principle which we have followed in the Report is that at the end of the day after the school principals and teachers have given their advice, it is up to the parents to make the final decision, because the education of children is ultimately that of the parents. So they must make the final choice, but think very carefully. The Member for Moulmein has brought up the point about the importance of teachers and the morale of teachers being fundamental to the success of the proposed measure. Sir, I fully agree with him. At the end of the day, it is the teachers in the classrooms who will decide whether any particular education innovation or change will be successful. That is why I am happy that these latest changes have been done in full consultation with principals and teachers and many of their recommendations and suggestions have been taken into account.”
“When the pilot project has been proved to be successful, the new policies or practices can then be implemented in more schools, so that eventually the benefits can be enjoyed by all children in Singapore. In this way, Sir, we will be able to implement necessary changes to educational policies with a minimum of disturbance and anxiety to parents and students. Now, Sir, let me deal with some of the specific points which have been brought up this afternoon. The first concerns the importance of the mother tongue, a point brought up by the Members for Bukit Batok, Aljunied GRC, Jalan Besar GRC and the Non-Constituency Member, Dr Lee Siew-Choh. The Report has stressed right from the very beginning that bilingualism is and will continue to remain the cornerstone of our education system. I do not think there should be any doubt that this policy will be changed. The issue of the teaching and learning of Chinese in our schools is a very important one. 2.15 pm Last year, the Ministry of Education invited four scholars from Taiwan to come to Singapore to study the teaching and learning of Chinese in our schools and to make recommendations as to how this can be improved. These four scholars have made their recommendations and these are now being studied by the Ministry of Education. I am happy to inform Members today that the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Ong Teng Cheong, has kindly agreed to chair a committee to advise the Ministry on the implementation of these recommendations. Under his guidance, Sir, I am confident that we will be able to improve the teaching of Chinese in our schools and to make the learning of Chinese less irksome and more interesting for our pupils.”
“Sir, let me first thank all Members who have spoken concerning the recent proposed changes to our educational policies and for their valuable comments and views. As I have stressed many times in this House and as we all know education is of fundamental importance to Singapore and to Singaporeans. This is why, Sir, the Government has put such a high priority on the need to provide high quality education for our children. Sir, the restructuring of our education system really began in 1979 with the publication of the Report on the Ministry of Education by Dr Goh Keng Swee. Since then, Sir, we have significantly upgraded and expanded secondary, post-secondary and tertiary education. And at the Schools Council meeting last Saturday, the Ministry made public the proposed measures to improve primary school education and to upgrade vocational and technical training in our institutions. Sir, I thank all Members for their support for the proposed measures. When these measures have been implemented, Sir, I am satisfied that we would have addressed the major deficiencies in our education system. There should, therefore, not be a need to make further radical changes in educational policies in the coming years. What would be needed is to focus on particular problems or issues that would inevitably arise from time to time. Where possible, Sir, we should try out new educational policies or practices through pilot projects, for example, the Primary Day School programme which will be tried out next year. These pilot projects will help us identify difficulties or problems that will arise in the course of implementation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, Government currently allocates 4% of GDP to education. As we improve the quality of education in Singapore, costs will rise. Government will consequently raise the financial allocation for education expenditure from 4% to 5% of GDP in the coming years. This will amount to almost one-fifth of total Government expenditure. Government contribution to build up the Edusave Endowment Fund will be in addition to this allocation. There is, however, one point, Sir, which I would like to stress and that is Government expenditure on education, although generous, cannot expand without limits. Government expenditure on education has to be kept within reasonable bounds and should not be at the expense of other vital Government Ministries such as Defence. The Government will fund generously educational infrastructure and basic educational services which are adequate for the education and training of our children. If parents would like the schools to introduce refinements or additions to the basic educational programme, the additional costs will have to be recovered from parents through higher school fees. PREPARATORY/PRIMARY SCHOOL REGISTRATION SYSTEM (Priority for children residing within 2 km of school) 2. Mr Heng Chiang Meng asked the Minister for Education whether greater priority will be given to children residing within 2 km of a school in the preparatory/primary school registration system.”
“Sir, as I have said, the cost of education must go up because we intend to improve the quality of education in Singapore. The major part of the cost will be provided by the Government and the miscellaneous fees, which amount to some $30 million a year, form only a very small fraction of the over $2 billion which the Government spends on education each year. However, it is not right, neither is it desirable, for Government to pay all the costs of education. Parents should pay a small part of it. This is to emphasize and make the point to parents that they have a responsibility for the education of their children. In any case, Sir, if parents have difficulty in paying schools fees or miscellaneous fees, assistance will be provided. HOSTING OF US MILITARY FACILITIES (Details of agreement) 5. Dr Lee Siew-Choh asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will give the House details of the agreement between Singapore and the United States government under which the United States will be granted military facilities in Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has not increased school fees. The Government has increased miscellaneous fees which are used by the schools to defray expenditure on teaching materials and equipment and to carry out educational projects. Expenditure by schools on such items amount to $29 million in financial year 1990 as against revenues of $25 million at the present rate of miscellaneous fees. The deficit for financial year 1990 is therefore $4 million and this deficit will increase in financial year 1991 if miscellaneous fees are not raised. The increases in the miscellaneous fees, which comprise $1 per month for students in primary schools, $1.50 per month for students in secondary schools, and $2.50 per month for students in junior colleges, centralised institutes and pre-university centres, are modest and well within the capacity of parents to pay. Furthermore, Sir, as I have stated in my speech at the Schools Council Dinner on 24th November this year, if parents require financial assistance to pay the miscellaneous fees, this will be provided generously.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Education is aware of the problems which parents face when they try to admit their children into schools in Singapore on their return from overseas job assignments. Currently, parents have to approach the schools directly to see if the schools have vacancies. Alternatively, parents have sought assistance from the Ministry's Pupil Placement Section to place their children in suitable schools. The Ministry is doing a comprehensive study of the problems which parents face concerning their children's education when the parents have to live or work overseas, sometimes for extended periods. The establishment of Singapore schools overseas, such as the primary school to be set up in Hong Kong next year and the provision of boarding facilities in secondary schools in Singapore, will help to alleviate these problems. However, more can be done. The Ministry will finalise its study and announce its proposed measures in the first quarter of next year. SCHOOL MISCELLANEOUS FEE INCREASES (Justification) 4. Dr Lee Siew-Choh asked the Minister for Education if he will justify the Government's decision to increase school fees from 1991.”
“The answer, Sir, is immediately. TIME-BASED TELEPHONE BILLING SYSTEM 2. Mr Goh Choon Kang asked the Minister for Communications and Information what are the cogent reasons for the Telecommunication Authority of Singapore to want to change the present phone billing system to a time-based one. 3. Mr Chin Harn Tong asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) whether any provision is being made to exclude emergency calls to the police and other public authorities when telephone subscribers are charged on a time-usage basis with effect from 1st October 1991, as otherwise, telephone subscribers may not allow the public to use their telephones, even in an emergency; and (b) whether the number of public telephones will be increased on or after 1st October 1991 to cater for the non-telephone-subscribing public.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Education is aware that the sums of money to be raised by aided schools for their building projects have risen significantly. Today, it costs about $20 million to build and equip a standard single-session secondary school. Aided schools would have to raise at least $4 million or more to meet their share of the cost. This, Sir, is a considerable sum and may be difficult for the schools to raise. The Ministry of Education together with the Ministry of Finance has therefore reviewed the capital grant scheme for aided schools and junior colleges and I am glad to announce today that the Government has decided to give more financial assistance to aided schools and junior colleges to help them to upgrade their facilities. The amount of capital grant for aided schools and junior colleges will be increased from 80% to 90% of approved building costs. The quantum of grant will apply to all aided schools, including aided schools that did not previously qualify for the full 80% grant and are presently on the 50% grant. Aided schools which have shown themselves to be viable with good enrolments will be given the 90% grant to help them improve the quality of education provided to their students. Aided schools which are no longer viable because of falling enrolments will not receive the grant and will be encouraged to close down.”
“But if there is no guarantee that we will always have good people in Government, is it not our responsibility now to take steps to build up our institutions, so that if, for whatever reasons, an irresponsible government should come into power, that government will not be able to cause irreparable damage to Singapore? To me, this is what this present Bill is all about. Sir, it is a difficult Bill and it may not be a perfect Bill. After this sitting today, the Bill will be sent to a Select Committee which I think is a very good idea. We will hear representations from the public. As with the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Bill, I am sure that it will help us to polish up the Bill and to make the Bill more effective. And when the Act is in operation, we may from time to time even have to make amendments. But just because we do not have a perfect Act today does not mean that we should do nothing. Let us proceed with the best draft that our draftsman can come up with today, send it to Select Committee, polish it up, and work it. If we need to make amendments later on, we shall do so. Therefore, Sir, in summary, on balance, despite all the difficulties and complications, I support the Bill. I believe that prevention is better than cure. We must realise that the institution of the Elected President cannot by itself ensure that we have a prosperous Singapore. But I believe that the institution of this Elected President will enhance our prospects of having in future years a prosperous, peaceful and secure Singapore where people of all races and all religions can live in peace and harmony. I think, after all, this is what should concern us most in this House. Much obliged, Sir.”
“In fact, Members will remember that when Singapore first became independent in 1965, there were any number of commentators who predicted or who expected Singapore to fail. I do not think, Sir, that we can fault them for their views. In fact, I believe at that time, given the circumstances, their views were quite well founded. That their views have not come true, fortunately for us, and that instead of a broken-back, not viable Singapore, we have a stable, prosperous Singapore today, is due to the fact that we were fortunate in having a group of people at that time who, despite the adverse circumstances, were determined to make a go of Singapore. And the result today is for all to see. Good people in Government are more important than strong institutions. Good people are fundamental. With good people in Government, the present system can work. I would even go further to say that if we can be sure that we will always have good people in government, any one of a number of systems can be made to work, including the present system. But I think we have to ask ourselves one fundamental question. Just because we have had the good fortune to have had in Government good people for the last 31 years, can we be sure that we will be lucky enough to have good people in Government for the next 31 years? People who will run the system honestly and will not seek to run down our reserves in order to secure their popularity and their own elections. If we can be sure that there will always be good people in Government, then this Bill is not necessary.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill which we are now considering in this House is an important Bill. It marks a change in our Constitution which will have ramifications and implications for many years. It is, therefore, not surprising, Sir, that there has been much debate on this Bill and much discussion both within and outside Parliament. And this is as it should be. We should not take such a major change lightly. Many of the points have already been covered by other speakers in this House and I do not want to waste Members' time by repeating them. All I want to do, Sir, is to make one very simple point, and that is, Sir, for a country, whether in Singapore or any other country in the world, to prosper and to provide a good life for its citizens, two things are necessary. First, you must have good people to run the Government. Second, you must have strong institutions, a point made by the First Deputy Prime Minister yesterday, and spoken on at some length by BG George Yeo in a speech which he made to Pre-University students in June this year. Sir, we have been exceptionally fortunate in having able people for the last 31 years who have governed Singapore well and honestly. As a result, we have been able to build up our reserves. We have ensured high standards of integrity and performance in our public services. All Singaporeans, Sir, whatever the Opposition may say, have benefitted as a result of this happy event. But Members will realise that if they look at the countries which have gone independent since the Second World War, I think it is not far-fetched to say that the success of Singapore is the exception rather than the rule.”
“(a) Presently, the Ministry of Education has a total of 4097 Chinese language teachers. The average age of these teachers is 46.5 years. (b) Of the 4097 teachers, 1029 are graduate teachers. (c) We have recruited 152 graduate teachers majoring in Chinese Studies from the NUS between 1983 and 1989. The number recruited each year is as follows:- 1983 - 27 1984 - 35 1985 - 24 1986 - 13 1987 - 19 1988 - 12 1989 - 22 --- Total - 152 --- (d) (1) Annual budget of the NUS Department of Chinese Studies (1983/84 - 1989/90) 1983/84 $1,457,200 1984/85 $1,471,400 1985/86 $1,860,000 1986/87 $1,995,200 1987/88 $1,700,500 1988/89 $1,697,300 1989/90 $2,416,900 (2) Student enrolment in the NUS Department of Chinese Studies (1983/84 - 1989/90) 1983/84 589 1984/85 759 1985/86 855 1986/87 852 1987/88 803 1988/89 923 1989/90 1000 (e) Number of books in the Reference Library in the NUS Department of Chinese Studies: approximately 8570 volumes. Number of books in the NUS Chinese Library: approximately 350,000 volumes. TAXPAYERS WITH ANNUAL ASSESSABLE INCOMES OF MORE THAN $500,000 2. Dr Lee Siew-Choh asked the Minister for Finance whether he will inform the House (i) the number of taxpayers, individual and corporate, who have reported incomes of $500,000 or more in their yearly income tax returns for the years 1985 to 1989; (ii) the amount of income tax actually paid by such taxpayers; and (iii) the percentage of income actually paid in taxes by them.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the motion. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. BILLS INTRODUCED 3.12 pm CONTROLLED PREMISES (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act (Chapter 60 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for National Development (Mr S. Dhanabalan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PREVENTION OF POLLUTION OF THE SEA BILL "to enable effect to be given to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973 as modified and added to by the Protocol of 1978 and to make provisions generally for preventing the pollution of Singapore waters and for matters related thereto, and to repeal the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea Act (Chapter 243 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Communications and Information (Dr Yeo Ning Hong); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. NEWSPAPER AND PRINTING PRESSES (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (Chapter 206 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister of State for Communications and Information (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. ADMINISTRATION OF MUSLIM LAW (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“I just want to make one point in passing, Sir, and that is we have to recognise that in Singapore, with the Chinese forming some 75% of the population, Malays and Indians and others forming 25%, it is theoretically possible, for example, for a Chinese to live, study and work in Singapore and only mix with Chinese. It is not possible for a Malay or an Indian to do the same because of the fact that they only form one-quarter of the population. So it is important for the Chinese population to ensure that we create opportunities for our children to interact and mix with children of other races. This is good for us and for Singapore, and I do not think that any Member would quarrel with this point. But as I have said in my Statement just now, although in the SAP schools there are almost exclusively Chinese children, there are opportunities for these children to mix with students of other schools and of other ethnic races in inter-school activities. There are opportunities within the school for the children to learn about multi-racial harmony and tolerance. And from the evidence which we have, from the views of the principals of the SAP schools and the junior colleges, the SAP students do mix well and comfortably with students of other schools and, therefore, there is no need to change the present mode of operation. Dr John Chen has said that we strengthen the study of Chinese at primary level. I think this has already been done. We have established 10 seed schools at the primary level. We are watching their progress. I believe, Sir, I have covered all the points.”
“On Mr Shanmugam's suggestion that we should ensure that as many schools as possible will offer Malay and Tamil as second language so as to widen access to schools to children of all races and that this should be done even if there are not many students in a particular school who would like to study Tamil, for example, I have said in my Statement that the Ministry is working out steps to ensure that Malay and Tamil as a second language is taught at many more schools. One of the measures which we are thinking about is to work out a system where we have one Tamil teacher, for example, going round to a few schools to teach TL2. It will involve a little bit of time-tabling problems. But I am sure that this can be worked out with the respective principals and this will make it possible for more schools to offer ML and TL as a second language, thereby allowing more access to these schools for Malay and Tamil children. On Dr Ow Chin Hock's point about inter-racial mixing, as I have said in my Statement, I do not think that we can really deny the fact that in a multi-racial school with Chinese, Malay and Indian students, there must be more opportunities for mixing than in a school where there are only Chinese students. That point to me is quite obvious. I also agree that it is not only in the schools that children mix but also in their housing estates and in their homes in which they live. And I am sure that all of us would welcome more opportunities for our children and our people of all races to mix with one another.”
“They have talks, they have discussions, they also have non-Chinese teachers teaching in the SAP schools, and I am sure they will give this subject very great importance and they will ensure that their students recognise the importance of multi-racial harmony and tolerance in Singapore. Mr Shanmugam suggested that possibly we might consider offering ML1 and TL1 in the SAP schools as a means of encouraging inter-racial mixing of children. Sir, I do not believe that this is a good suggestion because the SAP schools were set up, as I have explained in my Statement, for the purpose of preserving the ethos and traditions of the Chinese schools. And for that to happen, it is necessary that English and Chinese be the dominant languages in that school and the school operates in that way. Once you allow ML1 and TL1 to be taught in the SAP schools, I believe, Sir, that the character of the SAP schools will change and they will not meet the objectives for which these schools were established. However, I would like to mention here that in fact three of our independent schools - Raffles Institution, Anglo-Chinese School and St. Joseph's Institution - have on their own initiative started to offer not only CL1 but also ML1 and TL1 to those children in their schools whom they think are capable and who would like to study these three languages at first language level. The Ministry is watching their progress very carefully. If they are successful, then perhaps we could consider extending this to other schools. But I think it is something which we should keep in mind.”
“I would say that I could not agree with him more that where it is necessary to stream children, it should be done by merit. And as I have said in my Statement, we take an even-handed attitude towards children of all races in our education system and we will ensure that no child is discriminated against simply because of his race. So I will make sure that the Ministry takes his point very much into consideration. On Dr Tan Cheng Bock's suggestion on the twinning of schools and how this can be done, I have said that we will look into this matter and I can assure him, Sir, that we always welcome his suggestion and his interest in the Ministry. I would be very glad to hear his views and when we come to the practical details, I am sure that he will be able to assist us. Sir, Mr Yatiman Yusof has brought up some suggestions, for example, in order to increase inter-racial mixing, we might possibly have a school with three branches - one for Chinese children learning EL and CL, one for Malays and one for Indians, ie, Malays learning EL and ML and Indians learning EL and TL. I believe, Sir, we tried this once. At one time, we had integrated schools with three branches, but it did not work out well. I think that our experience with this type of school shows that it is not a promising approach. But since the Member has raised this point, we will have a look at it again. It may or may not work, but I assure him that his suggestion will not be thrown into the waste paper basket. We will look at it . Regarding subjects to be taught in the SAP schools which stress multi-racial harmony, as I said in my Statement, Sir, the principals have said that they do have these subjects.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would first of all like to thank all the Members who have spoken this afternoon for their very valuable comments on the Statement which I have made concerning the SAP schools. I am also happy that from the general tenor of the speeches, Members have accepted and agreed with the point that while of course we should continue to monitor the situation very closely, I believe that all Members agree that there is no pressing need to make major changes to the mode of operation of the SAP schools at the present time. Sir, I will come now to the various points made by Members in the order in which they have been made. But before I do that, I would like to again stress one fundamental point, and that is, our Government's commitment to multi-racial harmony and tolerance as the bedrock of our survival and prosperity in Singapore. As I said, this is fundamental. This cannot be argued and it is important we should ensure that everyone in Singapore, particularly our children, develop an understanding and appreciation of the sensitivities, cultures, customs, religions of the various races in Singapore, learn to accommodate one another, where necessary, and generally learn to live and work with each other. This is to ensure that we continue to have the type of peaceful and prosperous Singapore which we now have. All our comments, whether on SAP schools or on other aspects of our education policy, or indeed of other aspects of Government policy, must always be made with this fundamental point in mind. Now, Sir, I come to the specific points made by the Members. First of all, Mr Chandra Das, on the point that streaming in our schools should be by merit and not by the choice of a second language.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That Parliament do now adjourn. Question proposed. SPECIAL ASSISTANCE PLAN (SAP) SCHOOLS 1.40 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I move adjournment of the House, may I 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)?”
“We will ensure that no child in Singapore is discriminated against simply because of his race. Pupils who are eligible and who wish to study ML1 or TL1 can already do so at the Ministry of Education's Language Centres. Furthermore, just as we have established the SAP schools to enable Chinese children to learn EL1 and CL1, we will establish similar schools to enable Malay and Indian children to learn EL1 and ML1 and EL1 and TL1 respectively if there is demand. To sum up, Sir, the SAP schools are a valuable part of our education system in Singapore. The SAP schools fulfil a need to nurture a core of students who are fluent in English and Chinese at first language level and who will be the transmitters of Chinese culture to future generations of Chinese Singaporeans. The Ministry will continue to keep the situation under close review and increase opportunities for students in SAP schools to integrate and mix with children of other schools but there is no pressing need to make major changes to the mode of operation of the SAP schools at the present time. Finally, the Ministry will continue to maintain an even-handed attitude towards children of all races in our education system. Just as we have made special provision for Chinese children to study EL1 and CL1, we will make similar provision for Malay and Indian children to study EL1 and ML1 and EL1 and TL1 if there is demand. Sir, as I understand that some Members may like to debate my statement, following precedent, I propose to move an adjournment of the House to enable Members to do so. DEBATE ON MINISTERIAL STATEMENT (Motion)”
“We will help the SAP schools to create more opportunities for their students to mix and interact with students of other schools, for example, by twinning the SAP schools with suitable multi-racial Government or Government-aided schools, as has been suggested by Dr Tan Cheng Bock. Overall, Sir, I agree with the principals that there is no pressing need to make major changes to the mode of operation of the SAP schools at the present time. The Ministry will always welcome suggestions from Members as to how we can further help students in our schools, including the students in the SAP schools, to understand the need for multi-racial harmony and tolerance in our multi-racial society and to develop an appreciation of the values, cultures and sensitivities of the various racial groups in Singapore. In this connection, the Ministry is working out ways to increase the number of schools which will teach Malay and Tamil as a second language in addition to Chinese during school time in the schools. This will ensure that access to our schools, particularly the popular schools, will be open to children of all races provided that they meet the required standards. Sir, I now come to another point which has been raised in the Press, ie, that as the SAP schools enjoy special resources not available to other schools and as they teach only EL1 and CL1, thereby attracting almost exclusively Chinese children, this is not fair to non-Chinese children who do not have the opportunity or who may not have the inclination to study in the SAP schools. The Government's position on this point is very clear. I have stated on more than one occasion that we take an even-handed attitude towards children of all races in our education system.”
“In view of the above, we are of the opinion, while we should continue to monitor the situation closely, there is no pressing need to make major changes to the mode of operation of the SAP schools at the present time. We thank you for the opportunity to make our views known to you on this very important matter. Yours sincerely, Signed Principals of Anglican High School, Chung Cheng High School, Catholic High School, Maris Stella High School, St. Nicholas Girls' School, Nanyang Girls' High School, The Chinese High School, Dunman High School and River Valley High School.' Sir, in addition to the principals of our SAP schools and Chinese High School, I also met with the principals of our junior colleges to discuss this subject. The junior college principals confirmed the point made by the principals of the SAP schools that, in the junior colleges, the SAP students interact and mix freely and comfortably with students of other ethnic groups as well as students from non-SAP schools. Sir, I have confidence in the judgment of our principals. They meet with the students daily. They, together with their teachers, are the people who know the students best. They are in the best position to assess whether the present mode of operation of the SAP schools hinders their students from developing an understanding and appreciation of the values, cultures and sensitivities of the various racial groups in our multi-racial society and should therefore be changed. As the principals suggest, the Ministry will keep the situation under close review.”
“It is dated 10th July 1990, and it says: 'Dear Minister, We refer to the meeting with you on July 4 concerning whether the present mode of operation of the SAP schools will lead to a lack of understanding and appreciation among our students of the values, cultures and sensitivities of the various racial groups in our multi-racial society and whether it is necessary to make any changes to the present mode of operation of the SAP schools. Our views can be summarised as follows: (i) While the SAP schools aimed to preserve and keep alive the traditions and ethos of the old Chinese schools, they are different from the old Chinese schools in that, in the SAP schools, the students learn both English and Chinese at first language level whereas, in the old Chinese schools, the students learn CL1 and EL2. As the students in the SAP schools are fluent in English, in addition to Chinese, this enables the students to mix easily with students from other schools in inter-school ECA activities; (ii) In our school programmes and activities, there are many opportunities for the SAP schools to bring home to our students the importance of multi-racial harmony and tolerance in a multi-racial society like Singapore. Events such as celebrations of major festivals, exhibitions of cultural artifacts, talks on customs and religions of the three main racial groups in Singapore figure prominently in the activities of our schools; and (iii) The majority of our students go on to junior college for their Pre-University education. These students have shown that they have the ability to mix and relate well with their counterparts from non-SAP schools as well as students of other ethnic groups.”
“Sir, I shall explain later the reasons why I have arrived at this conclusion, but let me first remind Members on why the SAP schools were set up in 1979. The SAP schools were set up for two purposes: (i) To encourage a number of our academically able and linguistically talented students to study both Chinese and English at first language level; and (ii) To preserve and keep alive the traditions and ethos of the old Chinese schools in a number of our best schools in order to provide a conducive environment for the learning of Chinese Language and Chinese culture. To ensure that the Chinese Language and culture will be kept alive and healthy in Singapore, in spite of the continuing and daily onslaught of Western influences through the media, it is necessary to have a core of able students who are proficient in English and Chinese and who are steeped in Chinese culture and values. These students will be our writers, newspaper reporters and editors, TV producers and personnel and teachers in the future. Knowing CL1, they will help to transmit Chinese culture to future generations of Chinese Singaporeans. Sir, I met with the principals of the eight SAP schools and Chinese High School on 4th July to discuss whether the present mode of operation of the SAP schools had the effect of hindering their students from developing an understanding and appreciation of the need for multi-racial harmony and tolerance in our multi-racial society and whether they felt that changes were needed to the present mode of operation of the SAP schools. Sir, the views of the principals are summed up in a letter which was sent to me after the meeting. I would like to quote from the letter.”
“Mr Speaker, since March this year, there have been a number of speeches by Members of Parliament and letters in the Press expressing concern as to whether the present mode of operation of the Special Assistance Plan (SAP) schools was hindering inter-racial mixing of students with the consequent worry that this could lead to a lack of understanding and appreciation among the SAP students of the need for multi-racial harmony and tolerance in Singapore. Sir, I would like to address these worries by underlining one fundamental point and that is the Government's commitment to multi-racial harmony and tolerance as the bedrock of Singapore's survival and prosperity. Multi-racial harmony and tolerance are fundamental in a multi-racial society like Singapore. It is important, indeed vital, that all our children and indeed all our people should learn to get on well with one another, to respect one another's traditions and practices and to accommodate these traditions and practices where necessary. Children who study in a multi-racial school naturally have the most opportunity to mix and interact with children of other races, thereby developing an understanding and appreciation of the values, cultures and sensitivities of the various racial groups in Singapore. In the SAP schools, the students are almost exclusively Chinese and opportunities for interaction with students of other races are obviously fewer than in a multi-racial school. This does not mean, however, that the students in our SAP schools cannot mix and interact easily with children of other races or develop an understanding of the need for multi-racial harmony and tolerance in our multi-racial society.”
“Finally, let me thank all those who made contributions to the work of the Select Committee through their written representations and appearance before it. They made many valid points which, together with the views expressed in this House, have helped the Committee to improve on the original Bill. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“The Select Committee is convinced that regardless of the intention of the present Government on this matter, it would be wrong to deprive future governments of this element of flexibility of appointing some NMPs as office holders. The Select Committee also deliberated on whether NMPs should sever ties with political parties. It decided that it was unnecessary to specifically require an NMP to do so. It felt that it was far better to leave to conventions and practice to evolve. On voting rights, the Committee decided to make no change, ie, NMPs will have the same voting rights as NCMPs. The reason was simple. The absence of voting rights would reduce the status of NMPs and discourage serious-minded persons from serving as nominated MPs. As Members can see, the Committee has made certain important changes to the Bill. It may not have made all the changes which all Members or representors to the Select Committee would have preferred. But I believe that Members will agree that we have been as accommodating as possible. I hope that Members will view the revised Bill more positively than the original Bill. Like all new proposals, people have their reservations. When I first pro- posed the concept of Medisave in this House, some sections of the public and also some MPs had their reservations. Likewise, when we introduced the concept of GRCs. Both Medisave and GRCs have worked, to the benefit of the people. Suppose we lacked foresight and the courage to propose and implement them. Would we be better off today? Again, I say, give the NMP scheme a try. If we do not try, we will never see the merits of the scheme. This Bill does not bind every future Parliament to have NMPs. If the demerits outweigh the merits, the next Parliament need not carry on with the scheme.”
“If the provisions of the Bill are not specific on this point, suitable amendments can be made.' [Hansard, Vol. 54, No. 8, Col. 698]. This is still my intention. The Government does not intend to appoint NMPs as Ministers or other office holders. But when I looked into the future, I wondered whether it was necessary or desirable to expressly prevent a future government from appointing an NMP as Minister. Many established democracies can and do regularly appoint Cabinet Ministers from the non-elected members of their legislature. Notable examples are the United Kingdom, France and Malaysia. If these countries, which have a bigger population and a bigger Parliament, need to appoint non-elected members as Cabinet Ministers from time to time, the reason is even more cogent for Singapore which has a Parliament of only 81 Members. In coming to this decision, my guiding principle is what is in the national interests. For a country to be well run and the people to enjoy growth and prosperity, it must have effective government. This means having suitable people to do the specialised complex jobs like Finance, Trade and Industry and Law. If there is no elected MP who can do such jobs adequately, it is in the people's interest that a competent person is appointed to do so from the non-elected MPs. A government may also consider it useful to appoint a Minister in charge of the Arts. The best person need not necessarily be a politician and a government may wish to draw upon the very limited talent pool in the arts to appoint such a Minister, rather than have a politician without a real interest in the arts to do the job.”
“The criteria are spelt out in the amended section 3(2) of the Fourth Schedule, which reads: 'The persons to be nominated shall be persons who have rendered distinguished public service, or who have brought honour to the Republic, or who have distinguished themselves in the field of arts and letters, culture, the sciences, business, industry, the professions, social or community service or the labour movement; and in making any nomination, the Special Select Committee shall have regard to the need for nominated Members to reflect as wide a range of independent and non-partisan views as possible.' The final change the Committee made to the Bill is that an NMP should vacate his seat before contesting a by-election where he contests on a party ticket. The original Bill did not require him to do so. The reason for the change is that it is not possible for an NMP to contest a by-election on a party ticket without his non-partisan image being affected. This requirement will not apply to an NMP standing for a by-election as an independent candidate as the same reason does not apply to him. Let me now turn to certain aspects which were raised during the hearings of the Select Committee but where the Committee decided to make no change to the Bill. First, concerns the question of whether NMPs should be permitted to hold political office. The original Bill does not prohibit an NMP from being appointed as Minister or other office holder. The Select Committee decided not to change this. Now, Members may recall what I said during the Second Reading and I quote: '... it is not the intention of Government that nominated MPs should be eligible to become Ministers or other office holders. The principle that office holders must come from the ranks of elected MPs will remain.”
“However, the Select Committee did recognise that there was value in the Special Select Committee obtaining the views of other MPs before it made its final recommendations to the President. Accordingly, a change has been made to the Bill whereby the Special Select Committee will be obliged to consult the general body of Members of Parliament, individually or otherwise, before deciding on the names to be submitted to the President. This is provided for in section 2(3) of the Fourth Schedule. This change enables the Special Select Committee to benefit from the views and comments of the Members who may have specific knowledge of particular nominees, without the whole House having to meet and publicly debate or vote on individual names. The details of the manner of consultations have not been spelt out in the Bill. It is best we leave these administrative details to the Special Select Committee to decide. Such consultation should, of course, be to the extent possible or practical for it may not always be possible to consult all MPs, for example, MPs who are abroad. Thirdly, on the criteria for selecting NMPs, the Select Committee decided that the Bill should incorporate some criteria. This will not only guide the Special Select Committee in its deliberations but will also help members of the public when they propose nominees for consideration of the Special Select Committee.”
“He argued, quite correctly, that if the system of NMPs was found unworkable, a future Parliament could always amend, or abolish it altogether. While I agreed with him, I nevertheless felt that we should have a mechanism which did not permanently and automatically require all future Parliaments to have NMPs. I therefore suggested that instead of a "sunset" clause, each Parliament should be given the discretion to decide if it wished to have NMPs for the term of that Parliament. It would determine this by a resolution; if it did not so resolve, then there would be no NMPs in that Parliament. This approach will give us some flexibility in trying out the NMP scheme. While the NMP provisions can be set out in the Constitution, they will not bind all future Parliaments to appoint NMPs. The Select Committee agreed with this variation. Accordingly, the Bill as revised by the Committee provides each Parliament with the discretion to determine whether it wishes to appoint NMPs. This is to be found in section 1 of the Fourth schedule. This discretion will be exercised by a resolution adopted by each Parliament within six months of its first meeting after a general election. NMPs will be appointed within six months of such a resolution. If no such resolution is adopted, no NMP will be nominated during the life of that Parliament. Now, I move on to the procedure for selecting NMPs. The Committee weighed the pros and cons of various proposals to change the procedure for selecting NMPs, for example, whether there should be open discussion and voting by all the Members of the House on the nominees or whether there should be secret voting. The Select Committee did not accept these ideas and has given its reasons in its Report.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there is at present no shortage of Chinese language teachers in primary and secondary schools. CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE (AMENDMENT) BILL (As reported from Select Committee) Order for Third Reading read. The First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence (Mr Goh Chok Tong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time." The Report of the Select Committee as well as the Bill, as revised by the Select Committee, was presented to Members on 15th March, 1990. I am sure all Members have read and studied the Report and the reasons given for the decisions taken by the Select Committee. I therefore do not propose to make a lengthy speech, but only to highlight the main points. I propose to separate my comments into two categories: areas where changes were made to the original Bill, and other areas where the Committee decided not to make any change. There are four areas where the Select Committee decided changes should be made to the Bill. The first concerns the "sunset" clause concept to the Bill. Members will recall that during the Second Reading, I suggested the idea of weaving a "self-destruct" or "sunset" clause into the Bill. I did so in order to accommodate the reservations expressed by some MPs over the Bill. My main objective was to urge them to try out the concept of NMP for the remaining period of this parliamentary term. The amendment to the Constitution will lapse automatically, unless it is re-enacted. During the Select Committee hearing, one representor graphically pointed out that such a "sunset" clause was like casting a "death wish for a new born baby". He was strongly against having such a clause in the Constitution which he regarded as the supreme law of the land.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, just a few remarks on the point made by Dr Tan Cheng Bock on the SAP schools. As I explained earlier today, we need the SAP schools in Singapore to foster a core of students who will learn Chinese as a first language and subsequently have enough expertise to transmit the language to other generations. As I said, if there is demand from Malay and Indian children to learn ML1 and TL1, we will also make arrangements to make this possible. With regard to his point as to whether there will be problems and whether we should allow these children more opportunities for integration, I have discussed this previously. I think the more opportunities that we can arrange for integration, as the principals themselves have suggested, obviously this must be desirable. We will look into his specific suggestions about twinning of schools and see whether this would be possible.”
“An increase of $500 million would mean an additional per cent and the percentage of our GDP spent on education would rise from 4% to 5%. We have still to establish that this is necessary, Sir, but I am sure that if the Ministry of Education decides that such an improvement is desirable, we shall receive sympathetic consideration from the Ministry of Finance.”
“With your indulgence, Sir, three very short answers to Mr Goh Choon Kang, Mr Chiam and Dr Lee Siew-Choh. First, regarding Mr Goh Choon Kang's point about the implementation of the bilingual policy in the case of mixed marriages, I will tell him that the Ministry is sympathetic towards this problem. We have had to take a uniform view of all cases initially in order to impress on the population and our students the importance of the bilingual policy. But we are sympathetic to the human problems that will arise from the implementation of this policy and we are reviewing our policy regarding allowing children of mixed marriages some flexibility in this area. Mr Chiam asked for some information regarding the NUS Department of Chinese Studies. On the number of graduates who read the subject as a major subject, the figures for the last five years were: 85 for 1985, 76 for 1986, 110 for 1987, 98 for 1988 and 117 for 1989. With regard to the other information, may I suggest that he table a question for written answer and we shall give him the information. Finally, I fully agree with Dr Lee Siew-Choh that we should make adequate resources available for education, and we have always done so. In future, we may have to spend more money on education. As an example, for the upgrading of primary schools and giving graduate teachers to teach in primary schools and if we were to implement our scheme to extend the pre-primary year to more schools, our estimate is that the amount of money which will be required is something in the region of about $500 million. At the present time, the budget of the Ministry of Education is just over $2 billion per year, which amounts to about 4% of our GDP.”
“Therefore, there is a huge variety of teaching materials and techniques which are constantly in use. My Ministry has been able to take advantage of these new materials. We constantly look out for new techniques to make the teaching and learning of English much more interesting and we will continue to do so. Much obliged, Sir.”
“Sir, I have explained at some length the steps which the Ministry of Education is taking in order to make the study of the mother tongue by our students less stressful and more enjoyable. Our objective must be that by the time a student finishes his general education at the age of 16 at 'O' level, he will have, in addition to a high standard of English, reasonable fluency in his mother tongue and a sound foundation on which, should he wish, he can build on to enhance his proficiency in the language. It will take us some years to realise this objective but it is something which is worthwhile for us to work towards. Sir, I apologize to the Member for taking so much of his time before coming round to his question. But as I said, Sir, we are paying as much attention to the teaching of English as to the teaching of Chinese. I am happy to inform him now that with the new materials and new techniques which we have in our primary and secondary schools, plus giving more time to those pupils who need help, the majority of our children are now able to reach an adequate standard in English. As I pointed out, Sir, the percentage of our students who now pass English at '0' level is comparable to those of English children taking the same examination in England. And for those children who need more time, ie, those children who come from dialect-speaking homes or non English-speaking homes, for example, this is a matter of concern to us. We will continue looking into it. One advantage which we have, Sir, with regard to the teaching of English in Singapore is that we are not the only country doing so. There are an innumerable number of centres and experts in England, America, Australia, Canada, all looking into this matter.”
“Here, our aim is to try and lay a sound foundation in Chinese by taking advantage of the Chinese primary school ethos in these schools and utilizing redesigned curricula and teaching materials. If this can be done successfully, and the signs are hopeful, we then have to consider whether or not we should extend the system to more schools and thereby effectively have our children start school earlier at five years instead of six years. This is a major issue which should be carefully studied before any decision is taken. Sir, my point in mentioning all of this is to point out that the Ministry of Education, as an operational Ministry, is not the best institution to look into these issues, many of which require intensive long term research. The Ministry has to deal with day-to-day problems. I believe that we need a centre or an institute in Singapore which can study issues not of the teaching of languages as such but of the implementation of the bilingual policy in our multi-racial society. In my view, Sir, the most appropriate institution to set up such a centre or institute for the study of bilingualism in our society would be one of our tertiary institutions, possibly the proposed National Institute of Education. I have therefore asked the working committee, which is looking into the establishment of the NIE, to consider the possibility of the NIE, perhaps in association with other relevant and interested bodies, sponsoring an institute or a centre to look into all the problems and issues connected with the implementation of the bilingual policy in Singapore. If this centre or institute can be set up, it could be of considerable assistance to us in resolving many of the problems and issues which we face today.”
“But nevertheless, Sir, as Japanese and Korean children learn Japanese and Korean as their mother tongue and their first language and having regard to another press report in the Chinese press which quoted a Professor from the Beijing Institute of Languages, as saying that, with a knowledge of 3,000 characters, one would be able to read newspapers in Chinese, are we not overloading our students who study Chinese as a second language by requiring them to learn 3,000 characters by the time they reach 'O' level? Should we not update our words list which was last compiled in 1982, and see if we can make do with fewer characters and still give our children a reasonable proficiency in Chinese? With regard to spreading the study of characters between primary and secondary school, we know that Chinese is not an easy language to learn and it could be advantageous for children to learn as much Chinese as possible in primary schools in order to build a firm foundation for the study of the language before the children proceed to secondary schools where they will have to study many more academic subjects. The question then arises as to how much time can we devote to Chinese at the primary school level without permanently handicapping the pupil in his learning of English and the other academic subjects. Unfortunately, our experience in this matter has not been very encouraging. Our previous attempt to give an early start and hence, more time to the learning of Chinese to about 10% of our primary school pupils in the pre-primary classes was not successful and, as Members will know, this has to be discontinued. We are now making a fresh start with the Preparatory Year programme for five years old in the 10 primary SAP schools.”
“Sir, Members may remember a few months ago it was reported in the press that Japanese and Korean students need to learn only 2,000 Chinese characters and 1,000 Chinese characters respectively by the time they reach 12th grade, ie, when they are 18 years old and they are still able to read their own newspapers. Of course, Japanese and Korean are not the same as Chinese. As Members will probably know, modern Japanese is written in a mixture of three components - Kanji, Hiragana and Katakana. Kanji are Chinese characters while Hiragana and Katakana are sets of syllables which make up two separate syllabic alphabets. Kanji is used mainly for content words, such as nouns, verbs and adjectives while Hiragana and Katakana are used for specific Japanese words, to perform grammatical functions, to denote pronouns, adverbs and conjunctions and to render foreign words into Japanese. The Korean writing system consists of Hanja which is mainly based on Chinese characters and Hangul which is the original Korean script. Korea has, of course, gone much further than Japan in using a phonetic script to denote both Hangul and Hanja characters. The experience of our children learning Chinese is therefore not strictly comparable to that of Japanese children learning Japanese or Korean children learning Korean.”
“When a child learns two European languages, English and French or French and German, we know that the key is to teach the children on an oral basis first, ie, to learn to use the language orally, to listen, to speak and to understand before going into the grammar and the spelling. Once the child is comfortable with the spoken language, the writing and reading then come more naturally. The question which we have to ask ourselves is: Does this also apply to Chinese which uses ideographs and not a phonetic alphabet? How much does oral fluency in Chinese help children to read and to write Chinese characters? If it is established that attaining oral proficiency in Chinese does help children significantly to get a better grasp of the language, should we therefore not restructure our teaching and our examinations to put emphasis on speaking, listening and understanding the language rather than on memorising and reproducing characters on demand? This would provide the opportunity for a more interactive, more interesting type of teaching and learning and make the study of the language more enjoyable, as Dr Hong Hai has suggested, and possibly lessen the anxiety of parents and students. But we cannot make such decisions off the cuff. The issues have to be studied carefully. A third issue, Sir - how many Chinese characters should a child know so that he can be considered to have acquired a reasonable knowledge of the language and how should the study of these characters be distributed between primary and secondary schools?”