(Paper Cmd. 4 of 1996)
Sir, I would like to thank Members who spoke yesterday for their many thoughtful comments. The issues that were raised concern Internet, censorship, the nature of our society. These issues are fundamental ones and to many of which I must confess that I have no answer. But we should never stop talking about them because they are issues which affect us at our core and it is in the debates and discussions that we discover and define ourselves. First, let me talk about Internet. Internet has got many properties. It is both a tool for communication and also a tool for broadcasting. I find it helpful to see it along a whole continuum - communication at one end, narrow casting becoming broader and broader to broadcasting at the other end. At the communication end, I am not really interested in regulating Internet - for private E-mail, individual Web pages which are used more for communication purposes. These are like telephone lines, fax machines, the articles that go through the postal system. Intelligence agencies may be interested in what goes on inside but this is really not MITA's concern. Our concern in broadcasting is what goes on at the other end - in the kind of broadcast communication that has got mass impact and it is only at that end that we are interested in regulating Internet. Mr Chew Heng Ching, Dr Koh Lip Lin, Mr Chng Hee Kok, Dr Ho Tat Kin and Dr Wang Kai Yuen are all concerned that we do not over-regulate or overkill. MITA and SBA are very mindful of this, which is why we have waited over a year to regulate, and even now our approach is to do only what is essential and doable and move in a tentative way, testing the water as we go along, one foot at a time. In the area of politics and religion, it is better that we mark out boundaries more clearly. This will help to ensure more responsible discussion. It will ensure accountability and those groups which put out Web pages for the purposes of discussing politics and religion in Singapore, whose intention is to broadcast, we will require them to register. Otherwise the participants can easily get carried away. Many of us have scanned through the newsgroup soc-culture Singapore. So much rubbish on it, everything is on it, it is like reading graffiti in a public toilet. Some postings are serious, many are not, most are anonymous, people get carried away, extremities and obscenities. This was the point raised by Mr Sinnakaruppan yesterday that because of anonymity, people are tempted to become irresponsible and outrageous. Discussions are often better when people have to put their names to it. We are not trying to stop discussion. In any case, this cannot be done. What we want to do is to mark out the areas so that discussion on politics and religion in Singapore can take place in a way that does not undermine moral values, political stability or religious harmony in Singapore. I must say that I was the one who got the Young PAP to start the first political Web page and am also determined that we should regulate ourselves. Otherwise, in an election campaign, our party supporters can easily get carried away and then I think the tone of the debate during the campaign will be a poorer one. So too religious groups. If everyone knows that no one is allowed to be extremist then everyone remains moderate. But the moment one or two groups decide to go extremist, then it puts enormous pressure on the other groups to answer and respond in equal measure. Even discussion within Web pages should be regulated as otherwise the political parties will say, "Look. These are not my comments. These are things which are said by the way." Then very quickly, they will degrade. I think it is best we treat these Web sites like newspapers or newsletters. The problems of smut and criminal activities were mentioned by Mr Chew Heng Ching, Mr Peh Chin Hua, Mr Sinnakaruppan and many other MPs. The solution here is to sweep every day. We sweep our frontyard and backyard every day. The moment we stop sweeping the dirt will come in and, as Mr Peh said, into our own homes. A lot of it is symbolic. Because the act of sweeping tells our children that this is dirt which we do not like to see. We may not be 100% successful, we may not even be 50% successful. But the act of sweeping itself makes a strong point. And it would help a lot too if all of us who live on the same street in cyberspace also sweep. Then we get a cleaner street. Which is why at the recent ASEAN Ministers' Meeting on Information we persuaded the other countries that we should meet from time to time to discuss how to concert and coordinate the regulation of Internet and they are interested because they confront the same problems that we face. Their Members of Parliament are as concerned as we are as to the impact of Internet on their societies. SBA will, of course, learn from the experiences of other countries and cooperate with whoever is prepared to cooperate with us. The key really is to protect the young. Adults travel anyway, they can look after themselves. But the young are vulnerable, we should not expose them unnecessarily, particularly in the early years. 12.45 pm Recently, I met Nicholas Negroponte from Media Labs, MIT. He comes down, I think, twice a year because we have got an interest in Media Labs. I explained to him what we are trying to do and I asked him for his feedback because he is an expert in this area. And he said that, in the end, the key is the family. We cannot watch our children all the time. We cannot police them all the time. We cannot tell them to stay away from the telephone or the computer. But by the way we signal approval and disapproval, by the way we accentuate what is good and criticise what is bad, every day from a young age, we send certain signals to our children and this is what we must do. Net Nannies and surf watchers are not 100% effective. But by the fact that we install them and we tell our children that these things are important, we are telling them, "Look, please remember these things are not good for us." It is a continuous battle. And we must make the point that in community centres, schools, libraries, cybercafes, some precautions are taken to ensure that there is no blatant flouting of the law. It is a cat and mouse game and the battles are endless. We are bringing Internet under the SBA. There is no need to amend the SBA Act because when we passed it last year, we anticipated this problem. But at the time, we did not want to act because the problem was not yet clear. Our approach is to regulate by exception. In other words, most sites are deemed licensed because you either originate in Singapore or you are concerned with what goes on in Singapore. But we will only monitor closely a few dozen sites. This we can do. This will not be beyond our capabilities. And we will work closely with the Internet access providers and Internet service providers on practical workable solutions. We will take one step at a time and learn as we go along. Existing laws like the Films Act and the Undesirable Publications Act will have to be amended to include items like CD-ROMs. And we have an Inter-Ministry Committee chaired by my Deputy Secretary which includes legal experts from the AG's Chambers. Dr Soin asked whether her site will have to be registered. I think Dr Soin's site will be deemed licensed under our new regulations. Individual sites intended for political, religious or social purposes, in other words, with the intention to broadcast, will be deemed to come under the SBA Act. Dr Soin is an NMP. If she belongs to a political party and is clearly using her site to circumvent our rules for political partisan purposes, then SBA may tell Dr Soin, "What you are operating is, in fact, a political Web site and can you please register?" But since Dr Soin is an NMP, I do not think the issue arises. The entire field is changing very rapidly and our regulatory framework will evolve with it. The implications are vast. This IT revolution would change the world. It is like other new technologies which have shaken human civilisations in the past, like fire, printing, nuclear energy. This IT revolution is a force for both good and evil, two-edged. Therefore, it is a moral challenge which all societies must respond to. But I am not pessimistic. When I talked about eventually regulating Internet a year ago, many foreign journalists sneered at us. Since then, many governments are taking action. Many of these actions may not succeed like the law passed by the US Senate. That law would be challenged in the US Supreme Court and is not likely to clear the US Supreme Court. In fact when I spoke to Negroponte, he said that it was a law crafted to be thrown out by the US Supreme Court and he had said so publicly. And this being US election year, the exercise was for political purposes. So the President also signed it, everyone knowing full well that the US Supreme Court would then have to provide a check. In the end, even the US will have to regulate. Every human society must find its own balance and civilisation is only possible when we maintain certain taboos against incest, bestiality, paedophilia and other materials which inflame primordial emotions or hatreds. But beyond that, I think there is another reason why Internet would eventually be regulated. Because it must be financed. For Internet to grow, businesses must be transacted. People must be able to derive revenue from it. For trade and economic interactions to take place, you need to protect property, you need contracts, you need enforcement. In other words, what is needed to do business in the real world will also be needed eventually to do business in cyberspace. Otherwise, who is going to make sure that you pay up or that you are not stealing property. And we must never forget that however people may think that cyberspace allows them to circumvent temporal authority, never under-estimate the determination of the tax collector to demand his cut. And it is not just Singapore which worries about this, I think all tax authorities around the world are studying this problem. Mr Sinnakaruppan's proposal for a National Internet Advisory Committee is a good one and MITA will consider it. Mr Philip Yeo already chairs an Internet Promotion Committee but we do need an Advisory Committee which looks at cyberspace from all perspectives. Dr Soin's fear that the old will become obsolete is a real one. But, in fact, there is no reason why older Singaporeans cannot learn. Senior Minister's interest in this technology has, in fact, inspired many grandfathers to follow suit. And I think there are any number of grandfathers in Singapore today who are hammering and clicking away on their PCs. But those who are unwilling or, for some reasons, unable to learn this technology will be at a disadvantage. They will be like people who cannot read. Many MPs spoke about the need for some kind of censorship. Some were opposed to it. Mr Peh Chin Hua was in favour of introducing V-chips. Dr Ho Tat Kin talked about the worldwide Web page consortium rating Web pages. These are like film classification. They are ways by which we grade materials so that parents and teachers can protect the young. But, of course, we must remember that in the narrow-cast world, standards will vary from family to family and really the decision will have to be made in the family. But taking all these into account, MITA and SBA will move in that general direction of rating materials. If the V-chip is useful, we will introduce the V-chip. But, today, our most important V-chip is really the SBA. As for enforcement, our priority is to go after those who produce and distribute, and not individuals, because there are too many individuals and it is not practical. The laws of the land apply even in cyberspace. Last year, at this Budget debate, I talked about stiffening penalties against distribution of obscene material, especially video tapes in housing estates. However, since then, there has been a significant improvement because residents have been reporting, response has been swift and the judges have been stricter in meting out sentences. The cases have fallen significantly from 1994 to 1995. We are therefore reviewing the need to increase penalties or to make the presumption that those who possess five or more copies are automatically deemed to be distributors. The key to developing our immune system is what is in our community, in our culture, in our educational system, in what we expect of each other. If only MITA is concerned about this and adults are against MITA or SBA, then we will fail. But if adult Singaporeans support what we do, then what we do is little more than the common expression of what the community wants, then we will succeed. This cannot be only a top-down effort. Many MPs have spoken about television, newspapers, the multi-media industry. The entire industry has developed much faster than we had expected. Dr Wang Kai Yuen was absolutely right that, last year, when I talked about the growth of Internet, I severely under-estimated. So, too, did I severely under-estimate the pace at which the broadcast industry would change. But I assure Mr Chew Heng Ching that it is our objective to make Singapore a multi-media hub and we can only be a multi-media hub, if our regulatory framework is a reasonable one. It is not arbitrary, attacks real problems and not too kiasu. In the last two years, we have been quite successful and, as Mr Chew said, political conditions are favourable to Singapore assuming that position in Asia. So many satellite broadcast companies have set up shop in Singapore and are uplinking from Singapore, including HBO, Disney, ESPN, ABN, MTV, BBC, and so on. In fact, there are so many now that I do not know some of their names. What we are doing for the moment is we are exploiting regulatory rigidities in China and in India. China does not want Hong Kong to be the uplink hub. So that business has come to us. India has also been very strict. So we have businessmen coming down from Tamil Nadu with suitcases full of video cassettes. They are played in Singapore, sent up to the satellite and beamed back to India. That business will eventually be gone but, for the time being, we are benefiting. But what is important is we are now seeing the development of an industry in Singapore, more money, more talents coming in. We are also cabling up the whole of Singapore. Over 80,000 households are now wired up and an additional 20,000 a month. IT 2000 is being realised and we have attracted considerable international interests from around the world. Our television stations, TCS, TV12 and our radio stations, RCS, have made some progress. They have learned from their mistakes and I thank MPs in the last few years for being critical and being very helpful with their suggestions. This year, there have been a few praises and I thank MPs for those praises too. I thank, in particular, those MPs who sit on the various advisory committees in different languages. There is a different spirit now in TCS and in TV12. They are attracting good people. They are more commercially minded and I think they are better placed to compete in a multi-channel world. But there are still a lot of problems. Quality is not good enough. Mr Peh Chin Hua's proposal for us to attract overseas talent is a good one and it is, in fact, being done. Many of those Hong Kong stars, he mentioned by name, are in fact already Singapore PRs. But for their own reasons, they do not want to make it public. Just the other night at the Fame award ceremony, I spoke to one of our local actresses who acted in the serial with a famous Hong Kong male star. So I asked her, "Was it a good experience?" and she said very much so. The Hong Kong stars know a lot of tricks which our people, starting later, are not aware of and through the interaction, they learn a lot. So we will continue to encourage international stars to come to Singapore to work with our own stars and, if they wish, to make Singapore a second home. TCS is thinking of a second Chinese channel. I am not quite sure how it will be financed. But if it is viable, then MITA will certainly support it. I would like to assure Mr Chew Heng Ching that there has been no drop in Government grant to public service broadcasting. He cited the FY95 figure being higher, but the reason is because that number included funds for external TV and video services. If you take away those funds for the external services, in fact there was a slight increase in Government funding from FY95 to FY96. In fact, there is already a formula which has been agreed to between MITA and the Finance Ministry, which is that whatever we are able to collect in TV and radio licence fees, the Finance Ministry will add an additional 15%. In the past, there were a lot of disagreements about how the accounting was done and it led to unnecessary bureaucratic disputes between the two Ministries. This formula was agreed to between Dr Hu and myself. It is simple. It is workable and I think it should see us through for a number of years to come. 1.00 pm Cable TV and Internet will transform our society, and choices will be available to Singaporeans as never before. In a few years' time, television will be available on Internet, quite high quality, and then the choices are well nigh infinite. The important thing is for our national broadcasters to be able to hold their position as national broadcasters. Otherwise, we will have no means by which to laugh and cry together and to share common experiences as Singaporeans. But with cable, all kinds of possibilities arise - interactive TV, distance learning, business, banking, anything which the marketing imagination can dream up. We conducted a trial recently with Internet on cable. It increases the speed of local access 1,000 times. The problem will no longer be bandwidth within Singapore. The problem will be bandwidth out of Singapore. But even that will be resolved in a few years' time. Many Singaporeans do not realise, at this point in time, that in a few years' time, being cabled up is as important as having water, electricity and telephone lines in the home. You would not be able to live without it. Of course, there will be implementation problems. My Parliamentary Secretary, Mr Maidin, chairs a working group to solve problems on the ground. The free channel which SCV is providing, I think, will help to sweeten the inconveniences resulting from cabling. But in the end, providing cable TV to every household in Singapore will enhance both our internal communication and our economic competitiveness in the world. It is much better than having satellite TV which is limited in scope, which does not allow two-way communication and, in an emergency, will not enable the SAF or other national authorities to reach every Singaporean in Singapore. Mr Charles Chong asked how we should respond to occasional foreign media criticisms of us. Our policies are clear. We respond only to criticisms which are important and which are repeated in Singapore or enjoy wide access in Singapore. The Western media understand our policies. Many are prepared to live with them, even if they are not happy, which we do not expect them to be anyway. But they can live with them and many feel that they can do business here. For example, Dow Jones, which owns the Asian Wall Street Journal and Far Eastern Economic Review, have set up their TV station for business in Singapore, ABN. They will also enlarge their operations here. Last year, when the Prime Minister was in New York, they hosted him and it was a very friendly meeting. At the end of last year, their Chairman and CEO, Peter Kann, came down here to attend a newspaper publishers' meeting. We met. He was friendly. I think others will come to the same conclusion that while we are strict and tough, we are reasonable. We are not arbitrary. We are completely predictable. Just do not interfere in the domestic politics of Singapore. Even the BBC, which has got large operations here, have recently applied to have their satellite TV uplink from Singapore. On our part, we must try to improve our external presentation. And the foreign media community in Singapore is important to us and we should include them for press briefings and so on. Some Ministries are better at this than others. We are all learning, but I think we are getting better year by year and it has become quite routine now for major announcements. When the Woodlands MRT line was open, the entire foreign media corps was invited. Recently, when I announced Internet regulations, I invited all of them to MITA for a briefing. But, of course, whatever we do, some conflicts and disagreements are unavoidable. Mr Davinder Singh wished that the local media would do more to educate Singaporeans. I think they do try very hard. In fact, some Singaporeans think that they try to educate too much. But it is not a wrong thing to do because we want the next generation to be better than we are. But at the end of the day, if the horse does not want to drink, there is not very much that we can do. I am, however, optimistic because our economy is regionalising and regionalisation will encourage Singaporeans to learn more about Asia. For example, if we look at our common knowledge of Indonesia and China, it has improved tremendously in the last 10 years. That is because economic possibilities have expanded manifold in those two countries. The fact that there is interest in the Taiwan Strait is because it affects us in a major way, and it shakes our stock market. But reporting on Bosnia, which is equally extensive, I think attracts much less attention. Nevertheless, I do share Mr Davinder Singh's wish for the media to continue educating Singaporeans. Let me now turn to public libraries. After the Library 2000 Report, we are now embarked on a massive library expansion programme. We expect to spend well over $1 billion in the next eight years on the new National Library building, on regional libraries, community libraries and children's libraries. And promoting reading is an important library programme. Tampines Regional Library is a good prototype. It involves the local community. There is a strong sense of ownership now in Tampines New Town about that library. It makes extensive use of information technology. The next regional library will be at Woodlands and it should be ready in 1999. In the meantime, the National Library Board is looking for temporary rental space so that immediate facilities can be provided. Later, other regional libraries will be built at Jurong East and Seletar. The new National Library at Victoria Street will be a regional library for the city area. The community library at Jurong West is in a shopping complex. This is an experiment. We are not quite sure how well it will work. It may. If it does, we will proliferate such libraries. And within five years, we will have community libraries built at Yishun, Cheng San, Jurong West and Choa Chu Kang. I understand Dr Koh Lip Lin's disappointment, but I assure him that the Yishun community library will be built by 1999, subject of course to MOF's approval, which I do not expect to be a problem. And it may be sooner if we can find a good space to rent temporarily. The children's libraries have been very successful. We now have 10. We intend to build 8-10 more a year. The project is a joint one between the National Library and the PAP Community Foundation. We are prepared to work with other Foundations as well. I thank Mr Chiam See Tong for his enthusiastic support for children's libraries and I assure him that our objective is eventually to proliferate them all over Singapore. In fact, we are targeting 100 and at least one will be in Potong Pasir, or close to it. But we do not build libraries by electoral constituencies. Our libraries will make extensive use of information technology and we are now working on linking up with other libraries in the world. I was at the San Francisco Public Library a few months ago and the chief librarian there, who has been to Singapore before and knows what we are trying to do, is a consultant to us. He is keen for a link-up between us and them so that members in Singapore can access their database in San Francisco and vice versa. They already have such an arrangement with the New York Public Library. Eventually, I see our National Library system being linked up to other major library networks in the world, and this will really meet the Library 2000 vision of borderless libraries. Let me now turn to the points raised by many MPs on how to make Singapore a more gracious society and how to better promote the arts and heritage in Singapore. As Mr Chew and Mr Davinder Singh pointed out, this is an area which cannot be made to happen like that. We are not building physical infrastructure. We are trying to change fundamentally what is in our culture. Any change must come from within. If all we do is to respond to carrots and sticks, then we are only donkeys. It is only when the values and the habits are ingrained within ourselves and passed on to our children that we can say that we have progressed. It is basically a problem of education, of culture, of social standards. And we must admit that there is a side of ourselves that we do not like when we see ourselves in the mirror. This grabby instinct, this kiasu spirit, this rush for free textbooks because they are free, that is not good. Two years ago when we had a courtesy campaign, we gave everyone a mirror. People laughed and smiled when they saw what it meant. When we had the advertisement on TV showing how we were grabbing things at buffets, people responded to it. And the fact that we laugh at kiasuism in Singapore, I think it is a good sign. Because in that laughter is a certain admission and a certain desire to be better. Of course, this will take time. In the recent Economist article on Business in Asia, there was a chart showing Singapore's per capita GDP, on a purchasing power parity basis, being comfortably above the OECD average. On a per capita income basis, we are very well off. We are first world. But at the cultural level, I think we are still very much third world, and we need another generation or two to put this right. It will take some time before we become like the New Zealanders. I think many of us have been to New Zealand and it is always wonderful to meet ordinary New Zealanders when we drive from North Island to South Island and to see how gracious they are, how prepared they are to play with our children and so on. It comes very naturally to them. It may be in their history. Maybe it is in their geography. Maybe it is living among sheep. But there is something about them which I think is very endearing, and if we can have a little of that in Singapore, then we will like ourselves better and we will be a better people. But we are making progress. Every year, courtesy campaign surveys show that Singaporeans do notice some progress. And this year, the Prime Minister has agreed to launch the courtesy movement. The courtesy committee chaired by Mr Noel Hon is keen on starting what the Japanese have done for some years, a small kindness movement. It is nothing dramatic, nothing heroic, but just to pass the message to young people and to not-so-young people that "let us do a little bit every day". The day is not done until we have taken our vitamins and brushed our teeth and done our exercise and also have done a good deed. It can just be a smile. It can just be a helping hand. It can be just holding a lift door until someone else can come in. Right now Singaporeans will press the "close" button when they see someone coming in. It is atrocious behaviour. What we want is a courtesy movement which is not just another campaign but a civic movement, welling up from below and spreading the message in the grassroots. I think it is something doable and if we persist year by year, it will get better. 1.15 pm On the arts, we are making some progress and I thank many Members for their kind words and for their constant support, and their constant plea to the Finance Minister to provide more funding. But in fact there is a lot of public funding, both direct and indirect, and it is not just the budget for NAC which we should look at. There is also indirect funding of NAFA, of LaSalle, of the Singapore Indian Fine Arts Society. In fact, since last year, we give partial funding to students who do courses in LaSalle and NAFA equivalent to polytechnic courses, for those who could have gone into polytechnics. The Education Ministry supported the Finance Ministry in giving these two institutes 50% of what we would have to spend on their students had they gone to a polytechnic. This has really raised the morale of both NAFA and LaSalle. The Tote Board's funding of the Esplanade, which is a very expensive project, should also not be forgotten. We are spending money on all these new museums. We allow for double tax deductibility for objects given to the museum and there are many other things being done to teach, to promote, to popularise. In fact, there is now development on a broad front and it has become an organic character. We no longer depend on just one or two individuals to keep things going. In the old days, without Brother McNally there would have been no LaSalle. Without Kuo Pao Kun there would have been no Substation. Without Choo Huey there would have been no SSO. Without Anthony Then there would have been no SDT. Today, we are able to move on and the organisations they have created now have lives of their own and that must give them a certain satisfaction. I would like here to record my tribute to them: to maestro Choo Huey for giving the best years of his life to the SSO. He has retired recently and is still a guest conductor and enjoys emeritus status, but he has done a very good job. Without Anthony Then - he died an untimely death - the SDT would not be what it is today. Without Brother McNally there will be no LaSalle. Without Kuo Pao Kun the magic of the Substation would not be possible. But I like Dr Soin's idea of an endowment fund which the Finance Minister would top up from time to time. I would certainly convey her proposal to Dr Hu. I share Mr Kenneth Chen's impatience with the development of the arts. I think both he and I wish that it could be faster. But let me clarify some of the points he raised. Empress Place Museum was closed because of renovation works. The building is an old building. The first renovation work was not well carried out. It suffers from rising damp and leaks. The plasters are flaking off. So we are undertaking a major renovation job. It will be a few more years before it is ready. When it is reopened, it will become part of the Asian Civilizations Museum. It is not true that SSO and museum attendances have been dwindling. In fact, they have been rising steadily. But audiences have become more discriminating and they are also prepared to pay for good productions when they come. We are very short of good halls. During weekends and public holidays, it is very difficult to get a hall and very often you have got to book one to two years in advance. So I have no doubt that when the Esplanade halls are ready, they will be put to good use. On the Esplanade, its design is now in the final stages and many details have still to be finalised. We hope to unveil the full design to the public next year. The roofscape will be quite interesting. The architects are now working on a solution consisting of discrete elements consisting of folded pieces, probably of anodized aluminium, closely aligned and overlapping at the top to make it opaque, and then as you come down, diverging gradually to let in the sun and to open up views of the city and the waterfront from the inside. Using sophisticated computer modelling, the roofscape will be shaped and textured to take into account the direction of the sun in the course of the day and the direction of the monsoons in the course of the year. I should not say anything more because it will take away the excitement from the unveiling next year. The key to all our efforts is what is within us. If we are gracious, if we affect interest in the arts, purely for economic reasons, if we smile in order to sell a few more trinkets to visiting tourists, then we have not succeeded and that is not really what we want. We want whatever graciousness we have, whatever artistic sense we have, to emanate from within. Otherwise, it is all superficial. My greatest worry is that our young lack a sense of culture and lack a sense of their own history. In many ways, we are a young society. So we have got to do many things as we mature. The key always is to start young because the early inculcation of values is the most fundamental. Long ago, other societies have recognised this. The Jesuits have long known that if you educate a child in a particular way up to the age of 12, you have got that person for life. The Muslims understand this. When we go round the housing estates in the evening, young children wearing their bajus, sarongs and caps would be shepherded to attend religious classes. They would not understand most of what is taught, but it stays with them in a way which at that age they do not appreciate. When they are teenagers, young adults, they may stray away. But come middle age, they go for their umrah, the haj, they put their caps back on, they re-visit the mosque. The Chinese have also understood this from the earliest days, which is why the teaching of the classics starts very young. During the Sung Dynasty, they were teaching the young children the san zi jing, ren zhi chu, xing ben shan ( ) and so on, words which are not a problem for young children to parrot because at that age the memory operates like fly paper. It is in the rhyme. It is easy to remember and in those few hundred lines they learn everything, about the importance of family, filial piety, loyalty. They study the history of China, they learn about the si shu liu jing ( ), which later became wu jing ( ), from the three emperors, two sovereigns and three kings, down the dynasties to modern China. In other words, if we transmit these values when our children are young, even when they do not fully understand, they will never forget that they are Christians or Muslims or Chinese or Indians, or whatever. Then it does not matter what this information revolution does to us, how the hurricane swirls, because we are firmly anchored in our own heritage. We have made some progress. For some time I have been attending the annual commemoration at the Civilian Memorial on 15th February held by the Chambers of Commerce and every year the crowd gets older and more wispy. But from three years ago I began to see school children re-appearing and these last two years they also carry wreaths. This year, over a thousand turned up. Mr Kwek Leng Joo who chairs the Committee was very pleased and he is thinking of ways to get the school children to take over part of the ceremony. So it is not a lost cause. Some things do get transmitted, sometimes in ways that we ourselves do not understand. The National Heritage Board has done a lot. They have marked many spots. I used to run along Changi Beach, where once upon a time many years ago, many batches of young Chinese males were sent there to be machine gunned on the beach. So I told the National Heritage Board, "We must mark it." So now if you go there, the little marker, discreet, waist height, in black, gold letters in four languages, it is like an icon. You stop, you look at it, click on to it mentally, a whole world opens in your mind. This is what we want to have among young Singaporeans, that they have a sense of where they came from, that however the world changes, certain things are fixed. This is what the yi jing ( ) teaches us, that however the world may change, the fundamentals are the same and the most important thing is to grasp the fundamentals.