Hansard, 1989-01-19

asked the Prime Minister when he proposes to table a motion for Parliament to resolve that the President be asked to grant a pardon to the former MP for Anson to honour the Prime Minister's statement made on the 12 September 1986 before the Committee of Privileges of the last Parliament.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the First Deputy Prime Minister has asked me to answer this question. Sir, there is no reason for the Prime Minister to table a motion to ask the President to pardon Mr Jeyaretnam. The Member should read carefully what the Prime Minister said on 12th September 1986 in the Committee of Privileges. The Prime Minister promised Mr Jeyaretnam to get Parliament to ask the President for a pardon or set aside the convictions and order a new trial if Mr Jeyaretnam proved his innocence, namely, by having the two witnesses, Ivy Chew and Ping, as witnesses to say that although the cheques were made out to the Workers' Party, they had, at the time they handed the cheques, said that he was to do with it as he wished. The fact is Mr Jeyaretnam never produced them as witnesses. Mr Speaker, Sir, after the Privy Council delivered their judgment in the case of J B Jeyaretnam versus the Law Society of Singapore, as Minister for Law, I asked the Attorney-General to advise on its legal implications for the Government. The Attorney-General studied the judgment and has given his advice, the full text(Cols. 361 - 364) of which will be circulated to hon. Members this morning. The Attorney-General in his advice has given his views on the Privy Council's ruling on Mr Jeyaretnam's disbarment as well as on the Privy Council's comments on Mr Jeyaretnam's criminal convictions. text - ADVICE OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL ON THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE'S JUDGMENT IN PRIVY COUNCIL APPEAL NO. 10 OF 1988 - JOSHUA BENJAMIN JEYARETNAM v THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE (Cols. 361 - 364) As regards the question of disbarment, the Attorney-General has stated that the judgment of the Privy Council, insofar as it relates to their ruling on Mr Jeyaretnam's appeal against disbarment, is binding on the parties, namely, the Law Society of Singapore and Mr J B Jeyaretnam. That ruling has been implemented and Mr Jeyaretnam's right to practise has already been restored. As for the comments of the Privy Council on convictions, Mr Jeyaretnam's appeal was not, and could not be, against the convictions. Mr Jeyaretnam had previously sought special leave from the Privy Council to appeal to them against these convictions, but the Privy Council had refused him leave to do so. The Attorney-General has advised that the comments of the Privy Council on the criminal convictions of Mr Jeyaretnam do not bind the Government. The Privy Council had no jurisdiction to decide this question. They themselves admitted in their judgment that this was the law. In the view of the Attorney-General, the Privy Council's statements do not in any way reverse these criminal convictions. While the Privy Council heard counsel for Mr Jeyaretnam on the question of his convictions, it did not invite the Singapore Public Prosecutor to argue the prosecution's case on the convictions. This violated a basic rule of natural justice: that a court should not reach a decision without hearing both sides of an argument. As a result, several issues which were crucial to the case were not fully argued. Had the Public Prosecutor been invited, he would have been able to show that Mr Jeyaretnam's convictions were fully justified under the laws of Singapore. After studying the Privy Council's criticisms of Mr Jeyaretnam's convictions, and after again reviewing the record of the case, the Attorney-General has advised the Government that Mr Jeyaretnam was correctly convicted by the Singapore courts and he has stated that he is satisfied that there has been no miscarriage of justice. Sir, it is clear from the Official Receiver's examination of the accounts of the Workers' Party that the Party had collected considerable sums in donations, totalling $58,363 between 1972 and 1980, more than $58,000. They had also expended $31,494 in election expenses in 1976, $1,400 in a by-election in 1977, and it had spent $14,463 in election expenses in 1980. So considerable sums of money received in donations, sums of money spent in elections and by-elections. Yet throughout this period the Party's bank accounts showed only $29 in 1977, $355 in 1978, and for the years 1979, 1980 and 1981, for each of these three years, $6.97 and a balance of $18.47 in January 1982. It was abundantly clear that this was a deliberate scheme to siphon off donations to the Party, and leave only paltry sums in the bank to prevent the Official Receiver from collecting them. The Police uncovered evidence of crimes in the case of the three diverted cheques. As a result, Mr Jeyaretnam was charged with fraud and making a false declaration, and tried and convicted by the courts in Singapore. The Privy Council has, without the benefit of full legal argument, stated that these convictions were wrong. It has given technical legal arguments, but without hearing the Singapore Public Prosecutor's arguments. The Government has been advised by the Attorney-General that the convictions were correct. The Privy Council stated that he was not guilty on the technical point, that each of the three cheques was a gift and not for value, and that therefore the donor could have changed his or her mind. It seems absurd that where the Official Receiver is appointed, whether he is defrauded of property belonging to the Workers' Party depends on whether a cheque was a gift or for value, because once Mr Jeyaretnam had received a cheque for the Workers' Party by law, he immediately was deemed to have held it for the Official Receiver, and had no power to give it back to the giver or to anybody else. This point comes out clearly in the Attorney-General's advice and let me quote: 'As a consequence of not hearing the Singapore Public Prosecutor, a number of issues crucial to the convictions were not fully argued. For example, when dealing with the issue concerning title to the proceeds of the cheques, the Privy Council seemed to have dismissed the fact that the Workers' Party was already in receivership, as of little or no importance, when Willie Lim altered his cheque at the request of Wong Hong Toy. Judge Khoo had found as a fact that when that cheque was countermanded, the Workers' Party was already in receivership, and that the terms of the Order was to the effect that all assets belonging to the Party were to be handed over to the Official Receiver. Consequently, neither Jeyaretnam nor Wong Hong Toy had any right to request Willie Lim to alter the cheque - property in it having already passed to the Official Receiver.' Sir, the Privy Council, therefore, missed the point that Mr Jeyaretnam and Mr Wong received the cheques as officers of the Workers' Party and that where the Workers' Party was under receivership, only the Receiver can give approval for the return of any cheque. The Receiver never knew of these goings-on and was kept completely out of the picture by the two officers of the Workers' Party who freely dealt with the asset of the Party, in breach of the trust that the law imposed on them. These then, Sir, are very important points of law which the Public Prosecutor would have raised had the Privy Council heard him.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has repeated some of the arguments put forward by the Prosecutor and it is a pity, Sir, that the Prime Minister himself is not here to answer some of the questions because I will follow up with some questions.

Dr Lee, can I ask you to put your question?

I just want to know whether the Minister has really read the full text of the Privy Council judgment.

The answer is yes, more than once.

Does the Minister then agree or does he not agree that the Privy Council examined every single conviction, going behind the judgments of the Singapore courts and declared that the convictions were wrong in law?

Sir, I think the Member has not listened to what I have said in my answer. I am not saying that the Privy Council did not make any comments on the question of convictions but that the comments on convictions are not binding on the Singapore Government, that the Privy Council had no jurisdiction to decide those questions, that they themselves had admitted that this was the law when they had refused application for leave; that the Attorney-General had not been invited to present the prosecution's case and therefore very important questions of law had not been fully argued.

In which case, Sir, will the Minister say for what reason the Privy Council set aside the Order of the High Court to strike out Mr J B Jeyaretnam from the roll of solicitors?

That question probably should be directed to the Privy Council.

Will the Minister agree then, Sir, that the Privy Council had made findings or a declaration that Mr J B Jeyaretnam was wrongly convicted on all four charges and that the Order to strike him off was wrong and should be set aside?

Mr Speaker, Sir, we will be involved in an endless repetition of what I had very clearly stated in my main answer - that the Privy Council's ruling on disbarment is binding on the parties, ie, the Law Society and Mr Jeyaretnam. It has been implemented. But the comments on the convictions are not binding on the Government.

The Minister repeats that they were comments. But could he be certain that they were merely comments and not the findings?

They had no jurisdiction to decide those questions. This is very clear from the Attorney-General's advice.

Does the Minister then agree that if Mr Jeyaretnam had been able to appeal to the Privy Council for his convictions, the Privy Council would have set aside all the other convictions?

The question is out of order. It is a question requiring an answer to a hypothetical proposition. It will not be allowed. Do you have any more questions, Dr Lee?

If I might add one more, Sir. Does the Minister agree that in spite of all that he has said, since the Privy Council had already set aside certain parts of the convictions which the local Singapore courts did not agree with, and the Government did not agree with, nevertheless, is it not the proper thing, a decent thing to put right the injustice caused to Mr Jeyaretnam by the law, not allowing him to appeal, and to give him a free pardon?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the question of giving him a pardon does not arise. This is a matter for Cabinet to decide. I have transmitted the Attorney-General's advice to my colleagues in the Cabinet. But Cabinet has not decided, for the reason that Mr Jeyaretnam has not petitioned for a pardon. And until and unless he does so, there is nothing for the Government to decide.

In spite of his explanation, does he not agree that the Prime Minister should carry out promises made under solemn conditions.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would only implore the Member to read again, very carefully, what was it that the Prime Minister said in the Committee of Privileges. The Prime Minister always chooses his words very carefully.

asked the Prime Minister whether there was any compelling reason to dissolve the last Parliament and hold elections for a new Parliament on the 3 September 1988 if it was the intention that this Parliament should not assemble until some four months have elapsed after its election.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Parliament was dissolved on 17th August 1988 because I had decided to hold the General Elections on 3rd September 1988. How soon after that Parliament would meet had nothing to do with the date for the elections. The Constitution requires the new Parliament to meet no later than six months after the last sitting of the previous session. I therefore decided that Parliament should convene in January, after the Chamber was renovated.

When was the decision to enlarge the seating of the House made? Before or after the elections?

The decision was made after the General Elections.

If that was the case, Sir, was the decision taken to prevent Francis T. Seow from taking his seat in Parliament, in the hope that he would be disqualified following his convictions?

Mr Speaker, Sir, no. I was aware that Mr Francis Seow had been charged in court with several counts of income tax fraud and evasion and that his case would be heard in December. Indeed, if the Member will recall, the matter of his possible conviction and disqualification was openly discussed in the last General Elections. In view of the gravity of the charges, if he was convicted, he was likely to be disqualified from being a Member of Parliament. I saw no reason, no reason at all, to bring forward the opening of Parliament just to allow Mr Francis Seow to be sworn in as an MP before the court had determined his guilt.

Was the decision to dissolve Parliament on 17th August and to hold fresh elections immediately taken after it was known early in August that the Privy Council would hear the appeal of Mr Jeyaretnam in October?

Mr Speaker, Sir, from Mr Seow we have now gone on to Mr Jeyaretnam. I decided on the date of 3rd September without knowing when the Privy Council would hear Mr Jeyaretnam's case. It was totally irrelevant to me.

Were the celebrations held during the National Day month to take advantage of the many treats that would be provided out of public funds during the month?

Mr Speaker, Sir, when I had to decide when to hold the General Elections, I considered many factors. And, of course, I considered factors which were favourable to the party. I think there is no sin in that, whether it is during National Day celebration month or whatever month. If the factors are favourable, we will call a General Election. So I decided that 3rd September was a good time to have the General Elections, and I was proven right.

Were treats like Swing Singapore on two occasions and treats in the community centres not part of what he has been saying?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member is digressing. I have given him a clear answer as to the reason for the date for the General Elections, and the relevance of his second part of the question to the first part. He is now going from Swing Singapore into Sing Singapore. Again, I repeat, the decision to hold the General Elections will be made on facts, and judgment on when will be a favourable date. It has nothing to do with Swing Singapore. Swing Singapore was organized before we decided to call the General Elections.

Were those conditions for the PAP connected with Swing Singapore and other treats?

Dr Lee, I think that question has been answered. Do you have any other supplementary questions?

No.

asked the Minister for Labour (a) if he will give the number of work permit holders as at the latest convenient date; and (b) what are his Ministry's plans to meet the labour shortage in some employment sectors.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there are over 150,000 work permit holders in Singapore today. The latest indicators show that there is some easing of the labour market. The number of job vacancies declined in the third quarter of 1988. Employment growth was less rapid in November last year. Some production workers were retrenched recently and released to the labour market. Over the next few months, there will be new entrants to the labour force from our schools and vocational institutions. Employers should therefore find it easier to recruit the workers that they need. As a small nation we are faced with various resource constraints as we strive to upgrade our economy and create better paid jobs for Singaporeans. Our labour supply is an important constraint. The local workforce is growing at about 1 to 2% per annum. With yearly productivity growth of 3 to 4%, our sustainable long-term growth rate is 4 to 6% per annum. If we try to grow faster than that we are bound to encounter labour and other constraints. Beyond this sustainable growth rate of 4 to 6%, each 1% additional growth requires an additional 12,000 workers. Thus, if we try to push the growth rate up from 6% to 10% per annum, we will need to import an additional 50,000 foreign workers each year or 250,000 in five years, and this is on top of the more than 150,000 who are already here. The situation will be clearly untenable, with enormous social and economic costs. Instead, we must upgrade our economy and make better use of our population. The Government will continue to allow a carefully regulated inflow of foreign workers to loosen our labour market and to act as an economic buffer. However, the whole economy must accept the limits of our indigenous labour force, plus a contingent, not an army, of work permit holders as buffer. It is not possible to let all employers get as many workers as they wish without serious social implications. Instead, they must increase productivity through automation, better work methods and restructuring. They should also employ more older Singaporeans and housewives. A liberal inflow of foreign workers will depress wages, attract labour-intensive, low value-added industries and raise demand for unskilled workers even further. We must therefore maintain a careful balance between higher economic growth and increasing reliance on foreign workers.

asked the Minister for Labour (a) if he will give his assessment of employers' response so far to the extension of retirement age from 55 years to 60 years old; and (b) what other steps his Ministry will be taking to encourage more employers to employ workers over 55 years of age.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the response by employers to the call to raise the retirement age from 55 to 60 has been mixed. The Singapore National Employers' Federation is supportive. It has been persuading its members to do so. However, employers in general are concerned about the cost implications of retaining older workers who are on long salary scales. Progress in raising the retirement age has therefore been slow initially. However, there seems to be a better response by employers in recent months. Various hotels, banks and insurance companies have raised their retirement age through negotiations over collective agreements. During the six months from July to December last year, 76 or 35% of the 217 collective agreements registered with the Industrial Arbitration Court extended the retirement age beyond 55. Of these 76 collective agreements, 49 set the new retirement age at 60 years whilst 27 specified retirement ages of 56 to 58. Although progress is being made, some sectors are still lagging behind. This is particularly so among companies in the non-unionized sector. My Ministry will continue to monitor the progress and assist in the negotiations, if necessary. We would prefer to leave it to the employers and unions to come to their own agreement on setting the new retirement age at 60. However, if the target is not achieved by negotiations within the next three years, the Government may have to resort to legislation. I would therefore like to urge employers who have yet to raise retirement age to work out appropriate arrangements with unions without delay. Employers in the non-unionized sector should also work out their own arrangements to raise the retirement age to 60.

Sir, will the Minister confirm that the age limit of 55 years has been removed from Government and statutory board tenders? I understand that some of the tenders given out by statutory boards and Government departments specify that the workers must not be above 55 years old. Is this correct?

Sir, I am not aware of such tenders.

Sir, in view of the increasing number of retirees, does the Ministry have plans to establish special services to assist retirees?

Mr Speaker, Sir, that is not the responsibility of my Ministry. Perhaps the Member should direct the question at the Ministry of Community Development.

asked the Minister for Community Development (a) whether there will be adequate child care centres in the near future to cater to the needs of working mothers affected by the recent increase in foreign maids levy; and (b) what are his Ministry's plans to encourage the establishment of more child care centres.

Mr Speaker, Sir, my Ministry has been stepping up its child care programme since 1984. At the end of FY 84, there were 61 child care centres providing 3,841 places. Over the period FY 85 to FY 87, the number of centres and places more than doubled to 127 and 7,887 places respectively. In FY 88 up to now, a total of 46 more child care centres were set up. Another six child care centres are likely to be operational within the next two months. In FY 88, therefore, there will be an increase of 52 child care centres and 2,534 places over the period of FY 87. This is more than double the number of centres that my Ministry had previously targetted for development annually, ie, 15-20 centres a year. Sir, it is not possible to determine exactly the extent of the increased demand for child care places resulting from the recent increase in the foreign maids levy. However, my Ministry is taking action to encourage the development of even more child care centres and other child care facilities. My Ministry is working with the Ministry of National Development to develop a scheme to enable private ntrepreneurs to use HDB premises for the development of child care centres. Currently, the development of child care centres in HDB estates is only by voluntary organizations. If more centres are to be built within HDB estates, private operators will have to be attracted to set up centres there. Training for child care centre personnel has also been stepped up. Besides increasing the intake for child care courses conducted by the Institute of Education, the Ministry has also accredited two other organizations as training agencies. The two organizations are the NTUC and the Kinderland Learning Centre. Since 1985, more than 800 persons have received training at the Basic and Intermediate levels in child care. Currently, another 400 are undergoing training at the various levels and another 300 will be trained before the end of the year. We are also encouraging private entrepreneurs and voluntary organizations to provide family day care services to meet the needs of parents who prefer such services so as to make family day care more widely available to parents. While we do all we can to increase the number of child care places, the setting up of a large number of child care centres cannot take place overnight. Several factors dictate the pace of increase of child care centres. Firstly, there is a temporary problem of time lag between the movement of people into a new town and the opening of a child care centre. I know many MPs have brought up this problem to me regarding the lack of child care places in HDB new towns. This temporary problem has arisen because child care operators are reluctant to open new centres until residents have moved in and there is an indication of demand. Secondly, a more serious problem is the shortage of manpower. Many advertisements for child care personnel have gone unanswered because our young girls are not attracted to work in child care centres. Competition is keen for girls with GCE 'O' level qualifications. The answer may have to lie in more attractive salaries and better schemes of service. My Ministry will discuss with child care operators about how to make this scheme of service more attractive.

Sir, will the Minister discuss with the Minister for Labour and together try to persuade the Minister for Finance to release the revenue collected from the foreign maids levy and target it specifically for building more child care centres and the training of child care staff? Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Sir, presently, there are adequate subsidies and adequate capital grants for private operators and even the NTUC, the PA and other operators who want to build child care centres. I believe the current level of subsidies is adequate.

Sir, will the Minister also try to convince the Minister for Labour to allow foreign maids to be used for the setting up of child care centres, as a temporary measure, so that the programme will not be hindered because of the shortage of manpower?

Sir, I think this question should really be directed at the Minister for Labour. I think we must be careful about introducing foreign maids into child care centres. We want our children to grow up as Singaporeans, identified with Singaporean values and things that we would like to do best and we want to propagate and to inculcate these in our children. I do not think that it is appropriate to have foreign maids running our child care centres.

Sir, will the Ministry of Community Development legislate workplace child care centres?

Sir, I heard the Member the other day when she recommended that the Government should force employers through legislation to operate child care centres in their workplaces. I think this idea, while laudable, is not entirely practicable. I have been on the other side before working in an organization and I know the difficulties of setting up child care centres. Just to take an example. Supposing an employer has 1,000 female workers and, say, only 50% or even 30% of them need such facilities for their children, which means that the employer would have to provide something like 500 places or 300 places for the children of these employees. Where would the employer find the resources and the expertise to operate such child care centres? Moreover, I do not think it is the right thing to legislate on this matter. We should leave it to the free play of market forces to determine where child care centres should appropriately be sited. From experience, we know that mothers do not like to place their children in workplace child care centres. They prefer to have their children in centres which are nearer their homes so that before they go to work, they can drop the children in the child care centre and when they come back they can pick up the children, rather than to bring the children on the bus or other means of public transport to the workplace and deposit the children there. Right now, there are 15 employer-operated child care centres and I think the enrolment rate is just about 75-80%.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister stated that it is undesirable to employ foreigners to run child care centres because they affect the values of our children. Is it not also true that by having foreign maids in our homes that they too directly impact upon the values of our children?

That could be true also, Mr Speaker, Sir, except that in the home environment, the employer, who is the parent of the child, will have a more direct influence on the child. Therefore, there is direct supervision between the employer and the foreign maid to ensure that such foreign values do not get transmitted to the child. And if there is, immediate corrective action can be taken. That is a very different situation from that of foreign maids working in child care centres.

Is the Minister aware that many parents leave the house before the children are up and come back after the children have gone to bed? And therefore the maid is dominant in terms of influencing values of the children.

Sir, I am a parent too and therefore I am aware that sometimes when I go to work my children may still be sleeping. While that may be the case, it is really up to the parents themselves to make sure that the foreign maids do not dominate the household. As far as I know, children know who to look up to. They do not look up to the foreign maids for guidance. They look up to the parents for guidance.

Has the Minister made a survey to find out how many of our children already have Filipino accents?

Sir, it is not my job to find out how many of them have Filipino accents.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Tampines GRC has raised a very important point. In fact, I am not satisfied with the Minister's answer. I think he should look into ---

Dr Tan, can you ask your question?

I am sorry, Sir. Will the Minister look into the request made by the Member for Tampines GRC and not just brush it aside and say that the present subsidies are adequate?

Sir, all questions raised in this House are always considered. And even if I give an answer, I keep thinking about whether the right answer has been given. So be assured that when Members raise a question and when they receive an answer from me and even when I consider that adequate, it still occupies my mind. And at the right time and if it is necessary, we will consider all the suggestions that they put up.

Sir, would the Minister agree that, especially in the instance of staffing of child care centres, mature women might actually have an advantage over the young ladies that he claims to have been seeking and not finding? Would he not agree that this would be a good outlet, one of the few available to mature women seeking jobs after they have laid off work to look after their own families?

Sir, the Member may have got the impression that we are only looking for young girls in my answer. In the advertisement or in the recruitment of staff, I do not think it is stated clearly that only young girls are preferred. Anyone who is interested in working at a child care centre will be considered.

Sir, in spite of the increase in the number of child care places in recent years, is the Minister aware that very few child care centres are taking in children below 2 years old? And what is the Ministry going to do about that?

Sir, we know that there are not many child care centres taking children under 2 years old. This is because of the higher cost of operation. I know for a fact that the NTUC has operated a number of these centres and they have decided to slowly wind down some of them because of the high cost. As to what we can do about that, we again have to leave it to the free enterprise. We have to leave it to the individual parent to decide whether to place the child there. As far as the Government is concerned, there is no discrimination in regard to whether a child is above 2 or below 2 years old. The subsidy is still $100.

Sir, now that the Minister recognizes the fact that infant care is more costly, would it not be good logic to increase the subsidy for infant care?

I do not think so, Sir.

Sir, the Minister said that consideration for the setting up of child care centres is for the newer estates. What about old constituen- cies like Kampong Glam where we wish to encourage the grandchildren to be looked after by the grandparents in such places? And because of the centrality of the constituency, should not equal consideration be given to established estates for child care centres?

Sir, child care centres are established where there is a demand and we do not discriminate between old and new estates. If the Member feels that there is a need for a child care centre in Kampong Glam, please by all means set it up.

May I ask the Minister for his reasons?

I do not agree with his logic.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not happy with the Minister's reply to the Member for Fengshan. On the one hand he says that the subsidies are sufficient for running child care centres ---

Mr Chng, can you ask your question.

--- and immediately after that he talks about the high cost of infant care. This implies that the subsidy is not sufficient. So how can that be the case?

Sir, the Government has decided to give a subsidy of $100 for each child. That is the level of subsidy that we think we should give to the child. Child care centres may run a higher cost in providing places for children who are under two years old. Parents may have many alternatives of putting a child in a child care centre. They can leave the child at home to be looked after by a maid, or get a parent or other relatives to look after the child. And there are other forms of care arrangement. The options are there for the parents. If they decide to put the child in a child care centre and if the cost is $350, the parents will have to decide whether this is a viable option.

I would like to ask the Minister whether his Ministry makes a regular check on all child care centres to ensure there is a high standard of hygiene because I understand that the infection rate of children going to child care centres is higher than children staying at home.

Sir, we do make regular checks but I am not aware that the infection rate of children in child care centre is higher. But sometimes it may be possible that because children get together in groups and when one child gets infected it is easy to transmit their infection or whatever problems they have to the other children. But we pay very close attention to such problems. If we know that such a problem exists, immediate action will be taken to isolate the child or bring the child home.

Is the Minister aware that the incentives given to start up child care centre is meagre and would he propose a more attractive package to enable others to initiate the services?

Sir, many centres have been set up over the last four years. If it is meagre, as he has mentioned, then there will not be that number of child care centres being set up.

asked the Prime Minister whether there is any reason why the office of the Chief Justice has been left vacant after the last Chief Justice reached his retirement age on the 28 September 1982.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member's question is misconceived. He has assumed that the office of the Chief Justice has been left vacant since 28th September 1982. This is wrong. Chief Justice Mr Wee Chong Jin has served continuously as Chief Justice since 5th January 1963. Article 94(3) of the Constitution enables Judges of the Supreme Court to continue in office after reaching the retirement age of 65. Several Judges have done so; and the Chief Justice is one of them. The President re-appointed him Chief Justice on 28th September 1982 when he reached the age of 65. Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam, in his appeal to the Privy Council on the question of his disbarment, questioned the validity of this re-appointment. However, Sir, this point was never pursued in argument before the Privy Council, nor did the Privy Council address it in its judgment. The Attorney-General has advised the Cabinet that it has no merit whatsoever. Nevertheless, Sir, since the matter was raised but not ruled upon by the Privy Council, the Government is amending Article 94 of the Constitution to put the matter beyond any doubt. This is one of the purposes of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Bill, which received its First Reading on Monday, 16th January.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Prime Minister again is not here to answer this question.

Could you ask your question, Dr Lee?

But since the Minister says there is an element of doubt in the Constitution, would he agree that Article 94(3) does not say that he could have appointed a Judge as the Chief Justice. It only says "to sit as a Judge". That does not mean that he is the Judge or the Chief Justice.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we can of course go into a lengthy argument. And it is precisely what it is, a legal argument. We have no doubts but Mr Jeyaretnam raised it in his appeal to the Privy Council. The fact that it was not pursued in argument in the Privy Council and the fact that the Privy Council did not deal with it in its Judgment reflects, in my view, that the Privy Council did not consider there was any merit in his argument. The Queen's Counsel who represented the Law Society subsequently informed the Solicitor-General that in his view had it been heard in an argument in the Privy Council he was very confident that he would have been able to persuade the Privy Council that this argument is irrational. I have already informed the House that the Attorney-General has also advised that there is no merit in this argument. I have studied and taught Constitutional Law, and the Member can take it from me that there is no merit whatsoever in the argument.

Sir, is there any reason why anybody should take his word for everything?

Sir, there is no reason. But my advice to him, without any disrespect that he is not a lawyer, and to avoid having a legal argument with a non-lawyer, I think it is best that I refer to him the various learned opinions of others.

By virtue of the proposed amendment to the Constitution that is now before the House, does he not admit that in fact Mr Wee Chong Jin has been functioning only as the Chief Justice contrary to the Constitution and therefore illegally?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the amendment is for the reason that I have stated - that it is for the avoidance of any doubts. A doubt was raised. It was not ruled upon. We think that the amendment really is not necessary but to put the matter beyond any question, we are tabling the amendment. We have no doubts in our mind whatsoever that the Chief Justice's appointment since September 1982 is perfectly lawful and perfectly in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.

I do not wish to argue with him on points of law. But does it not appear that the Government in making the amendment that it has really admitted that he has made a mistake.

That question has been answered.

It has not really been answered.

It has been. Any more questions?

Yes. Since there is a possibility that there were mistakes made, although he denies it, can he say that there were times when there were improper use of powers of the Chief Justice?

Dr Lee, there is a Bill before the House. I suggest you save your comments for the Second Reading. Do you have any other supplementary questions not related to the Bill?

In which case, Sir, I will wait until the Bill is to be debated.

Very good. 1.25 pm

"to amend the Urban Redevelopment Authority Act (Chapter 340 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.

"to amend the Planning Act (Chapter 232 of the 1985 Revised Edition)" presented by Mr Dhanabalan; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act (Chapter 60 of the 1985 Revised Edition)" presented by Mr Dhanabalan; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Minor Offences Act (Chapter 184 of the 1985 Revised Edition)" presented by the Minister for Home Affairs (Prof. S. Jayakumar); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [16th January, 1989], 'That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to:- "We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.".' - (Mr Abdullah Tarmugi) Question again proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Siglap. Yesterday, just before Parliament adjourned, I was talking about consultation and pointed out that consultation is not a one-time affair. In the course of my speech, I asked Members, especially the new Backbencher colleagues, to speak their minds and not to be intimidated by Ministers. However, let me also remind them that if they go around throwing brickbats at Ministers they can also get hurt. I remember when I first entered this House and I took on the First Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Goh Keng Swee, he gave me a good walloping. I think he gave me some ulcers too. He really cut me to pieces. Mr Speaker, Sir, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose an argument. But if you are wounded, do not worry. Take a few antacids to heal your ulcers. But do not run. Do not hide. Lick your parliamentary wounds and come back the next round. Mr Speaker, Sir, there is one phrase that is repeatedly used and I propose we drop it. This phrase "little or no margin for error" means exactly what it meant. You just cannot fail. It would do us no good in trying to encourage people to get involved because of this fear of failure. Success and failure are part of life. We are human beings. We do make mistakes. The Government is also not perfect. We have also made mistakes. Who wants to risk his neck if he knows his head will be on the chopping block if he fails? The result is that people will be less willing to take risks and we will be a nation of no risk-takers and this will also encourage over-dependence on others for support. It is no wonder that people always look to the Government for solutions each time they are in trouble. Mr Speaker, Sir, the next five years is important. We must continue to show by examples and by deeds of our intention to want our people to participate. By then I hope Singaporeans will come out of their no-risk shell.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am pleased to join in expressing our thanks to the President for his Address to this House. Sir, it strikes me that the key point in the President's Address and the very basis of the Government's plans for the next few years lies in the first sentence of the Address which says, "The Government's goal is to create a better life for all Singaporeans." This simple sentence states the mission and the raison d'etre of the Government. This is the primary duty of any Government to improve the well-being of the people. The Government is being elected and judged by the people on how much it has improved their lives. I was very surprised yesterday when the Non-Constituency Member, Dr Lee Siew-Choh, in his speech lamented that the PAP Government has not done much for the people. Sir, the fundamental desire of the people is very simple. It is well expressed in a popular Chinese saying An ju le ye, jiu shi an ding de sheng huo, yi kuai de lao dong " " which means in English that the common people's basic desire is to have stable living conditions so that they and their future generations can continue to work and live peacefully. It is therefore indisputable that the present Government has done an excellent job in improving the lives of our people over the last three decades. Otherwise it would not have been possible for our people to elect this Government back into office for seven consecutive terms. Sir, I would like to focus my speech on two main subjects - first, National Ideology and then Education. On the National Ideology, to further ensure stability and set the correct directions for our nation, the Government has proposed that we develop a National Ideology. Many Members in this House and individuals and groups outside this House have suggested several good ideas for the National Ideology. I feel that the National Ideology should embody certain key principles for different levels of our life. For example, at the individual level, we can adopt the principle which is to strive for excellence by all. At the family level, a key concept would be, I am sure, filial piety. At the Government level, we can adopt good and non-corrupt administration as a principle. At the society level, an important principle will be social tolerance. At the national level, I would take observance and protection of the laws of the land. Sir, the above principles are just some suggestions. The Committee on National Ideology headed by the Minister for Trade and Industry will have to carefully select and present the chosen principles. These ideals once chosen cannot be easily changed. We cannot say that after a few years, a few of the principles did not work out quite well and we have to do a complete about-turn. The people will be confused. Here I would like to say that as against the view of the Member for Ayer Rajah, there is very little room for error. It is possible for us to tell our people that, first, you stop at two children; and later on, to tell them to stop at three or more if you can afford it. But it is difficult for us to tell our people to first adopt certain principles and later on say, "No, please erase your mind from all those concepts. Come again, let us try all over again with some new concepts." Therefore, it is important that the right principles are selected for the National Ideology. The National Ideology is important as it will guide us in our conduct of personal, family, business and international relations. To be effective, the Government should gather the views from all segments of the people and distill all the ideas collected into a few key, simple and straightforward principles so that everyone can relate to and accept. Widespread explanation and acceptance is critical. Otherwise there may be a small group who though they may agree to the general need for a National Ideology, may not necessarily agree to one or two specific principles in the National Ideology. They will feel segregated and alienated. If not carefully handled, this whole programme of the National Ideology can become a very divisive instrument instead of being a bond of our diverse cultures and people. After we have decided on the National Ideology, there is a need to disseminate the concepts. Here the Government must take a leading role to inspire the widespread adoption of these ideas, through Ministerial speeches, promotional campaigns, and mass media dissemina- tion. In my view, an effective manner to enable the principles of the National Ideology to be instilled is through education. School textbooks and reading materials should be selected or written which serve to communicate the core values embodied in the National Ideology. If education should be the means to teach core values, then I feel there is a pool of people on whom we should pay special attention. These are the principals and teachers. Better recognition of their status in society should be made. They should be given proper training and exposure on the significance of the National Ideology. With better understanding, our teachers will then be able to communicate the National Ideology to the students. Now I would like to turn to education. The Chairman of the GPC for Education, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, yesterday has given his views on various educational issues relating to primary, secondary and pre-university education. As a member of the GPC for Education, I would like to touch on one other aspect of education, and that is, tertiary level education. I am pleased to read in the President's Address: 'More students are now doing well in schools and qualifying for university. The Government shall expand university intakes, upgrade NTI into a full university, and study the feasibility of building a new tertiary institution to complement NUS and NTI.' Sir, these statements made by the Government are very encouraging indeed. The decision to provide more university places is correct. At present, there is a big demand for students to enter the universities. I have attempted to gather some comparative statistics on student population at the tertiary level in various countries. Sir, with your permission, may I ask the Clerk to circulate a table for the Members' attention. [Copies of table circulated to Members]. This table that I am circulating shows some statistical collection done by UNESCO on the number of students at the tertiary level (they call it "the third level") per 100,000 inhabitants in a few countries in North America, Europe and Asia. For Singapore, the number is about 1,600 students per 100,000 inhabitants. If you compare that number with some other countries, we are way below North America, like USA and Canada which have over 5,000 students per 100,000 inhabitants. We are also behind some countries like UK and Switzerland and also far behind other Western countries like West Germany and France which have about 2,600 students at the third level education. We are also behind Japan, South Korea and Taiwan although we are a little ahead of Hong Kong and of course much ahead of Malaysia and Indonesia. The figures are given in the table that has been circulated. It is granted that there may be difficulty in making cross-country comparison because of differences in the definition of tertiary education in the various countries. The above statistics are nevertheless interesting. It shows that for Singapore, while we are catching up with countries like Japan, UK and Switzerland, we are still behind in the provision of tertiary level student places compared to the North American countries, USA and Canada, to European countries like West Germany and France, and even some Asian countries like South Korea and Taiwan. The above data show that we can do more to provide tertiary level training for Singaporeans. I would like to urge the Government therefore to set up the proposed new third university urgently. There is the often-repeated phrase - the provision of more tertiary places means that more Singaporeans can be developed to their fullest potential. There is another means whereby we can expand the tertiary level training opportunities for our adult population. This is the creation of an open university. Our present educational system caters mainly for straightforward entry into the university through pre-university 'A' level qualifications. For the people who have failed to qualify, given the stringent entry requirements or for those who have for a variety of reasons, personal or family, missed the chance to enter the university, the present system is quite rigid. It is very difficult for these adult Singaporeans to get a formal tertiary education once they missed the chance. There are many examples of institutions in developed countries which provide university-level education for mature adults. Notable examples are the Open University of UK and the Everyman's University of Israel. The Open University of UK has a current enrolment of 50,000 students. The experience of this University is interesting. It shows that many do not enrol for a full degree courses but are only interested in acquiring knowledge in specific subjects. There are several Singaporeans who are keen in getting higher education but are unable to enter the local university. Several have gone overseas to study. Many others, after working for a few years, enrol themselves with correspondence schools or evening classes which prepare themselves for degree courses in foreign institutes. The Member for Ayer Rajah has yesterday circulated a table showing that there are over 10,000 Singaporeans studying abroad. This obviously is an indication that there is a huge demand for higher education by our local Singaporeans which cannot be met by the local tertiary institutions. Many Singaporeans have also obtained external degrees in languages, economics and arts through the very popular external degree programme of the London University. For the population base that we have in Singapore there may not be a sufficient demand for us to establish an independent open university. Hence, I would like to propose that the Government consider creating some avenues or channels whereby Singaporean adults who are keen can obtain external degrees through self-study or part-time courses with local institutions, such as the NUS or NTI or the new university to be proposed. This arrangement can be very cost-effective because it means that the existing facilities and teaching staff need only be expanded very slightly to cater for the enlarged external degree programme. Moreover, the university's physical facilities, the equipment can also be better utilized because during the vacation period the external students can come in to use those facilities. Having such a scheme in Singapore will alleviate the demand for university places by ambitious young people, who desire to go for higher education but cannot get to enter our local universities, and may have to go to foreign institutions. The Government has expounded on a vision for Singapore that we shall become an economically progressive and culturally developed nation. The importance of education in the overall context of national development and instilling the core values of the National Ideology is well recognized. As the people progress, demand for higher education increases. There is a general desire for improvement of skills and knowledge. Therefore, our educational system should not be too rigid. There must be some allowance for flexibility and free play. While we do not want to create a nation of bookish paper-chasers, ways must be found to enlarge the opportunities for Singaporeans to improve themselves. I believe that the provision of more tertiary education places and the establishment of a new university as soon as possible are important. Just like the concept of the independent schools, we should also allow for perhaps some privately-run colleges or university provided these are of course well run and have the required level of educational standards. In addition, the Ministry should seriously consider the setting up of an open university or an external degree programme under the NUS or the NTI. These facilities will promote the ideal that our Singapore people can become more knowledgeable, and there shall be more free flow of ideas. As it is said, the neglect of education will be the ruin of a nation. Conversely, a sound education will be the bastion of a society. Sir, I support the motion proposed by the Member for Siglap.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Siglap. Sir, as a member of the GPC on Education, may I first state that I concur with most of the suggestions brought up by the GPC Chairman yesterday concerning the learning and teaching of the mother tongue. Today, I would like to focus myself also on the bilingual policy. Sir, in his Address the President raised a number of pertinent questions. (1) What sort of society will we become in another generation? (2) What sort of people do we want our children to become? And (3) Do we want to abandon our own culture and national identity? I think the key to these questions is education. And these questions concern education. How we educate our children both at home and in school; how we nurture a new generation of Singaporeans will determine the kind of citizens we will have in future. Education, as the Member for Cairnhill pointed out the other day, is Bai nian shu ren ( ). Shu ren in the broader sense of the term is education. It is not an easy task, but it is an important task. I believe most Singaporeans want our children to have the best of East and West. We want to modernize as well as to preserve our own cultural heritage. Very few would think that wholesale westernization is the right path for us to take. And I think this is where bilingualism comes in. Those who advocate total or complete westernization may think that bilingualism imposes an unnecessary burden on their children and that mother tongue is unnecessary and useless. But I think most Singaporeans are aware of the dangers of Handan xue bu ( ) which means, in attempting to walk like a swan, the crow loses its own gait. The importance of bilingualism, therefore, cannot be over-emphasized, now that we have integrated all language streams into one national stream with English as the so-called first language and mother tongue the second language. Because of this I think, Sir, we have to watch for two potential dangers. (1) Our children will be more directly exposed to outside influences and fads and may succumb to undesirable influences more easily. (2) The wrong impression which some have, that mother tongue is not important or useless, may become more widespread. So what should we do? I think the most important thing is to uphold the bilingual policy and to reinforce it, not to weaken it. In this respect, I am happy to note that the Government has decided to strengthen the teaching of our core values in schools and also to promote the use of the mother tongue. I believe that the bilingual policy needs to be reinforced and not weakened because I think it is instrumental in providing our children with the necessary cultural ballast. To do so, I would like to urge the Government to do the following. Firstly, to do away with this labelling of first and second language because second language may give the wrong impression that it is not important or of secondary importance. So give them back their proper names, either English and mother tongue, or simply English language, Malay language, Tamil language or Chinese language. Some may say, what's in a name? I am under no illusion also that just by doing that we can achieve wonders. But as the old master, Confucius, said, Ming bu zheng, ze yan bu shun; Yan bu shun, ze shi bu cheng ( ) which means, when the names are not correct, what is said does not sound reasonable, and when what is said does not sound reasonable, affairs will not culminate in success. Secondly, I would urge the Government to resist any pressure from any quarter to lower the standard of mother tongue further or to do away with this entrance requirement to our universities. To do so would be like Xue zhu shi lu", ( ), which is to whittle down the feet to fit the shoes, or Wan rao bu chuang ( ) which means, to cut off a piece of flesh from the body just to mend a sore. Sir, a minimum standard of mother tongue should be ensured; otherwise it would defeat the whole purpose of the bilingual policy. But I agree that for the average students we have to set realistic standards, both for English and for the mother tongue. Sir, I am aware that some of those who migrate or go for overseas studies cited inability to cope with the requirement of mother tongue as one of their reasons. But let us look at the figures. I have requested the Clerk to circulate, with your permission, Sir, two tables. [Copies of tables circulated to hon. Members.] These tables show the examination results of mother tongue at '0' and 'A' levels from 1985 to 1987. Examination results may not reflect actual standard. But the tables clearly show that the passing rates for all mother tongue, both at '0' and 'A' levels, were consistently over 90%. And the minimum requirement for entry into the NUS is a mere grade 7. Even those who fail to meet this minimum requirement but have good results in other subjects are admitted first and given time and assistance to make up for it later. So, Shi shi sheng yu xiong bian ( ), that is, facts speak most eloquently. Thirdly, I think, Sir, we should, as the President said, promote the use of mother tongue. Indeed, mother tongue should not be taught as a dead language like Latin. Therefore, I sincerely hope that the Government can come up with specific programmes to further this aim of promoting the use of mother tongue. The suggestion to have an annual Language and Cultural Month for each community would not be out of place. The Malay community with the blessing of 1DPM already started one last year. The Chinese and Indian communities should be encouraged to do likewise. Finally, Sir, on our part, as parents, I think we must ourselves adopt a positive attitude towards the teaching and learning of mother tongue. We owe it to our children to encourage, motivate and assist them to learn and to appreciate the importance of mother tongue, the beauty of the language and to be bilingual.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to join in this debate to thank the President for his speech. Sir, I was in the last term of Parliament in the GPC for Community Developlment. While I was there I came to know a little bit more about the art scene in Singapore. Now that I am in the GPC for Education, there is much which can be done in the area of education for the arts. Let me explain. In recent years it has actually been encouraging to see the great increase in performances of visual arts and the great increase and interest in exhibitions of performing arts too. What I mean are subjects like music and dance, art and sculpture. But what we are seeing at that end which has been very well promoted, in particular by the Cultural Affairs Division of the Ministry of Community Development, and also many, many enthusiastic groups of volunteers and not least, donors and audiences. It is good, it is encouraging. But this is the top end, it is the performance end. What I wish to talk about is the base of all this support and the base starts from early childhood. I shall come to that a little bit later on. But why do we want to do this? I shall try and explain that. It is recognized that the arts gives breadth and richness of life, improving its quality. This ties in with our wanting to give our people a better life. What is better life? Better life is not merely more money to spend, more able to buy a bigger car or a bigger house. I think quality of life is something that we need to consider at this stage of our development. In the earlier years of our nationhood we were struggling just to live; we were struggling just to pay for a decent place to live, but without aspiring to a better life. From this point onwards, we must be talking in terms of better quality of life rather than just quantity of things. I think quality of life is promoted by the arts and probably I will not spend any more time on that. There is no argument about it. But for those of a more pragmatic mind, maybe those who control purse strings, I would like to point out there are other potential advantages. When children participate in arts and all these things like music, dance, doing things with their hands, drawing and so on, they improve their physical coordination. When they are exposed to rhythm, they learn to move, they learn body perceptions. When they do things with their hands, whether it be sand play, water play, modelling, they are appreciating shapes and design. And perception of design can translate into better sales. How? By better design of our products, by better design of our packaging. We have indeed found this to be lacking, and this is where we have lacked a cutting edge in selling the products that we make. I think it is not so easy. You cannot simply take people and say, "OK, we give you a 3-month course in design. Therefore, you can design." It does not work like that. It needs to be learnt from an early age, to be sort of absorbed in. When we learn to dance and move at an early age, it inculcates the love of movement and physical usage of the body, as it were, leading to a better level of physical fitness which is so important, especially when we are thinking of the greying of Singapore. The single most important factor in keeping our older people at work and keeping them healthy is for them to be physically active. Of course, they should also avoid bad life habits. But it is a well-known fact that people who actively take part in physical activities, be it running, dancing, swimming or what have you, are the same people who avoid harmful lifestyles. Therefore, if we want to avoid harmful lifestyles and preserve our people in good health, to be able to work better, longer, we must start them young and inculcate in them the good things which will, as they grow up, displace the bad influences in their lives. Therefore, although you cannot say that 2 plus 2 equals 4 in this kind of argument, it is very clear that the arts do play a large part in the development of one's personality. We know the value of languages. We know the value of mathematics in school. But the value of the arts is not so easy to evaluate. You cannot give a lot of marks to indicate 90-100 equals so many per cent and so on. But it helps the brain, a brain that is fit because the body is fit. A brain that is exposed to influences other than just book learning is also a brain which will be more innovative and imaginative. What I am trying to say is that if we want excellence and if we want quality of life, we owe our children the kind of education which will develop every child to the maximum of his or her potential in the maximum number of directions. But, Sir, when I look around I do not see the means of doing this. We need to do this from an early age; in fact, from pre-school through primary and secondary schools. In fact, it should be part and parcel of the general education curriculum. To do this, we need specialist teachers to be able to teach these subjects as specialist subjects and this is quite lacking in Singapore. In the Institute of Education, there are teachers who are trained to teach Arts but not as a specialist subject for primary schools. In the secondary schools, I am aware that there are a number of schools that run Art and Music elective programmes. And perhaps one JC runs a dance elective programme. But you know these are very very few. It does not touch the vast majority of our students who go to school. And there is no conception that this is part and parcel of education, that this will benefit a person all round in their adult life and that this can translate into useful skills which can earn money. Therefore, I think we would like the Government to look into providing facilities for the training of specialist teachers in the Arts. There are actually colleges that are providing some training at college level. But the number of people that they are able to train is very small. There is the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA), there is the La Salle, and the third one escapes me. I am sorry. The Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts is the oldest. La Salle is very well accredited with international colleges. But, Sir, the number of students that these colleges can take care of is very small. They cannot make an impact on the general education of all our children. Therefore, I think the Institute of Education needs to be given the wherewithal to establish specialist departments in all these subjects in order that they can teach more students to become teachers in primary and secondary schools for these subjects. If we pursue this line, we also need tertiary education in these subjects. Because the people in the tertiary level will be the people who will teach the teachers. You cannot have secondary school teachers without a university department producing people who will teach these teachers. Similarly, I would propose that we should think about having departments in our tertiary institutions at university level for Music, Art, Culture and even Dance. At this time when we are thinking of a third university, I would urge the Minister to really consider it very seriously. However, I would urge him not to consider having these departments all in one university. That is not on. What we need is to have these departments as part of universities that offer a whole range of departments. I think design and engineering are related. Design and architecture are definitely related. No one can become a good architect if they do not have good design. Design and movement are integrated. All these things overlap each with the other. Therefore, Sir, I would propose that we do need three universities. But let us have three well-rounded, balanced, universities. I feel there is no better exposure for students and faculties in, let us say, sciences and humanities than to have within their midst faculty and students from the Arts department. Having said all this, I must put in my pitch for the second language in support of the Chairman of the GPC for Education. Some Members still remember that I made a similar speech in February 1985, for which I was rewarded by a very prolonged and acrimonious response in the Chinese press, to the extent that I had to make my next speech in Mandarin. My thinking is very simple. I feel that we need to open the windows of our minds. What I have said of the Arts actually opens more windows to our minds, and that is all that I am asking for. Languages and Arts are actually quite similar. Arts are actually languages. And if you are talking about a National Ideology where we must respect each other's cultures and religions, where we want to promote our heritages, what better place to promote than using the Arts as a vehicle. The Arts is a place where people can cross cultural, international, barriers. The Arts is a place that borrows quite freely from each other. So even Mr Chiam's idea of a melting pot would be well served with promotion of the Arts at its basic level, from early childhood, not just performances here and there. The way I see language is the same. I feel that all of us are richer for having more than one language. And all of us are richer if we know something of our heritage. Therefore, I am a strong supporter of the second language, in particular one's mother tongue. In my day, our schools were not so obliging as to offer second languages. In my day, my friends and I went to English schools in the morning to learn English and we went to Chinese schools in the afternoon to learn Chinese. It took up a lot of our time. We went to school in the morning. We rushed home and went to school again in the afternoon. But we learnt rather more than just the language. We learnt also Chinese history, Chinese geography and even Chinese style hygiene. There was a subject called Hygiene, and I can recall this teacher who told us very seriously that after dinner we should lie on our right side because the stomach flow the right. I carried this all the way until I went to medical school when I found that whether you lie on your left or right or even if you stood on your head, your stomach would still empty from the left to the right. However, that is besides the point. The point is that we learn a lot about culture and we learn a lot about peoples from learning languages. In my adult life, my husband and I took lessons in Malay. So we are now trilingual. But that does not mean we are very good in two languages. I think for education in languages, we want to promote the mother tongue and we want to promote as many languages for as many people as possible. I think we can even promote a third language. However, Sir, not everyone is proficient at many languages. There are some who are very proficient. And here I would like to support the concept that we need to have people in Singapore who will be very good at languages, who will excel, so that these people can be our future teachers of children, can be our faculty at university level. I think if we are all mediocre, we are going to lose out in people who have excellent standards in languages, particularly our own language. Therefore, I would support the suggestion that we need to promote more languages. We need to encourage more children who have the aptitude to take more than one language at first level, ie, CL1 plus EL1 or ML1 plus EL1 and so forth. I think the availability must be much more scattered. Because it is no point just having a few of our best schools offering this. All the rest of the children out in the new housing estates and so forth will not be able to come in to our few SAP schools and others to take languages at this higher level. And I think this higher level needs also to be promoted at all levels, 'A' level and tertiary level at university. I think our university departments can benefit from being beefed up for Malay studies, Chinese studies and Tamil studies at the least, if not other languages. Therefore, I wish to call on the Government to think of both Arts and Language with this concept, that we need to start the children young. We need to provide these facilities in a broad way. However, let us not be too rigid in the implementation. Let us allow choice, particularly in subjects like Languages and Arts. There is a lot of individual difference in aptitude and ability. I think we want excellence for those who have the aptitude. But for those who have average ability, I think average acquisition is quite adequate. Let me conclude, Sir, by going back to the Arts. I feel strongly that in today's world, we need people who have versatile brains and skills, people with more than one specialty, people who can cooperate with others in different fields. Only in this way can we produce imaginative and high level ideas which can be sold to the rest of the world. This is what excellence is all about. This is what quality of life is all about. Therefore, in conclusion, Sir, may I leave a parting thought, which is that the arts are not only for the artistically gifted, nor are they the prerogative of the rich. Art is for everybody. Sir, I support the Motion.

( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion by the Member for Siglap thanking the President for his Address. In the President's Address he stressed the importance of cultivating value concept to perpetuate the cultural heritages of our various races and to safeguard our common values through the learning of the mother tongue and the teaching of moral education in the schools in case we lose our direction. I feel that it is important to learn one's mother tongue, whatever race one belongs to. In the primary curricula the use of the mother tongue should be strengthened. I also agree to the Minister of Education's addendum which says that the Ministry wants to improve the course structure and teaching materials for the mother tongue without overloading the children or lowering the standards of English, Mathematics and Science. This exactly hits the nail on the head. Before I commence, let me first declare that I am a textbook and educational publisher, but I would like to clarify that the following text is not based on pecuniary interest. Some people think that in order to preserve Chinese cultural heritage and value concept, it is necessary to increase the list of common words to raise the standard of Chinese to achieve our aim. In fact, it is wrong and not necessary. Let me quote some surveys to illustrate this point. According to the Beijing Chinese Language Research Centre, in its 1985 survey of 1,000 most commonly used words which formed 78.57% of their total textbook materials used in the primary and secondary schools, 99% or 990 out of those 1,000 words are found in our present word list for primary schools. I quote this example just to illustrate the point of view that language-wise the list of 1,800 words adopted for our primary schools is sufficient. According to another survey by the Lianhe Zaobao of its list of 1,000 most commonly used words, 92.8% are found in the word list of 1,800 words for our primary schools. The above, therefore, proves that the word list of the Ministry of Education is correct and, simultaneously, that the number of commonly used words in the Chinese Language listed for our students is sufficient. Hence, if we increase the present word list, it would only lead to an additional workload for Chinese students taking English and Chinese as their first and second language respectively, thereby leading to negative results in the long run. Since our word list is sufficient and yet we experience a loss in our core values, then, where does the problem lie? At this juncture, I personally feel that there is a weak link between the course structure for our primary schools and the requirements of our present society which I would like to elaborate. Sir, at present our Chinese textbook for primary schools emphasises the learning of sentence structure and knowledge, neglecting the inculcation of values. The text wording is not written in such a way as to help primary students to read and memorize with ease for being pithy, rhythmic and catchy. Chinese is not like other languages. It is ideographic and has four tones and other characteristics. Some people think that Chinese is more difficult to learn. Therefore, if the text cannot rouse the interest of the students, then it would be very difficult for them to remember what they have learnt. If one cannot learn one's mother tongue with facility, how can you expect him to learn his culture and values? Let us make a comparison of the Chinese textbooks used in the primary school, the present textbook is different from what we had in the past. Today, the first lesson is: "This is a person. This is the head, etc." ( ). Another lesson for the primary one student is about the younger brother playing with a ball, the younger sister drawing the moon, etc. ( ). Almost the whole primary one textbook consists of this kind of text. Let us look at the primary one lessons during my time in 1954. Here we have a lesson clapping one's hands and playing with a ball which not only teaches sentence structure but also inculcate values in the students. The text is like this: ( ). Most of us may have the wrong impression that the word list of yesterday's is more difficult. Allow me, Mr Speaker, Sir, to refer to this chapter ( ) of my generation. It only consists of 11 new words which are also found in our existing word list for Primary 1. However, it comprises invaluable lessons which could be inculcated in our young citizens at this tender age. This lesson teaches ethical values: The younger brother does not compete with the elder brother for the bigger ball and the younger sister does not compete with the two brothers for any ball but clapping her hands smilingly. There is another lesson; the text relates to stars twinkling brightly in the sky and the people on the earth desiring for peace ( ) and so on. The reading is rhythmic and catchy, facili- tating memory. It teaches the children to love peace and live harmoniously together. There are many such rhythmic, recitable and easily memorable lessons which are also educational, such as "Receiving Guests", "Little Lamb" and so on. ( ). These wordings could rhyme and are easy to catch on. Such rhythmic and catchy phrases of this type of formulation can also be easily memorized. So all these would facilitate the children to learn the mother tongue well. Also at the same time, they inculcate good human relationships and correct value concept in them. Therefore, they are much better than our present texts which are lacking in appeal due to lack of these qualities. So because of these reasons I hope the good text materials used in the 50's could also be adopted to improve our present textbook contents while new terms relating to our environment such as our housing estates, MRT and Total Defence, and so on, could be included in our textbooks. Besides these, strengthening the student's ability to read, write and actually use the common vocabulary is also important. The ability to express in the language is directly proportional to the volume of vocabulary acquired. Couplings and phrases can be formed out of individual words to give new meanings, such as the single word " " (root) and the single word " " (origin) when combined together would form a coupling " " meaning "fundamental". Another example, when single words " " (person), " " (hill) and " " (sea) are combined together they form a quadruple phrase " " meaning "a huge crowd". We have adequate vocabulary for primary pupils, what is lacking for them is constant practice and usage of this common vocabulary which should be encouraged and incorporated in the teaching materials for the primary textbooks. It is only through constant practice and repeated use that the student will be able to increase his ability to master the Chinese mother tongue, particularly in reading and writing aspects. Otherwise, traditional Asian value concepts would gradually be lost. Westernization in values such as individualism and self-centred life philosophy would then replace them. This would be regrettable. At present, there are many subjects that students have to learn. Besides, there are extra-curricular activities. The Mandarin teachers have been working hard for the mother tongue within the constraints of teaching periods. Their efforts merit our praise. We may consider including the oral Chinese vocabulary of our pre-schoolers in the lower primary textbooks. According to a survey by the Institute of Education in 1988, the pre-schoolers have an oral vocabulary of Chinese of about 1,231. If this known vocabulary were to be included in the primary school textbook, it will help a lot in raising the effectiveness of our children's learning of the mother tongue. Other than this, we can also review the primary word list including word selection. If we can divide the list of words into two main categories for lower primary and higher primary without increasing it or affecting Primary 3 streaming and PSLE, we can make the use of these teaching materials more flexible, without increasing or enhancing the burden of the children in learning mother tongue. As regards selection of words for the common list, we can include some words relating to national service " " and take away some seldom used words like " " (bat), " " (hoe), etc, in order to relate to our present society and environment. Sir, the Ministry of Education intends to strengthen the use of mother tongue in five years. I would just like to make some suggestions to strengthen what the Member for Ayer Rajah, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, suggested yesterday. (1) Less constraint on the number of new words - The primary education level could be classified into two, namely, lower and upper primary, with the number of word list from Primary 1 to Primary 3 set at 830 and the cumulative total for Primary 6 set at 1,800. There will be less constraint in the usage and words formation of our teaching materials, in which case the passages would become more interesting to our students and therefore the standard of our mother tongue could be raised. At the same time, there will be no overloading on the students taking the Primary 3 streaming as well as the PSLE because the overall word list would remain unchanged. (2) Planning of teaching materials - Great care must be taken when incorporating the learning materials to make them interesting. Catchy phrases that rhyme could be repeated so as to enable the students to remember what they have learnt. (3) Emphasis on reading and writing - We could reinforce the most commonly used phrases out of the 1800 word list, with emphasis on vocabulary building. This would definitely enable our students to read and write better. (4) Instil intrinsic values - In the mastery of the mother tongue, we should not concentrate solely on language structure and overlook the intrinsic values of moral education. This is to ensure that our students will have a strong cultural foundation and not lose their Asian identity values. (5) Allowing mother tongue as a first language for more good students - We could consider allowing those students with a good command of their mother tongue to take this subject as a first language in their studies. (6) Mother tongue as the medium for moral education - Without overloading our students or decreasing the hours allotted to the subjects of English, Science and Mathematics, we should try to use the mother tongue as the medium for other appropriate lessons such as moral education, etc. Sir, I support the motion. Thank you.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise before this House in support of the motion that is tabled before it by the hon. Member for Siglap. Sir, I also noted that at the end of the first day's proceedings, you mentioned that the great British politician, Sir Winston Churchill made a habit of memorizing his speech the night before. In all probability, Sir, he did not have the meet-the-people sessions or house visits the night before. I therefore urge you, Sir, to bear with me if from time to time I make references to my text. Sir, in his Address, the President outlined the Government's goal of creating a better life for all Singaporeans. A skilled, well-paid job for every working Singaporean; every family housed in an affordable, comfortable home; every child educated to the limits of his or her potential. The recognition of the unequal rates of progress made by the different communities, Sir, is indeed laudable, so too is the Government's stated intention to further encourage and facilitate the progress of Malay Singaporeans into the mainstream of national life. Sir, I believe this sentiment reflects the genuine concern of the Government, for they understand that it is to our nation's own advantage to have Malay Singaporeans achieve greater socio-economic parity. It is in the interest of all to have the community better educated, better qualified and to increase its contribution to Singapore's development. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore is widely known as a place where different ethnic groups live together without the strife that has become a normal feature of many other plural societies. To this, the credit must go to the Government's commitment to multi-racialism. However, Sir, for such a commitment to succeed, it requires that each and every Singaporean subscribes to the goal of living together in harmony, whether in the religious, racial or cultural spheres, for there could be few better places to consider the attainment of that goal than right here in Singapore where tolerance of our diversity in race, culture and religion has made the need for living together in harmony a practical compulsion, a necessity whose virtue we as a nation so worthily symbolize. Sir, though there may be differences of culture, race and creed, it is imperative that we strive to understand those differences. It is imperative that we strive to accept the differences. But more importantly, Sir, we must strive to tolerate and understand those differences in order that we may all live in harmony. As in the Malay proverb, Sir, "Bersatu teguh, bercerai roboh" - united we stand, divided we fall. Mr Speaker, Sir, for almost a generation we have been living in harmony. It does not mean that differences in perspectives and outlook have disappeared. Indeed we would be naive in thinking so, for they have not. Emotional issues can still result in tension and, if left unchecked, may indeed sow the seed for conflict. Therefore, Sir, we must constantly remind ourselves that such harmony cannot be taken for granted. Indeed, we should strive for higher levels of maturity and rationality in dealing with complex issues. Sir, we should not allow ourselves to be swayed by our emotions to the extent that we lose our bearing in looking at issues. Mr Speaker, Sir, I urge the Government to employ to good advantage its particular style of leadership characterized by its informality - the walkabouts, the public forums and dialogue sessions. For in doing so, I am sure that it may benefit from being an experienced practitioner and consensus building, seeking to promote understanding which can be of long-term value rather than of instant advantage. Mr Speaker, Sir, earlier this afternoon, my GPC Chairman on Education said that the phrase "little or no margin for error" should no longer be used. In this regard, I beg to differ. Surely, Sir, if one was to draw upon the lessons learnt from the past, it must be that our effort of living together in harmony in Singapore must succeed. A great experiment of living together is taking place right here in this nation and we can ill afford for it to fail. There is nothing complicated in the prescription - tolerance, understanding, equality, respect for each other's cultural and religious backgrounds, and more importantly, a special understanding for the strong feelings which those backgrounds engender. The Singapore of today stands at the cross-roads. Staring stark in its face are the challenges and uncertainties of the nineties. As we move into the next decade, our young men and women must be imbued with the same verve and vitality which were the characteristics of our forefathers. Never before, Sir, have so much stress and expectations been placed on our young people and there can be no doubt that the youth of Singapore which constitutes the bulk of our population will rise to the occasion with drive and idealism. Their contribution to the process of nation-building cannot be over-emphasized. Sir, in this regard, I would like to urge the Government to consider the setting up of a central body responsible for the research into planning, coordination and management of youth affairs. Presently, there are several ministries and numerous youth agencies that work with youth or deal with youth problems. There is an overlap of services, differences in approaches and omission of certain youth services. Sir, a central body could remedy the situation. Presently, there exists a National Youth Coordinating Committee. Its role is non-executive and non-policy making. There is a need to enlarge and elevate its status so that it can better serve the needs of our youths. The President's Address lays the framework for our pursuit for a society of excellence. In that pursuit, let us seek excellence with a sense of grace, let us seek excellence with finesse, but above all, Sir, let us seek excellence with a touch of class. That we may build a society that we can justifiably be proud of, proud enough to bequeath to our children and to our children's children. That in their day, Sir, they may look back on this House, the Seventh Parliament, on this Government and say, "We dare to dream great dreams." Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion.

Mr Nasser, I might add that Sir Winston in all probability never had the experience of reading the News over TV.

Point noted, Sir.

Order. I suspend the sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.00 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 2.38 pm until 3.00 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.00 pm

Debate resumed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I had originally intended to wait until the Budget Debate in March in order to respond to Members' comments concerning the Ministry of Education. However, as several Members have raised a number of important points concerning our bilingual policy and the teaching of the mother tongue in our schools, I would like to take this opportunity today to outline the Ministry's proposed plan of action relating to this area. More details will be given when we meet again in March. Sir, in addressing this matter, the Member for Ayer Rajah said yesterday that he was guided by two principles, first, that children who are linguistically talented should be given more opportunities to study their mother tongue at a higher level and, second, children who are less able should not be subjected to additional burden. Sir, these principles are sound and the Ministry will take cognizance of them in the formulation of our policies. Children learn best and most effectively when they want to learn and when they are given opportunities to learn rather than when they are forced to learn. The more that we can encourage our pupils in schools to regard the learning of the mother tongue as an opportunity to be welcomed rather than as a hurdle which they have to cross in their progress up the educational ladder, the nearer we will be towards our goal of ensuring adequate proficiency in the mother tongue for our children. In ensuring that our children have adequate proficiency in the mother tongue, it is important, as the Member for Ayer Rajah has stressed, to make sure that standards are set at an appropriate level so that the children who may not be linguistically talented are not over-burdened and find school a chore or have to spend so much time on studying the mother tongue to the detriment of their other subjects, particularly English, Science and Mathematics. As stated in the Ministry of Education's Addendum to the Presidential Address, a mastery of English, Science and Mathematics represents essential skills which our children must acquire if they are to earn a living in Singapore's modern economy when they grow up. But for children who are linguistically talented and who wish to study their mother tongue at first language level in addition to English, the Ministry will provide the facilities to enable them to do so. At the secondary school level, children who would like to study Chinese at first language level can already do so in the nine SAP schools. Similarly, children can study Malay as a first language in the Ministry of Education Language Centre at Winstedt Road and Tamil as a first language at the Umar Pulavar Tamil Language Centre at Serangoon Road. While there are facilities at secondary school for the study of the mother tongue at first language level, the Ministry will make more provision for the study of the mother tongue at first language level at the primary and the pre-university levels. There are today four primary schools which teach Chinese as a first language, in addition to English, for those children who would like to take CL1 at PSLE. Beginning in 1990, the Ministry will increase the number of primary schools teaching Chinese as a first language in addition to English. The study of CL1 in these primary schools will enlarge the pool of CL1 pupils and provide the pupils in these schools with a strong foundation in Chinese. It will be useful preparation for those students who would like to carry on to study Chinese at first language level in the nine SAP schools. At the pre-university level, in order to encourage students with a flair for languages to continue to study their mother tongue at a high level, the Ministry proposes to introduce a Language Elective Programme initially for the study of Chinese in selected junior colleges. Features of the Language Elective Programme will include immersion programmes, award of scholarships and links with centres of Chinese Language studies. In this respect, Sir, the Ministry will soon begin discussions with clan associations, private and civic organizations concerning the award of the scholarships and I hope that they will participate in the scheme. Sir, while the proposed arrangements are initially for the study of Chinese, I would like to assure all Members that there will be parity of treatment for those of our pupils who would like to study Malay or Tamil as a first language. The Ministry will ensure that facilities are available for Malay or Tamil if there is demand. Finally, Sir, as regards the suggestions from Members concerning the strengthening of the Chinese and the Malay language departments in the National University of Singapore and the possibility of setting up a Tamil Language Department, if there is demand, I have noted these suggestions and conveyed them to the University for further study. Sir, in the teaching of the mother tongue in our schools, as of the other subjects, the key, as I have remarked on a previous occasion in Parliament, must be a proper balance in our school curriculum. We want to provide for the total development of every child not only intellectually but also morally, physically and aesthetically. This is an ambitious objective and difficult to attain but it is vital for Singapore's progress and I am sure, Sir, that parents and Members would not wish us to aim any lower.

( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for this opportunity to say a few words to this House. For the past few days we have been debating on the President's Address, talking about the formulation of a National Ideology. Today, we are talking about the standard of mother tongue and related matters. We generally agree that the learning of mother tongue will help to enhance our understanding of our own value concept. But to raise the standard of learning of mother tongue does not necessarily mean that we must increase the list of words to be learned. I agree with the Member for Jalan Besar GRC on the points he mentioned earlier. At the moment, we have culled 1,800 words in the list for the primary level. This vocabulary is quite high. To raise the standard of Chinese language does not mean that we have to increase the number of words to this list. To do so would only increase the burden of the children. Today, the children have to learn more than the children in the past. Today, the children learn more subjects in schools, and there is already a greater burden on them. Our policy is right. We want to learn mother tongue but at the same time to acquire western knowledge, science and technology, management methods, administrative and judicial systems, and so on. The preservation and cultivation of our traditional values is easier done through the learning of mother tongue. But when we talk of raising the standard of mother tongue, there may be some misunderstanding. Therefore, I will avail myself of this opportunity to dispel any misconception and to help explain what the Member for Jalan Besar GRC has said and to expand on it in order to enable people to understand. What we want is to raise the standard of mother tongue by improving the teaching methods and text content. In this way it will be easier to absorb one's culture and values. It is not our intention to raise the standard by adding more words to the set list to be learned. This is the first point. On the formulation of a National Ideology through the learning of the mother tongue, let me say that when we Chinese talk about learning Chinese culture and value concepts through raising the standard of Chinese language, it is not chauvinism. Similarly, when the other races, the Malays or Indians, for example, talk about acquiring or learning their traditional culture and values through raising the standard of their own mother tongue, it is also not chauvinism. It is important that we discuss this matter in a peaceful, calm and dispassionate way with the view of the national interest and benefit in mind so that we will be able to contribute constructively towards the formulation of our National Ideology. When I look at the Member for Potong Pasir here - he has just come in - I remember what he said yesterday. I do not want to be difficult with him. He talked about the westernization of Singapore. He considered that it was not necessary for us to formulate a National Ideology because westernization has brought about economic improvement for Singapore resulting in today's sound economic position. Therefore, western ideas such as freedom, democracy and so on have been helpful in this process. Therefore, the absorption of western political system and method of administration and management, western democracy is correct. I agree up to this point. All these have brought about economic prosperity to Singapore and social progress. But this is not westernization, this is modernization. Because, other than these, we are also learning industrial management and on how to increase productivity from the Japanese. This is not westernization. This is modernization. By westernization we mean living in western style and adopting western social habits. But this does not mean that all western cultures and habits are bad. Some are good and some are bad. Even in our oriental cultures and social habits, many are already outdated and not suitable for our present-day society and we should change them. By adverse, undesirable influence of the western culture, we mean their drug taking, and their paying too little attention to family relationships but stressing individualism, their emphasis on personal interest and not paying much importance to social or national interest. Yesterday, the Member for Potong Pasir said that westernization is good and it should be adopted wholesale. I would like to point out that this concept is wrong. In addition, he also said that the independence of Singapore had been brought about by a group of leadership in the PAP who were western educated. This is only partially right. Mass support is necessary in any struggle for independence. It is true tha we have leaders who were educated in the West; but, to say independence of a country depended entirely on them would be too simplistic. In their struggle for independence from colonial rule, many countries had gone through a period of bloody revolution, turmoil and struggle before independence could be achieved. The PAP leadership was able to successfully achieve independence for Singapore without bloodshed was because of the broad support of the masses. After the Second World War, movements for independence had taken place throughout the world, one of which was India, followed by Burma and other South East Asian countries. One after the other had become independent, including Singapore. But before the PAP was established, many Singaporeans who had not been trained in the West or educated in a western school were dissatisfied with the colonial rule under the British. They took part in anti-British activities and independence movements. I entered the Chinese High School in 1950. I was in Junior Middle 1 class. Just a few months after I entered school, the riot police came and encircled the school one day. They arrested scores of students. The society was in a volatile state. The students did not find it at ease to study in school. Although we had English lessons in school, nobody dared speak English. If you speak English, you would be branded a running dog or a breaking wind. That was a time of anti-British sentiments. At that time, there was a group of Western trained scholars and others who had acquired Western thoughts and skills. They understood methods of government administration and political systems. They decided to come forward to lead the broad masses towards independence for Singapore. They complemented each other, and helped Singapore achieved independence. Yesterday, the Member for Potong Pasir had handed a bouquet to the leadership of the PAP. I would like to thank him. But I dare say that the the PAP leadership does not consider themselves as being the only ones who deserved this accolade. We are now talking about formulating a National Ideology in the long-term interest of our country. Some may ask why did we not talk about this earlier? Why do we talk about this now? Let me explain. In the past, the situation was different. In those days, we had to look after our stomachs, to fill our stomachs three times a day. Now that our living standard is better, and everybody is able to speak English and we are able to absorb foreign technology and science. Not only this, we are watching foreign movies and TV programmes. So, we can be easily influenced by foreign culture and values. The PAP Government is, as we all know, one that is always on the alert and vigilant over the future, even though we are now having a peaceful time. The leadership is mindful of the need to establish or formulate a National Ideology to ensure the wellbeing of the future development of Singapore. While the people are talking of democracy, rights and freedom, they must also consider the interest of the family, the society and the nation on how to continue enjoying prosperity, peace and a good standard of living. Not all Western social customs and habits are bad. For example, freedom of marriage is, of course, better than the old Oriental precept which prohibits close proximity and mixing between the male and the female. When we talk about freedom of marriage, we should at the same time talk about our duties to the family. The family is the basic unit of the society. When talking about the National Ideology, our aim is to unite, and not to segregate the various races. We want to strengthen, not weaken, our social cohesion. We cannot and should not impose the cultural values of one's race on the other races. When we talk about Confucianism and its values, we do not mean to impose it on the Malays or Indians. The Member for Potong Pasir referred to Prof. Tu Wei Ming's comment about Confucianism being Chinese because of its Chineseness. I do not deny that. There are many Chinese who do not know the Chinese Language. But this is not to say that those Chinese who do not understand Chinese must be bad hats. No, it is not so. There are many of us who do not know their mother tongue because of their past circumstances. During the colonial days, not everybody could attend school. Therefore, many clans, associations, set up schools to enable Chinese children to attend schools to learn Chinese. So those students who attended such schools were able to speak only Chinese. Whereas those who joined the few Government English schools could speak only English. This is not their fault. They are not to blame. It is due to social circumstances then. There is no ulterior motive in our attempt or effort to promote the learning of mother tongue to their children. It is for the good and in the long-term interest of all concerned. So I hope that the Member for Potong Pasir will support this. I am also glad that the NCMP Member has also expressed his appreciation that the PAP recognized the danger to the society of too much Westernization, and I believe he would also agree to this plan for a set of National Ideology.

Sir, with your permission, may I ask for a clarification from the Second Deputy Prime Minister? I think there is going to be a confusion of what we are going to discuss unless we know exactly what the Government means by "Westernization". Now we hear a new term "modernization". But in any event, the clarification that I want is on family relationship. Is it not true that the Government introduced the Women's Charter and, in fact, took away all the traditional Chinese values and relationships between the husband and wife and introduced a Western system? Is it not true? An hon. Member: Of course.

Then why are you complaining now?

( In Mandarin):Mr Speaker, Sir, earlier I have explained very clearly. We have learned and absorbed many systems and things from the West, such as freedom in contracting marriage and about the relationship between the husband and the wife, equality between them. It is not wrong. But what I mean to say is that after adopting and enacting the Women's Charter, divorce cases have been on the rise. We are afraid that we may follow the West in having more divorce cases. We must find ways to avoid going in this direction. There is much we can learn from the West. But since we are Orientals, we should be proud of our own cultures and value concepts. If they are good, we should preserve them. It is correct that there should be freedom in contracting marriage. But the husband and the wife should also mutually love and respect each other and be mutually responsible for the family so as to preserve the unity of the family. This is not wrong.

Sir, may I have a further clarification? The Second Deputy Prime Minister says that good values from the West can be accepted. So we have accepted one good value from the West in respect of relationship between husband and wife. Is it not correct? Although we are Asians, we have accepted wholesale the relationship between husband and wife and embodied it in the law upon which the PAP Government pride itself of and, in fact, I think helped it to win elections. So what is wrong with accepting other Western values which are good for us? You have already accepted one in relationships. An hon. Member: Accept one, accept all?

We should accept good values. What is wrong with that?

Nobody is saying no.

( In Mandarin):Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not differ from him in this. We should accept good value concepts, whether from the West or from the East. Does he agree to this? He does not agree?

Sir, if we are going to replace Confucianist values of husband and wife relationship ---

Are we? Are you asking?

--- then I think it is a step backwards. It is not a good value. If you accept Confucius' teaching, you must teach our children the five relationships between the Emperor and his subjects, husband and wife, between the siblings, between citizens. So the husband and wife relationship is one of them. And the husband and wife relationship is not on equal basis. Whereas our law now says that they are on equal basis. When they divorce, they have, in fact, a distribution of matrimonial properties. So how are you going to relate the two? You cannot. You either accept Confucianist values or Western values.

( In Mandarin):I think the Member for Potong Pasir is confused with what I have been saying. I did not propose that we adopt wholesale the five relationships of Confucianism. I have already said that we should discard practices which are bad and outdated, including any Confucianist values. We must skim the cream out of Western or Eastern traditional cultures and values. We should preserve the good ones, and discard the bad ones. I think the Member would not disagree with this. 3.31 pm

( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to thank the President for his Address in this Parliament. His address stresses the importance of Asian value concepts in building our National Ideology. This is very clear. This is also the goal that we should strive for. The trend of westernized thinking of our younger generation is now causing grave concern to all of us. I would like to stress that this problem is very serious. In the period that I lived in, from the 1930's to the 1980's, I have seen many changes in our society and I have also seen the changes in the thinking and behaviour of our young people. Sir, western thoughts may have their good and bad points. But under the impact of western culture, the traditions we value, such as our concern for the society and the family and respect for the elders, our thrifty and simple lifestyle and our diligent work attitude have been gradually replaced by a more materialistic, individualistic and hedonistic outlook and lifestyle. In recent years, this phenomenon has become more apparent. If this trend were not arrested and if it were allowed to continue and develop, then it will cause great damage to the building up of our national consciousness, the unity of the people and cohesion of our society. This will endanger our future development and wipe out all our past hard won achievements. So we must look into the root causes of this phenomenon in order to solve the problem better. Sure, some people will say that this is the price to pay for modernization or that Singapore is an open society; therefore it is inevitable that western thoughts will filter into our society and their influence felt here, and that the thoughts and behaviour of our young people are consequently affected by western cultures. But I would point out that the Government should also bear part of the responsibility in this matter. Up to very recently, for the cause of nation building we paid much attention to economic construction and development, so much so that whatever was profitable was given great attention and importance to. Therefore, those Ministries or units which could yield great profits, such as Ministry of Finance, EDB, etc. were given great approbation and attention to. On the other hand, other Ministries such as Ministry of Culture, Sports Council and so on which have to spend money were not given much attention to, as a result, their work was hindered or delayed or progress slowed down. Government's attitude towards personnel was also like this. The Government's excessive emphasis on academic qualifications has made the students and the parents also to acquire the same attitude, paying attention only to academic results. So, extracurricular activities which will not help them in getting a better job or in joining a higher institute of learning were generally neglected. What the government look for in these personnel was the material contribution they could make to the State. Therefore, engineers and economists were held very much in esteem and were greatly admired. The Government's attitude towards others was one of benevolent indifference, such as regards the artists, musicians and writers. The attitude of the Government was that, as the grass will bend with the wind, other social and private institutions would take their cue from the Government; as a result, such social vogue was formed. Sir, I fully understand that during nation building, economic development is important. But after a certain stage of economic development and having attained a certain degree of achievement, we must pay attention to the development and promotion of culture and other forms of spiritual growth as the foundation for further national development. I am glad to see that now the Government has paid more attention to non- materialistic topics and has formed many committees to study these topics and propose guidelines for their development. I feel, when promoting the work in these matters, it is necessary to seek out the root cause of the problems and thoroughly change our past views and attitude on these questions before we can effectively carry out our work. Cultural education work is a long-term process. It is not like building a house which can be erected within a short time. In the course of gradual cultural development, we can see young people in succeeding generations, under the teaching and influence of culture of correct value, developing correct concept of life, strong national consciousness, bringing up good families and establishing good relationship with relatives and friends. What I would like to point out is that unlike economic development we cannot expect to see the results of cultural education development in a short time. We must be patient and persistent in promoting this task. In conclusion, what I want to say is that our Government now is stressing the importance of Asian value concepts and National Ideology. This is correct. At present, the trend of westernization of the thinking of our younger generation has caused grave social problems in Singapore. This will damage our national unity and social cohesion and destroy the achievement that we have acquired through much effort in the past. To solve this problem, we must seek out the root causes of the problem, one of which is the Government's past policies and manner of implementation or administration. This kind of influence has affected the society and produced the phenomena of a society where people attached much importance to profit and tended to neglect cultural and spiritual values. Such has been the social vogue. Now the Government has realized the seriousness of the problem and is now taking the correct stand on cultural development. But it is necessary to recognize the root cause of the problem and correct the attitude towards cultural promotion before we can carry out the task better. When promoting cultural educa- tion, it is necessary to recognize the fact that it is a task that will require a long time to achieve, quite unlike economic development whose result can be seen in a shorter time. It requires patience and resolution in order to promote this task.

3.40 pm Resolved, That the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted at this day's sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng].

Debate resumed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion of thanks for the President's Address on the goals and challenges of this Government. For the past 30 years under the People's Action Party the Government has aimed at economic growth and development in order to give the people a better livelihood. For the last few years we have been aiming at a higher quality of life for the people. However, we can see the Government's increasing concern with grappling with the spiritual and cultural dimensions of the nation-building process. Having emphasized growth and development and succeeded beyond doubt, we have now turned full circle and come face to face with the stark reality of a non-homogenous plural society. Many people, among them the more articulate, modern and educated sections of the population, have doubts about the need and the relevance for a National Ideology. They should not be. Just now we heard the Second Deputy Prime Minister mention the reasons why we are tackling the problems of National Ideology now. But I think there are other reasons from a sociological and economic point of view. Herman Kahn, the futurologist in the 1970's, in his study of the world economic development had predicted that as countries enter the post-industrial phase of development there would always be a greater search and need for ideologies for meaningful growth and development. We in Singapore are entering this phase of development now towards the end of the 1980's. However, in our search for a National Ideology we must not lose sight of several considerations. Firstly, we are a modern city-state. The culture and ethos we want to nurture have to counter the modernistic culture and values. These values are likely to exert very strong pulls because of our openness and our modern communication facilities. Hence the values we want in the National Ideology must not be too restrictive or inflexible. Otherwise when applied in the context of overall policies, Singaporeans of all races, age and education, may find it unappealing. Secondly, I feel we must be cautious that by teaching the values in the mother tongues or the mother languages in the schools, we should not unwittingly provoke or evoke communal responses. Up to now the integration of Singaporeans of different ethnic groups, however limited it may be, is conducted through the English medium. Young Singaporeans today should still have to integrate across ethnic and cultural differences in the English mode. Otherwise the outcome may be more communal orientation rather than national orientation which will defeat the purpose of the National Ideology. Thirdly, I feel the National Ideology must give all sections of our people the sense of shared vision of the future we are heading for. This vision has at various times been defined a global City of Excellence with a Swiss standard of living. Are our people in that vision Chinese, Malays and Indians? Or are they Singaporeans with a Singaporean soul? I hope the National Ideology will consider this. In this search for a National Ideology, I suggest we should not be too trammelled by our over-focus on the success stories of the Asian "little dragons", namely, Korea, Taiwan or Hong Kong. Communitarianism is only one aspect of their culture which sociologists can explain for their success. Other social scientists have their own explanation, not least of which are the appropriate strategic policies which were undertaken in economic development which enabled them to achieve their spectacular success. Singapore has not done that badly with our non-homogeneous plural society background. We are still the second highest per capita income country in Asia after Japan. A good section of our population comprising Malays, Indians, Eurasian and non-Chinese speaking Singaporans need the assurance that the National Ideology should integrate them as Singaporeans and not as Malays, Chinese, or Indians or Eurasians. Mr Speaker, Sir, I note that in the preliminary search for our National Ideology we have been concerned with core values but not with virtues. I suggest that virtues like diligence, duty, pride in one's work, group loyalty, cooperation, maybe even a sense of shame, be worthy of examination. In our search for a National Ideology we cannot divorce ourselves from the specific problems we are facing at this time in our work ethos, in duty, in pride in one's work, in group loyalty. This has been so in the experience of other countries with ideologies. The Taiwanese have their three principles of nationalism, democracy and social well-being which is a throwback to the revolutionary days of China under Sun Yat Sen. The Koreans have their New Community Movement with its principles of diligence, self-help and cooperation. The Japanese have their neo-Confucian culture of group loyalty since the Meiji Revolution when they started to catch up with the West. Mr Speaker, Sir, the four core values mentioned in the President's Address are laudable. Most people would swear by these high ideals. Yet we hear of disquiet in some articulate sectors. I suggest it has to do with applying the value of placing society above self as part of an ideology in the context of overall policies. I am using the words "placing society above self" as quoted in the Presidential Address because I feel in a discussion on the National Ideology the words we use are very important in order not to have different meanings or interpretation. While Members are proud to profess this value in this Chamber, I think it is a different thing when given the status of a National Ideology and invoked as a moral precept in the context of policy and choice. I believe a good section of Singaporeans are disturbed by this. Let me give the illustration which the hon. Member for Buona Vista, the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, gave a few days ago. He was on a teaching award from the Ministry of Education and he was forced to do Mathematics more than 25 years ago. He refused and paid back his bond in dollars and went on to do Economics and I thought he did pretty well. Twenty-five years later, he is now in Parliament as a Minister of State. I can imagine not so long ago that we have similar problems where students who qualified to do Medicine, for example, were allocated to do Law at the University. It is problems like this that we face when "society before self" may be invoked as a precept, a moral precept, and individual choice is sacrificed. The disenchanted may not be as strong-willed as the hon. Minister of State and in our context in Singapore today they may feel disenchanted and they may even leave Singapore and settle elsewhere. The Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry stressed two days ago that the National Ideology is to find a balance by emphasizing the obligations to society. Indeed this is reassuring. Many Singaporeans fear that the term "society before self" may imply a definite ordinal social preference everywhere and always by arbiters in the system. When invoked as a moral precept in the National Ideology it can be disturbing to them. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not suggesting that we are all selfish. The fact is that most likely the State or the bureaucracy will not be in a good position to arbitrate on what is good for itself or for the individual. The Member for Boon Lay gave a long list three days ago regarding various changes in policy decisions over the last few years. This has also been borne out all over the world where command political-economic systems have failed and the free world market economies have proven to be a more efficient system in decision-making and allocation. By pursuing the individual self-interest, the welfare of the nation is raised by the invisible hand. Hence my concern is that perhaps "society before self" may not be exactly what we need to stipulate. What we are concerned about I venture to suggest is a certain community orientation or social harmony in our endeavours which is lacking, partly due to our short immigrant background. This "community orientation" should co-exist side by side or in the back of our mind in our endeavours, while as individuals we pursue our own goals in self-interest. The pursuit of this individual interest as part of our immigrant culture has always been present in the ordinary Singaporean. It has accounted for our dynamism and flexibility. Mr Speaker, Sir, community orientation can co-exist without internal inconsistency with our strive for excellence. Putting "society before self" may mean trading excellence to second place because the search for excellence is very often a trail blazing strive by the few and the initiated. Again the Member for Buona Vista comes to mind. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is very important for us to ensure that various Government policies are in tune and consistent with whatever core values we want to uphold in the National Ideology. For example, while the National Ideology will want to uphold the family as the building block, there are many families with one member, either a father or a mother or a child who has been staying in Singapore for more than a decade and still cannot get permanent residence status. And yet they know of many other professionals and skilled personnel who are allowed to stay easily whose commitment and family ties to Singapore may yet be established. Although many of them could be just ordinary workers without those skills and professional qualifications which enable many others to stay permanently these people are not without their contribution. They have direct family ties in Singapore and nowhere else. Their children, or brothers do national service. I urge the Government to re-examine these policies so that the family unit as a building block of society is given credence. Mr Speaker, Sir, the President's Address makes no direct mention of the problems of the aged in our society. I urge the Government to formulate policies for the aged in three aspects. Firstly, providing more avenues for our elderly to achieve more degree of financial security. The Government or HDB should examine into a reverse mortgage scheme for elderly people who own HDB flats. This suggestion has been made in the Howe Yoon Chong Report before. This would provide an additional source of financial security for the elderly. Secondly, the HDB should consider allowing senior citizens who own private properties to sell off their properties and move into HDB flats. This would allow many elderly citizens who spend most of their life savings paying for a house or apartment and educating their children to move into smaller HDB flats and liquidate their savings in the house or the private apartment into an annuity. Thirdly, I feel that the Government should bring back to life discussion on the problem of the aged and seek consensus from the population as to what kind of policies and measures to adopt to formulate as a plan for action. Various measures have already been expressed like raising the retirement age to 60 and the improvement of geriatric medicine. The problem of the aged will become more urgent over the next five years. Many good suggestions have also been made by the Howe Yoon Chong Report. I think it deserves deeper study and review again. Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, in the Addendum to the President's Address by the Minister for Trade and Industry there is mention of the EDB setting up an international direct investment programme to facilitate and support Singapore companies to go offshore. I think this is a worthy goal. I also urge the Government to map out a strategy to enable Singapore companies to go trans-national. As our domestic labour supply and total factor productivity become constraints to our growth, the Government should identify those companies with the resources to venture overseas. This should be under- taken as a national strategic economic development effort and not be left to the vagaries of private business alone. Our presence in overseas countries is important in the longer term. It should complement our domestic economic development. We must get out of the confines of protectionist boundaries, labour constraints and comparative advantages to generate value-added for the long term survival of the city state. It is also, I believe, a strategic dimension of total defence. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Siglap. Sir, I would also like to join the earlier speakers in congratulating the Government for clearly outlining its policies and programmes for the next five years. Now that the directions and policies are set, I believe it is up to us as Singaporeans to work with the Government to fulfil the goals outlined in the Presidential Address. Sir, in this context, I am extremely gratified that the hon. Member for Potong Pasir is supporting the motion of thanks. Sir, I believe after one term in this House he has finally seen light. Sir, over the past few days, various Members of this House have commented on general and specific aspects mentioned in the Presidential Address. I do not propose to go over the same grounds. What I propose to do is to follow up on what the First Deputy Prime Minister wrote to you in his letter. Sir, he says he is now in charge and to use his corporate analogy, he is the Chief Executive Officer with the Prime Minister serving as the Chairman of the board. I am confident that the new team under the leadership of the First Deputy Prime Minister will do Singapore proud and I would urge all Singaporeans to give maximum support to this new team. Also, as a new team, I would urge the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues to bring in changes, preferably refreshing changes in the governance of Singapore. Sir, I would appeal to the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues to take a new look at some of our existing problems and policies. In this context, Sir, I would like to refer specifically to two existing policies. The first refers to car ownership policy and the second on foreign maids. I will take the car ownership policy first. Sir, this problem has been with us for a long time and will continue to be with us. Our current method of tackling this problem has been largely by fiscal means - reduce congestion by making it expensive to own a car. Whether this has served us well as a policy I think is a moot point. I believe the Government has failed to make a distinction between ownership of cars and usage of cars. I believe what we need is to control usage and not ownership. Hence in one breath the same dose of medicine is given to both. It is the declared policy of this Government to move Singapore and Singaporeans towards a middle class society. Whether we like it or not, Sir, one of the indicators of middle-class society must be ownership of a car, apart from house, refrigerator, washing machine, microwave oven, or what-have-you. It is indeed ironical that it is easier in Singapore to own a home than a car, and both as a result of Government policy. Sir, I believe the Government should at least not discourage the ownership of cars. Owning a car is part and parcel of a middle class status. Today, there is tremendous frustration, particularly among younger professionals because they are unable to own a car. Sir, the frustration is even greater when taxi drivers can own their own vehicles. The Member for Bukit Timah a couple of days ago made a very eloquent case for controlling the car population. I am sure even the Minister for Communications could not have made a better case than him. Sir, I would respectfully ask the First Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Communications and his other colleagues to seriously reconsider the present policy on car ownership. Government might want to consider the scenario where ownership of cars is differentiated from usage of cars. Otherwise, the present policy of trying to restrict ownership will be seen by many as purely a revenue-generating exercise. I for one moment do not believe it is a revenue-generating exercise. Hence, I would strongly suggest that the Government consider making ownership of cars less restrictive but really introduce stringent measures when it comes to use of cars on our roads. Technology is sufficiently advanced to enable Government to charge according to usage. It is not for me here to suggest how this ought to be worked out. This is something for the Minister for Communications to mull over. Sir, I refer to our policy on foreign maids. Many of my colleagues in this House have pointed out the inconsistency in this policy. We are all aware of the problem. The number of foreign maids must be controlled otherwise, as the Minister for Labour said, we will face other social problems. So the question is how to determine the level of maids that we want in Singapore at any one point of time, be it 30,000, 40,000, 50,000. Sir, once this level is determined, then I believe the problem is one of allocation. Right now, allocation is affected through the pricing mechanism, that is a higher levy is introduced to reduce demand. Again, I would like to urge the First Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Labour and his other colleagues to have another look at this policy. Pricing mechanism alone may not be the only solution. Maybe, Sir, new criteria for allocation of maids may have to be established. I think a policy needs to be established that it is not the right of every Singaporean to have a foreign maid. Some new conditions can be introduced. For example, to qualify employment of a maid, the applicant must at least be a taxpayer. Quantum of tax can be decided by the Government after some consultation. Again, at the moment, the levy is a flat levy. I believe if both husband and wife are working, then maybe the Government would consider a rebate rather than a flat rate for all. I also believe that the Government can actively promote and assist companies to provide maid services. This can result in maids being employed on time basis. Sir, not everyone needs a stay-in maid for 24 hours. These companies can be given incentives and assistance or HDB could make some flats available to accommodate the maids. The Minister for Labour could give priority for such companies to bring in maids. Sharing of maids among families can also be encouraged. These are some suggestions which the Minister may want to look into. Sir, the points I have made on car policy and foreign maids are suggestions basically to call upon the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues to re-examine some of our existing policies. I have discussed these with some of my other GPC Chairman-colleagues. The majority of us feel that some form of re-examination may be in order. Sir, there is one other concern which I would like to bring to the attention of the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues. Sometime ago during a lunch with a Chief Executive of a multi-national company, I was rather shocked to hear him say that a sociologist (an American sociologist, I think), in conducting a survey on Singapore which involved a cross section of our population, came to one conclusion among other conclusions - that the civil servant in Singapore generally holds the businessman in "contempt". And this Chief Executive was very concerned with this conclusion. Sir, I am not in total agreement with this conclusion of the sociologist. But, in fact, a milder word than "contempt" may be necessary. In my case I would like to use the word "distrust". However, Sir, in reality, the truth may lie somewhere between "mistrust" and "contempt". Sir, if this is the situation, then I believe it does Singapore no good. It is extremely important for the Civil Service, the political leadership and the business community to work together for the improvement of our people and our country. I would urge if such a situation exists that 1DPM would help to redress and forge a closer relationship based on trust and understanding. All sectors of the population must work in tandem for the benefit of Singapore. I think we can do away with "I am holier than thou attitude". Sir, in conclusion, I can only say that changing times require new perspectives and new solutions to old problems. I would urge and plead with the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues to take a fresh and new look at all problems, old and new. Mr Speaker, Sir, before I sit down, I just want to make one other observation, that is, again to request the Frontbenchers not to be unduly disturbed because of criticisms from my colleagues, the Backbench, particularly GPC Chairmen. Sir, Backbenchers and GPC Chairmen are expected to raise issues and concerns in this House. If this exercise is to continue, then I believe there must be a certain amount of give-and-take. However, Sir, in yesterday's debate, I believe the steak was a little overdone. 4.10 pm The Minister of State for Finance and Foreign Affairs (BG George Yong-Boon Yeo): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion of thanks to the President. Our desire to preserve traditional values should not lead to a de-emphasis of democratic values in Singapore. Being more communitarian should not mean we become less democratic. It means we become less individualistic. It would be wrong to equate democracy with individualism. That was not the meaning of democracy as the Greeks understood it. That was not the democracy idealized in the West in the age of Enlightenment. In his famous Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln summarized democracy as "government of the people, by the people, and for the people". The democracy Lincoln described so succinctly is as much concerned with the duties of individuals to the community as it is with the rights of individuals. Hence, the Civil War. The relative backwardness of Asian societies for a long time was partly the result of a lack of democracy. Feudal thinking prevented the modernization of these societies. Societal values are hard to change. Japan took one generation to make the leap. And even so the Meiji Restoration was not enough. It took the Second World War, two atomic bombs and the American occupation which followed to finally make Japan the industrial democracy it is today. For China, a much larger country with a much larger population, that transformation takes much longer. From the loss of Hong Kong in 1842 to the British during the Opium War to the eventual return of Hong Kong in 1997, China would have taken some 150 years to achieve this great transformation. And even then, we hear today this raging controversy going on over the exhibition of nude paintings. The Culture Minister himself had to declare that the exhibition should be seen as an attack on feudal thinking. And you can be sure we have not heard the last of this quite fascinating subject. Mr Speaker, Sir, there could have been no progress in traditional Asian societies without democracy. For this reason, democratic values should be an integral part of our national value system. We are a democratic nation, yes, but we do not have a long tradition of democracy. It is not in our ancestral cultures unlike, for example, the Anglo-Saxon peoples. For centuries, since Magna Carta in the days of King John and Robin Hood, the Anglo-Saxon peoples have evolved a tradition of democratic values so tenacious that wherever they may be transplanted on this earth, they re-create, basically, the same political system. In the end the institutions we fashion must reflect the values that are in all of us. Therefore, if we want Singapore to endure as a strong democracy, we must ensure that the democratic values which sustain our national institutions are deeply held by all of us, and from our childhood. Legally, the Constitution is supreme. But, politically, the Constitution is only as durable as the community wants it to be. Many Third World countries are democratic in the constitutional sense when they first became independent. But for as long as the ideas and the ideals of democracy are not imbued in the people, such constitutional experiments very often fail. It is very difficult to have a democratic government without democratic values and democratic traditions. And we are still building up such traditions in Singapore. Dr Lee Siew-Choh's agreement to take up his NCMP seat in Parliament is a milestone in the development of our democracy. He is of my father's generation and already a historical personage whether or not we agree with his political views. By coming back to this House after so many years, he affirms to all Singaporeans the constitutional principle that this is the way we state and settle our political differences - an important democratic principle that we do well to confirm, not only for ourselves but for our children and for our children's children. Mr Speaker, Sir, we are right to worry that we may become too Westernized, too individualistic in the American sense. And for us that will be disastrous. We are particularly vulnerable because of our size and our exposure through the English language. But our problem, though more acute, is not unique. In much the same way, the other NICs face the same problem, the same challenge. Look at what is happening today in Taiwan, in South Korea, in Hongkong. China too. Even Gorbachev's Russia. We are not choosing between East and West. We are deciding what synthesis of East and West will best carry us as a society into the 21st century. Mr Chay, the Member for Brickworks, had mentioned earlier about Dr Sun Yat Sen, the founder of Republican China in 1911. Dr Sun propounded the Three Principles of the People (San Min Zhu Yi) as the basis for a democratic, industrial nation-state. The three principles were nationalism, democracy and the people's welfare (Min Zu, Min Quan, Min Sheng) reflecting the impact of Western ideas on the Chinese mind. Dr Sun himself was the product of Western missionary education, a convert to Christianity. The Chinese Government he formed was divided into five branches, three adopted from the US Constitution (the Executive, the Legislative and the Judiciary), but two more from the traditions of Imperial China (the Examination Yuan and the Control or Censorial Yuan). And this is still the structure of government in Taipei today. The structure is an interesting, syncretic blend of democratic Western institutions and traditional Chinese ones. Our approach must be the same in Singapore. We remain as committed to the ideals of democracy but in a way relevant to our history and to our circumstances. Like our values, our institutions are still evolving. The British left us valuable assets in the legal system, in the Civil Service (for all its faults), in Parliament. We build on these assets. We modify them. We improve. Like the introduction of GRCs and NCMPs and, eventually, an elected Presidency or some such safeguard on the exercise of Executive power. Singaporeans want a livelier democracy, particularly younger Singaporeans. That is in accord with the times. We live in an age where because of the minute division of labour, even the most minor tasks require the cooperatiave effort of a large number of free individuals. You cannot force people to create works of art, or to write good software or even just to provide courteous service over the counter if they are not willing. That is why QC circles have become so important in industry. QC circles are a part of the democratization process in work organization. A diversity of views is an insurance against the unexpected and the unforeseen. Singapore cannot become a great nation in this information age without a lively democracy. Even the Russians now agree that without democratic practice, no further economic progress is possible. History, it seems, is now on the side of democracy. Our fear is a democracy perverted by an elevation of the self over all societal considerations, signs of which we see in the West. But here, it may be the turn of the West to learn from the East. And if I may misquote Kipling, East is East and West is West, and indeed the twain shall meet. All over America and Europe, business schools and management experts are trying hard to unfathom the secret of success of Japanese corporations. But there is really no secret. As the CEO of Sony, Akio Morita, explained it recently in an interview with Newsweek, the problem in the West is one of excessive individualism. But, alas, national characteristics are not easy to change. And it will take time now for Western societies to correct this growing imbalance in their internal value system. They too must learn to adjust. We are trying to avoid having such an imbalance in our society in Singapore. So we must stress communitarian values. For the Chinese, communitarian values are mainly Confucianist values. Those Confucianist values which are harmful to progress, we must reject, as Dr Sun Yat Sen and the founders of modern republican China did and as our Second Deputy Prime Minister expressed earlier this afternoon. We should preserve only those which are relevant and emphasize, at the same time, the importance of democratic values without which a modern industrial society cannot be built. In short, our shared values must be both democratic and communitarian. We should therefore not leave out democratic values in our national value system. There will otherwise be a lack of balance in presentation. Mr Speaker, Sir, the next century will be the century of the Pacific, of the Western Pacific where Western values have successfully leavened Eastern societies, and of the Eastern Pacific where Eastern ideas will in turn re-invigorate Western societies. Singapore's success to date is a part of the larger success story of the string of islands and peninsulas which skirt the Chinese mainland. Singapore's success in the future will be a part of the larger drama now unfolding before our very eyes in the Pacific. It must be against such a backdrop of cultural and intellectual ferment in the Pacific that we debate what set of shared values will best enable us to take our rightful place on that stage.

Mr Speaker, Sir, that must be one of the most enlightened maiden speeches I have heard.

Are you seeking a clarification?

Can I get a clarification from the Minister of State?

All right, make it brief.

Yes. If I heard him correctly, apparently the Taiwan way is the way we should take. I do not know whether he said it. Taiwan is different from us. They are a homogeneous race. Our problem here is multi-racialism. He did not address this area in which is perhaps our main problem. On democratic values, he said that we should uphold democratic values. How do you reconcile democratic values with Confucianist values which are not democratic?

I am not recommending the Taiwanese model for ourselves. When I said that this is the approach we should follow, I was referring to the approach of syncretism, that we should not only be looking back to the past to decide what we want for the future. What we are witnessing in Asia today is a clash of civilizations, of Western ideas impacting on Eastern civilizations with its own long traditions and producing a new synthesis. So in deciding what our national values should be, we should look forward and not backwards. That was the point I was making.

What about democratic values? How do you reconcile them with Confucianist values?

They too must evolve. The democratic and Confucianist values that we evolve for ourselves must represent a new synthesis of past ideas. Such is the nature of human thought. Ideas appear to reflect what they were in the past. But in the process of cyclical change, new developments have taken place. And what we are talking about are ideas which will enable us to exploit the full potential of the technological age. Look at what societies in the West today are doing. They are scrambling to find out why East Asia has been so successful in the last 20 years. And they have exhausted their own indigenous intellectual resources as to what makes the East tick and what is now giving the West problem. I think there is today a situation where Western theory lags behind world practice.

Mr Speaker, Sir ---

You are still not clear?

I am very happy with the answers that he has given. But I still cannot fathom: how are you going to reconcile democratic values and Confucianist values which are basically undemocratic? How do you reconcile the two? How are you going to adapt Confucianist values and fit them into our democratic system or democratic values? How do you do that?

I do not have a precise answer because that is a solution we are now seeking in this House. But by way of analogy, by way of example, I think it would be instructive for us to look at how Japan has successfully integrated democracy with Confucianism. The institutional forms are outwardly democratic. In fact, their parliamentary system, their Diet, is not unlike the British system. The original inspiration was American and many of their laws are, in fact, based on American laws. But the practice is Japanese. So if we look at Japan, look at the way they have, in their own style, blended the two together. I think there is in the Japanese example a case study for us to look at.

What is their approach towards the opposition?

Apart from factionalism in the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan, I think there is merit in the way the Japanese political system has evolved. There is national stability because when push comes to shove, the interest of the country gather around the ruling party. So there is political stability. They have a highly professional civil service which provides for further institutional stability. At the same time, there is an opposition which in its own way is effective. And which in its own way has to deal with the ruling party. The ruling party, as a matter of course, does not push Bills over the heads of the opposition. And very often, they seek consensus with the opposition. But for that to happen, the opposition itself learns that it must bargain and deal with the ruling party. That may be the way we will evolve in this Parliament.

Thank you. 4.25 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion standing in the name of the hon. Member for Siglap. Sir, the President mentioned that Singaporeans should not only have their material needs met, but also able to enjoy meaningful and fulfilling life. Many hon. Members have spoken at length on the National Ideology, education, economy and the need to support the lower income groups, the unskilled workers, to improve themselves through training and retraining, so that they too could upgrade their lives. Many of my Malay MP colleagues have also mentioned the aspirations and desire of the Malay community to move ahead and join the mainstream. I fully share the views of hon. Members on the above issues and would like to see that the Government is concerned and try to implement some of the recommendations which are practical and feasible. Mr Speaker, Sir, last year, the First Deputy Prime Minister announced the formation of six advisory councils to look into the various ways and means of improving the quality of life for all Singaporeans. I believe most of these committees have already submitted their recommendations. Earlier today, the hon. Member for Ulu Pandan eloquently spoke about the Arts and how it contributes to improving the quality of life. Now I would like to speak on sports and recreation, a topic which seems to be at the lowest priority. Sir, the emotional stress of urban living, the rich and the plentiful food available to most people, the ease of an era of machines and the sedentary way of life, have generally made Singaporeans rather soft and vulnerable to both physical and mental ailments. And these, to a certain extent, tend to mar the quality of our life. Sir, with the adoption of the Government's Sports for All policy in 1973, there has been an active promotion of physical fitness and sports among school children, national servicemen and the masses. There has been a greater awareness of the importance of sports. I know many hon. Members as well as Ministers have played their part in spearheading the sports movement. However, I still feel that active participation in sports and other recreational activities by the general public is still not up to the level ideally preferred. Although the average Singaporean is aware of the desirability and the benefits of sports, and intends to get more of it, he is stacked against his driving need to succeed and to be secure in the framework of an intensively competitive society. Time spent in sport has often struck him almost as a form of self-indulgence. This lifestyle will have to change if one wants to enjoy good health and a good quality of life. How does sport contribute to this good quality of life? Sports like art, music, contributes to the development of many personal values. It contributes to good character, loyalty, altruism, self-control, fortitude, health, physical fitness and mental alertness. As the growth of an individual or a society is a process, encompassing every aspect of human functioning and emotion, sports' contribution to the desired growth of the individual as well as the society can never be over-emphasized. Sir, one of the primary values of sport is that it provides an opportunity for people to interact, to socialize and to overcome a sense of isolation by joining social groups. In our society, such groups are important in that they provide individuals with a sense of belonging rather than isolation. Group participation offers a realistic training ground for both cooperation and healthy competition. An individual must learn to cooperate with others, to accept group rules, to impose self-discipline and to subordinate his own wishes, when necessary, to the desires of the overall group. In multi-racial Singapore, this aspect of development is also important for nation building. Sports can help to forge our people together as it has no racial or religious barrier. What better way than to start taking part in sports and games, if not from young, in the schools? Through participation in group activities such as sports and games, young children can learn to control their emotions and to express themselves in socially acceptable ways - to take responsibilities, to respect others, to be considerate, to be tolerant and to work as a team, etc. In short, they learn to get along well with others at the same time, the esprit de corps inherent in such team activities often leads to life-long friendship. Today, the priority on academic excellence, modernization and unavoidable western influence have brought with them their woes and bad influence. The luxury of life has perpetuated a sedentary lifestyle in most Singa- poreans and some of us are crumbling under work and family pressures. Our children and youth are caught up in the high-paced pursuit of academic excellence. Consequently, there is a lack of exercise resulting in obesity and lack of proper physical and motor development in them. I recollect there were three articles in the Straits Times sometime in August 1988 which reflect the situation of our children's plight at the primary school age who are overweight. I know the Ministry is looking into ways and means of how to improve in this area. It is indeed timely that the recommendations made by the Sports and Recreation Advisory Committee be looked into seriously and, if possible, to implement them as soon as possible. And for sports to make an impact in any society, it must start from the very young. Sports and its benefits must be introduced and taught to our children right from the home, from pre-primary school, or if need to, throughout the secondary school. Then the interests and habits of participation will be carried through the child's later years and society as a whole will definitely benefit. Sir, I understand that schools plan their Extra curricular activities programme which, while providing for health and enjoyable sports and recreation activities, may also teach pupils skills in a particular game or sport and at the same time cultivating in them great values and desirable social attitudes and habits which I have just mentioned earlier. The question is, are there sufficient qualified physical education teachers and adequate facilities available to cater for the various needs and interests of our young pupils? I understand, Sir, that the number of activities a school provides for its pupils depends upon the availability of expertise among its staff members, availability of facilities within the school premises and the interests of the pupils themselves. However, I am happy to note that the Physical Education College has been established and new intakes of trainees are undergoing full-time courses, but it will take some time before we are able to produce enough qualified physical education teachers to be sent to all our primary schools. I do hope that more and better facilities are available when new primary schools are being built in the next five to 10 years. By and large the most important factor to succeed in sports promotion is the acceptance and encouragement by parents and society as a whole, and this is the best guarantee for a sporting future for the whole generation. If our children are given opportunities to learn to practise the basic elements of movement, if the young have the chance to use them in a wide variety of sports and games, and enjoy doing them, then sports for a lifetime will be assured. As it is mandatory for male youths to undergo national service, there is an inevitable need for them to be fit and strong for the physical and mental demands of military training. The experience I gained when I was in the Armed Forces is that for those trainees who were sports enthusiasts in their schools find no difficulty in adapting themselves to the rigorous military training. It is only when you are fit you are confident; when you are confident you can do your work better. One way of ensuring this is to inculcate in : em, from young, the habit of indulging in sports or any other type of outdoor activities such as adventure training, orienteering, canoeing and the like. Perhaps our youth groups that we have in the various community centres should seriously consider the promotion of sports in their activities besides all the other social activities. When our youth enter adulthood, they will immediately be part of our workforce. Whether in the office or the factory they are playing an important economic role that demands a healthy body and a healthy mind. As a reservist, these workers have to maintain a certain level of fitness as they have to be prepared for any eventuality at any time. One way of maintaining this condition of mental and physical efficiency is by encouraging them to continue participating in sports. The many intangible values of sports provide tremendous benefit to the individual and the company he is working for. From research conducted in the developed countries, sports in industries seems to increase productivity, reduce turnover and absenteeism, and even boost the morale of the employees. Studies have also shown that sports can help to relieve the tedium and tensions of work and reduce feelings of alienation and apathy between employer and employee. In this respect, I know there are some industries, some big companies have already provided facilities for their staff to do physical training or recreational activities, but I would like to urge more companies, especially the big ones, to provide these amenities for their staff and employees. Mr Speaker, Sir, we have been reminded again and again that Singapore is a small country. We have only human resources to talk about. Whether the population is fit and healthy, or unfit, will sooner or later become a question of national concern. The need for sport and physical fitness cannot be over-emphasized if we are to enjoy a more meaningful and fulfilling life and become a middle class society and continue to work together to build a nation of excellence. Sir, I support the motion.

Sir, I do hope that you do not consider long speeches a sporting event. I would like to thank you for giving me this opportunity to thank the President for his address. The first sentence of the President's Address says it all - "My Government's goal is to create a better life for all Singaporeans." Who can disagree? But then goals are mere statements and they can only become flesh if the appropriate policies, and the rules and the regulations are put in place for their implementation. And that, Sir, is my area of concern - the rules and regulations of the Government Ministries and the various departments. Sir, firstly I believe that Singapore has perhaps more rules and regulations affecting our daily lives when compared to most other countries. This is not surprising as living closely together in a high density city nation such as Singapore, especially when more than 80% of our population are HDB residents, obviously requires more laws, more rules and more regulations to ensure some form of harmonious relationship amongst our residents. Otherwise, there may be disorder, chaos and anarchy. In fact, Sir, in themselves, rules and regulations may not be necessarily bad. For example, let us examine the regulation relating to the HDB policy of allocating flats on a "first-come first-served" basis. Is it a bad policy because it does not consider the housing needs of individual applicants? The rules are very clear; an earlier applicant will have his flat before a later applicant even though it can be shown that the later applicant has a more pressing need for a house than the earlier one. Sir, does this mean that the Government is not caring? Perhaps so, if you consider that the current policy gives very little weightage to the personal housing needs of applicants. However, if we examine closely, we will see that it is not that simple. A system based on needs must obviously give rise to the question of what need comes first. For example, should a couple intending to get married come before a family wanting to upgrade from a smaller unit to a bigger one, and how can we differentiate between two or more different types of needs? Furthermore, a system based on qualitative factors would normally also provide fertile ground for corruption. In fact, I believe that it is precisely to eliminate this problem of corruption that the HDB first imposed the "first-come first-served" policy. Sir, I have taken a bit of time to show that it is not the rules per se that are of concern. But it is the attitude, the philosophy of the rule makers, it is the manner that these rules and regulations are applied to the people, these are the real concerns. These concerns are due to what I call the "cement bucket" syndrome and the "cast-in-stone" syndrome in the civil service. Let me explain what these syndromes are. Let us say that the Government has a new policy and the objective of this policy is to transport water from one place to another. However, only a bucket is available. Let us also assume there are some holes in the bucket. But even with these holes it is still possible to transport about 75% of the water, losing about 25% along the way due to leakage. However, like all good civil servants, this leakage is not acceptable to the rule makers. There should be no leakages. There should be no abuses. So the holes, the loopholes, must be plugged, whatever happens. Unfortunately, there is only cement. Never mind, use the cement. Before long, you find that every hole is plugged and now the bucket is half-filled with cement. Obviously the carrying capacity has dropped from 75%, even with leakages, to only 50%. Furthermore, with cement, it is now heavier and instead of originally only one civil servant needed to operate the system, now it requires two or more. But the civil servants are now happy since the rules and regulations have plugged all the loopholes. So there is no way the policy can be abused. Never mind the drop in the carrying capacity. Never mind the heavier bucket, the extra rules and regulations. Never mind even the additional manpower needed. The important thing is that no abuse is possible. What about the 50% efficiency? No worry. Who knows that it could be at 75% because it is an either/or type of situation? The second concern - that of applying the rules and regulations to the general public - in fact is related to the "cement bucket" syndrome. It is called the "cast-in-stone" syndrome. When applying the rules and regulations, ie, the "cement bucket", there will be situations not envisaged by the rule makers, simply because no set of man-made regulations can foresee the million and one situations that may arise in the future. However, since the regulations must be applied as established, no flexibility is permitted. We must either follow the regulations or else, "I am sorry. You just cannot have it." no matter what the peculiar or particular circumstances are. This is the "cast-in-stone" syndrome. The rules are cast in stone. There should be no, and there shall be no abuse of the system. Sir, we all know that R & R are necessities - I mean rules and regulations. But the way they are applied can either make Singapore a gracious society or a living hell for us who are confronted with Government bureaucracy in almost every facet of our lives. I would like to urge the Government to seriously address these concerns. In fact, I believe they are the main contributory factors to the charge that Singapore is a controlled society, that the atmosphere in Singapore is stifling and oppressive. People do understand reasons. They just do not want to be told what to do just because the rules tell them to do. Explain to them the rationale for an action. They will understand. Sir, for a start, I would like to recommend that every Government department establish a 3R Committee (Rules and Regulations Review Committee) whose sole purpose is to ensure that every rule and every regulation justifies its relevance and, hence, justifies its existence. It is a start towards the establishment of more humane regulations which will be relevant to today's conditions. It is a spring cleaning of our irrelevant regulations. It is another step along the way to a more gracious society and in the President's own words "a better life for all Singaporeans".

I think we will call it a day. Debate to be resumed on what day, Mr Tarmugi?

Tomorrow, Sir.

Resolved, That Parliament do now adjourn. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. Adjourned accordingly at Eleven Minutes to Five o'clock pm.

asked the Minister for National Development whether there are plans to redevelop the old housing estates in the Tiong Bahru GRC and when these plans are likely to be implemented.

A number of sites in Tiong Bahru GRC will be available for redevelopment by the HDB once the vacant rental blocks are demolished. HDB is working out a comprehensive redevelopment plan for these sites. The first redevelopment project is likely to be implemented in 1990. text - ADVICE OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL ON THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE'S JUDGMENT IN PRIVY COUNCIL APPEAL NO. 10 OF 1988 - JOSHUA BENJAMIN JEYARETNAM v THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE (Cols. 361 - 364)