ALL-PARTY COMMITTEE ON CHINESE EDUCATION

Mr Speaker: Order, order. I must first have the general assent of Members present to dispensation with notice under Standing Order No. 23. Have I your assent that this motion can be moved without notice?

Hon. Members indicated assent.

The Minister for Education (Mr Chew Swee Kee): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to move the motion standing in my name,

That this Assembly is of the opinion that a Committee be appointed with the following terms of reference -

'to investigate the situation in Chinese schools in Singapore and to make recommendations for the improvement and strengthening of Chinese education in the interests of Chinese culture and orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence in Singapore';

that the Committee do consist of the following - 1. Mr Chew Swee Kee (Chairman) 2. Mr Richard Chuan Hoe Lim 3. Mr Wong Foo Nam 4. Mr Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat 5. Mr Lim Yew Hock 6. Mr Lee Kuan Yew 7. Mr Goh Tong Liang 8. Mr Lim Cher Kheng 9. Mr M. P. D. Nair; that the Committee have powers to send for persons, papers and records;

that 5 members of the Committee shall form a quorum;

that the Committee do meet inside the Assembly House building.

Hon. Members of this Assembly are, I am sure, aware of the fact that the situation in Chinese schools in Singapore needs an overall investigation to enable the Committee to make suitable recommendations for the improvement of Chinese education, so that this Colony will move towards self-government and ultimate independence in Singapore in an orderly fashion. The question is of such an important and grave nature that I have sought the assent of this Assembly to dispense with the notice, with a view to making it possible for the Committee to go into the question with all speed.

The members of the Committee come from all political Parties that are represented in this House, and I believe they will present different constructive views. It is the Government's intention to seek views from public bodies, any persons interested in education, in fact, from all quarters, to enable the Committee to make recommendations for consideration by the Government.

I am glad to note that the schools concerned, namely the Chung Cheng High School and the Chinese High School, have now resumed normally and that the students have resumed their studies in a normal manner. This will enable the Committee appointed to deliberate on whatever views are submitted to the Committee in an atmosphere of calm and goodwill.

The Chief Minister (Mr D. S. Marshall): Mr Speaker, Sir, I seek the privilege of seconding this motion, and in so doing I seek to clarify our position and our attitude to the recent conduct of students in certain Chinese middle schools.

They have blindly supported and incited strikers without understanding the issues. They have taken part in demonstrations of defiance. Some even have been party to acts of horrible brutality. And finally, Sir, they have blatantly flouted constituted authority.

When Government moved to punish the immediate culprits, these students organised wholesale defiance and, working on the racial emotions of parents and of labour, they threatened further considerable strife without regard to truth or justice, or the welfare of the people of this country. The manoeuvring of Communists behind the scenes had succeeded in bringing about among a decent people strong racial emotions, blindly antagonistic.

Sir, I have a very high regard for the Chinese parent, both the non-British and British subject. He is usually a sober, solid, sensible, peaceable person. That these parents should have been drawn into the vortex of blind emotions was a matter of the deepest concern to us. The punishment of the immediate culprits lost significance in the wider issue - the vital issue - an issue which every member of our Chinese population must now face for himself, must now ask of himself: Is Singapore my permanent home? Am I going to respect the other communities in this territory, and work in harmony and friendship with them, to build a glorious new palace of independence of which I will be a strong and loyal pillar? That is the issue, Sir, that we would like to see resolved in the peace and the calm of the individual's own soul, free from mass demonstrations and mass emotions. It is an issue which must be clearly faced, and frankly answered.

Government has been told - we have been accused - that our action, and our inaction, has undermined authority. We are told that our son has publicly cocked his snook at us, and our other sons stand by wondering at our forbearance, perturbed, even dismayed. Some have cried out that we should use the whip.

Sir, our son is as one who is ill. He lies stricken with the chicken-pox, his body a mass of red spots, and the more we forbid him to scratch, the more he stubbornly scratches, and the more those spots suppurate. What would you have us do? Use a knife to excoriate those red spots? Take down the whip and lash out in a frenzy of hurt pride, and then weep at the damage we have done? This, Sir, is not the time for the whip, or the knife. I have no pride in the face of this illness.

The Chinese people, Sir, are the very heart in our body politic. They are the blood in our veins. To harm them would destroy all. It would destroy forever the glorious future now within our grasp of a free and independent people, working together as brothers in love and in mutual respect. This, Sir, is a time, in our view, for gentle nursing. Age-old Chinese wisdom and Chinese stability, working on a constitution that is basically sound, will restore this son to health, and we will be proud of our Chinese son. Friends think us weak; others call us cowards. They will not deflect us from our vision of a united people.

The task before us, Sir, is a tremendous one - a task to win the confidence of our Chinese people, a people who have had considerable cause for complaint in the past. In humility, and with all we have, we shall seek to gain that confidence and to gain that co-operation which is absolutely necessary for the welfare of all races in this territory.

Sir, a poet once wrote that "Thoughts in hours of insight willed can be in hours of gloom fulfilled." In the days of gloom through which we have passed, our guiding light has been our firm desire to bring to our Chinese people a realisation of their great role in the independent Malaya of tomorrow, a realisation that the rich broad river of Chinese culture is not limited to the present-day political manifestation of their homeland which is based on foreign concepts. It is our hope that they will realise their future is here, in friendship and harmony and loyal co-operation with all races, to build this new nation which is our deepest desire. It is in this spirit that the motion before you is conceived, and it is my privilege, Sir, to second it.

Question proposed.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Speaker, Sir, we would like to assure hon. Members here that the Progressive Party will do its utmost to promote Chinese education and culture. This involves recommendations on a long-term policy, and if the motion moved is strictly in accordance with this aim alone, it will receive our wholehearted support. However, I must point out that the motion today differs from that of a Press release, issued by the Council of Ministers sometime last week. With your indulgence, Sir, I shall read out the relevant part for purposes of comparison. As it stands today, the motion reads thus:

"To investigate the situation in Chinese schools in Singapore and to make recommendations for the improvement and strengthening of Chinese education in the interests of Chinese culture and orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence in Singapore."

The official release is as follows. This release is dated 19th May:

"To investigate the situation in the Chinese schools with a view to making such recommendations for the improvement of Chinese culture which the Committee considers to be desirable in the interests of orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence in Singapore."

It should be noted, Sir, that instead of investigating the situation so as to enable it to give recommendations on a long-term basis for the benefit of Chinese education and culture, the Committee that is to be appointed will now have two terms of reference. One, to investigate the situation in Chinese schools in Singapore; and, two, to make recommendations. We would like the Government to clarify this point and to state the reasons for the necessity for the change of phraseology. Is the Committee to be appointed now responsible not only for the making of recommendations on a long-term basis, which we gladly accept, but also for dealing with any situation that may arise from day to day? On this point, Sir, I must point out that the day-to-day administration is the responsibility of the Government. After all, I think I am right, they are paid for the job!

The present Government is a Labour Front Government -

An hon. Member: Coalition.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: - and not an all-party coalition, and any attempt to utilise the Committee that is to be appointed as a rubber stamp to justify its actions will be resisted by my Party. I will repeat, however, Sir, that if the Government will clarify this point and state clearly that it is not the intention of the motion to make use of this Committee as such, the motion will then receive our support.

Finally, Sir, we would like to seek further clarification on a few other points. Since the motion is one that seeks an opinion, is the Committee one that is appointed by this Assembly, or is it one that is appointed by the Government? Furthermore, to whom will this Committee be responsible? And to whom will it submit its report? Will it submit its report direct to the Government or otherwise?

Mr John Ede (Tanglin): Mr Speaker, Sir, there is one point which I want to bring to the notice of my hon. Friend the Minister for Education for his consideration. He stated that memoranda on the subject of this complex problem of Chinese education sent in by responsible individuals and bodies will be given every consideration by him and his Committee.

I would, however, like to inform him that a number of persons have expressed their fears to me that many may refrain from sending in valuable contributions to the Committee if these have to bear their signature. To take an example: A teacher in a Chinese school, with firm but not necessarily popular ideas, might fear repercussions if he were to forward these ideas under his own name. I would he the first to say most emphatically that such fears should not exist, considering that memoranda will be examined in secret only by hon. Members of this House. But, nevertheless, I think we must not close our eyes to the fact that these fears may exist.

I would, therefore, ask my hon. Friend to consider the advisability of announcing that he will accept unsigned or anonymous memoranda so long as these are obviously constructively and sincerely written, so that no aspect of public opinion may go unrepresented.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to congratulate the Minister for Education in having improved the phraseology of the motion which now lies before this House. Unlike the Member for Serangoon (Mr Lim Choon Mong), I thought it was very prudent of the Minister for Education this morning not to place before the House a term of reference which says "to improve Chinese culture". Sir, I have great regard for the ability and capacity of Members of this House but I should think the improvement of Chinese culture is not one within their power!

I would, however, Sir, like to take this opportunity to express the views of the People's Action Party and of many people, who are not members of the People's Action Party, but who bear similarly strong views on this subject of Chinese and vernacular education in general. In my opinion, if this Committee is not, as is feared by the Member for Serangoon, a rubber stamp to pilot the Government through a somewhat delicate and difficult problem, if it is to be more - if it is to approach a very difficult problem and try to find a long-term solution to this problem, then the terms of reference should be expanded. But before we expand the terms of reference in which - [Interruption.] Before I seek to expand the terms of reference. I must never forget that the Chief Minister has got 18 votes in this House! But before I seek to expand it, I would like to seek to reduce the terms of reference "to investigate the situation in Chinese schools in Singapore, and to make recommendations for the improvement and strengthening of Chinese education in the interests of Chinese culture and orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence in Singapore". Now, Sir, that runs against the whole grain of the People's Action Party, to think of ultimate independence in Singapore as divorced from the wider concept of independence in Malaya, and I would seek to delete the words "in Singapore".

Then I would seek to add "and to review the whole policy of English and vernacular education in Singapore in order to formulate a considered linguistic policy for an independent Malaya".

Sir, the Chief Minister has referred to the fears and uneasiness of a large section of the non-Chinese-speaking population in Singapore and in Malaya at the happenings that he has referred to in recent months. I think there is one basic principle which we must resolve if we are to convince, what the Chief Minister has said, the stolid, sensible and - I forgot his other "s" - the stolid, sensible and -

The Chief Minister: Solid.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: - solid parents if we are to win these parents over and their offsprings, we have to face a very important, if we do not like it, we can call it prejudice - if we are not quite so prejudiced, we can call it -

The Chief Minister: Predilection.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: - predilection; I thank the Chief Minister for his choice of words. But, nevertheless, we must face it. One of the greatest difficulties in instilling confidence in Chinese schools in Malaya is the fear that either the conscious or subconscious policy of the British Government in Malaya is the Anglicization of the Chinese in this country - a policy which may reduce Chinese into a secondary language in their own Chinese schools. It is this basic predilection, but a fact which must be faced, that we must resolve. Before we can resolve that, we must be able to review the whole position and then to decide whither we are going. All this talk of multi-lingualism, all this demand for multi-lingualism, has got wider implications than just voting people whom you like into either the Legislative Chamber or, (now it would appear not), the City and Island Council. It goes right down to the root of our educational policy.

In a free and independent Malaya in which every Chinese, every Indian, every Malay, will no longer be Chinese, Malay or Indian but Malayan, what language or languages shall they speak? What language or languages shall the Government use? What language or languages will be acceptable to the people? What are the language or languages of an independent and democratic Malaya? They are thorny, delicate problems which many politicians would prefer to defer to some other day, when the problem should again reappear in acute form. But I feel if we are to face, to solve, this situation, we must be able to clear our minds, and the minds of the public, in the way that the Chief Minister has said. Where do we stand in this independent Malaya? The Malays want to know. The Indians want to know. And the Chinese want to know. They are all going to be Malayans in this independent Malaya, or they will leave this country. But they all speak their own languages. They all have their own bias.

The policy of the colonial government hitherto - perhaps subconsciously, perhaps even consciously - has been one of Anglicization. Malayanisation has been equated to Anglicization - to produce a Malayan nation by making them all English, or learn English, or learn about Francis Drake and his bowls, and Sir Walter Raleigh and his cloak, and daffodils and buttercups, which they have never seen. This policy I think we must review, and we must reformulate. We cannot resolve the situation in Chinese schools as long as they - the parents, teachers, principals and students - feel that there is a conscious or even subconscious attempt to introduce more and more English into the Chinese schools. They fear one day the Chinese language in Chinese schools will be reduced to a secondary language, as is already happening in Malay schools, where there is this new policy of Malayanisation. I think the Minister for Housing can confirm this - that there was a definite policy to introduce the English language to such an extent in Malay schools that Malay parents were alarmed that their children will no longer be Malays.

Now, Sir, if we allow each community to go on its own way and stir up all these extreme prejudices, then we are going to have a very difficult problem of synthesizing or composing various individual units which may then never merge. But we, I think, unlike the colonial government, cannot afford to ignore basic likes and dislikes - basic facts. One of these basic facts is that no racial or linguistic group in this country will give up its own language, its own culture, its own traditions, completely for either English or any other Anglicized form of Malayan language, culture, or tradition. But we must solve it, and it can be solved. In fact, it is the only way, or we must give up. If we cannot resolve this problem, then we must resign ourselves to a Malaya in which there will be internecine strife for years, and years, and years. I believe there are men with sufficient goodwill and - if I may borrow yet another phrase from the Hon. the Chief Minister - men of stature, in the Chinese, in the Malay, in the Indian and in the other communities, who will be able to rise up to the situation, to rise up to this problem. If you can resolve this point now, in the context of an independent Malaya which we are all going to build, then I say we are opening up the way, we are blazing a new trail. If we cannot, then we have just kept this problem for the future when it would probably reappear in an even more acute and unpleasant form. And it is for this reason that I seek to extend the terms of reference of this Committee.

I think I must remind the Member for Serangoon that there is no danger of this Committee being made use of as a rubber stamp for the Government. Any member of this Committee who feels that the recommendations and deliberations are contrary to his belief, or the belief of his Party, has got the right to dissent. But if this Committee is to do more than just to try and patch up, or to bottle up, the present state of the schools in Singapore, then it must resolve this problem. Is it the policy in Singapore to have English introduced more and more into Malay and Chinese schools? Is it the policy to allow Chinese education to go on uninhibited in a completely Chinese orientated way? Similarly, with Malay and Indian education. Is that the policy of this Government of the Singapore Labour Front - U.M.N.O. - M.C.A. - M.I.C. and Malay Unions? Or is it their policy, with the support of other Parties in this House, to formulate a policy which will last, which will lead us to an independent Malaya?

What is to be the lingua franca - English? Have we decided? Have we made up our minds? Have the people of Singapore and the people of Malaya decided on that? Is the introduction of multi-lingualism the forerunner of riotous confusion, as the Progressive Party so often so riotously expressed it? Or are we in our inarticulate ways trying to resolve a very difficult problem, a problem of building a nation where there are diverse linguistic and cultural groups, where cultural and linguistic susceptibilities are restricted, so that it may fit within the framework of national security, national aspirations? I would not like to suggest what the languages ought to be at this stage of the proceedings of a Committee which is yet to be formed. The problem must be tackled now. It cannot be resolved just by subconsciously carrying on a policy instituted by a colonial government of introducing English into all schools in the hope that, thereby, English would prevail in this country, and, thereby, we would all become Anglicized Malayans. I know the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat) has very strong views on this matter. I do not believe we cannot resolve the suspicion in Chinese schools. The allegation, the charge, is seriously meant, seriously intended - that the British Government is destroying the Chinese language and Chinese culture in these schools. You have to face them. One could shrug, one could laugh it off, as completely ridiculous. But if one does not face this problem, one will never resolve it. In every issue which arises over the schools you will find the management committees, the teachers, the parents, not as active supporters of - if I may borrow a phrase not from the Chief Minister but from His Excellency the Governor - "constituted authority". If you want to find them behind "constituted authority", then they must be satisfied that "constituted authority" is behind the things which they so basically desire.

Sir, I myself have been extremely careful not to commit my Party or myself to any preconceived notions on this subject. All we say is that there is this very delicate problem. It must be dealt with, and it is no use confining ourselves to purely temporary and ephemeral measures which will bring about a lull in these schools, without resolving basic causes. And this is one of the basic causes. There may be others, I do not know. The Committee has not started its deliberations. But I am confident that this is one of the causes and we must resolve it. Whither are we going? Is it going to be a Malaya with a single language imposed on all its subjects? Or is it going to be a Malaya where various languages are allowed to foster and to flourish, but with a common thread running through them, with one lingua franca, or as the Minister for Housing would have it, one national language? What is to be that lingua franca? These are problems which I think we should seriously start to consider.

I do not believe that the Labour Front Government is the people's government. I cannot agree with that because, as the Hon. the Chief Minister will admit, he had, in what I consider more disinterested moments, expressed a contrary view. It is very difficult for him but it is dangerous, this defending of a constitution which was once described as outmoded, because that was the slippery slope at the bottom of which lies the mangled political remains of his once political opponent in Cairnhill. If you want the people to believe those things, then certain radical alterations must be made to the constitution. Perhaps we might start now by trying to show them that we are prepared, that the Chief Minister and his colleagues are prepared, within what I surely will admit are very conscribed limits, to start tackling a very basic problem.

I beg to move this amendment to the motion, and it is my hope that the Government will approach this is amendment, not with an idea that the P.A.P. seeks political advantage, but that the P.A.P. seeks to help the Government resolve a very difficult problem.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng (Changi): Mr Speaker, Sir, before I support the motion, I wish to make it clear to the House -

Mr Speaker: Are you seconding this amendment?

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Yes.

Mr Speaker: Thank you.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Second? - Can I, can I - ?

Mr Speaker: Order, order. I first want a seconder to the amendment proposed. Mr Lim, are you seconding the amendment?

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: No.

Mr Speaker: Then I want a seconder to the amendment, please.

Mr Lim Ching Siong (Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, I rise to second the amendment.

Mr Speaker: The Question was, inter alia,

That this Assembly is of the opinion that a Committee be appointed with the following terms of reference -

`to investigate the situation in Chinese schools in Singapore and to make recommendations for the improvement and strengthening of Chinese education in the interests of Chinese culture and orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence in Singapore';

since which amendments have been proposed to delete the words at the end of that Question, "in Singapore", and to add to the end of that Question the words "and to review the whole policy of English and vernacular education in Singapore in order to formulate a considered linguistic policy for an independent Malaya".

It appears to me, hon. Members, that there are, in fact, two distinct Questions. One of them is not completely dependent on the other. I, therefore, will first propose the Question - that the words "in Singapore" at the end of the Question be left out of the original Question. However, that would not prevent Members from speaking on both of them. I hope I have made myself clear. The Question will be that the words "in Singapore" proposed to be left out at the end of the Question be left out. Members can speak on that Question, as well as on the other Question, which I shall put after we have disposed of the first Question. The Question, therefore, now is that the words "in Singapore" proposed to be left out of the original Question, be so left out.

The Chief Minister: I am happy, Mr Speaker, Sir, to inform the hon. Member opposite that Government will be delighted to accept the suggested deletion. It is somewhat improved language with an eye to neatness. I see that he has used the words "in Singapore" repeatedly. Government does accept the suggestion.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng rose -

Mr Speaker: You are speaking on the amendment, Mr Lim?

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: No.

Mr Speaker: Nobody wishes to speak? Then I put that Question.

Question, "That the words `in Singapore' proposed to be left out, be left out," put, and agreed to.

Mr Speaker: The Question now is that the following words be added to the original Question, which has since been amended to leave out the words "in Singapore". I read out now the original Question as amended. The original Question, as amended, is:

That this Assembly is of the opinion that a Committee be appointed with the following terms of reference -

`to investigate the situation in Chinese schools in Singapore and to make recommendations for the improvement and strengthening of Chinese education in the interests of Chinese culture and orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence'.

The Question now is that the following words be added to the end of that Question: "and to review the whole policy of English and vernacular education in Singapore in order to formulate a considered linguistic policy for an independent Malaya".

The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, I must confess I admire the temerity of the Member for Tanjong Pagar who asks us to lay down a linguistic policy for Malaya without asking the Federation to assist us in that effort, but all seems possible to the Member for Tanjong Pagar. He asks us to expand the terms of reference of this Committee which is now, with its limited reference, viewed with suspicion. It seems the Committee, if given these additional powers, would be beyond suspicion and quite capable of performing its duties but, with the sole question of reference being Chinese education, it must be viewed with suspicion.

I think, Sir, that as far as I can see, this amendment is somewhat of a quibble. If the hon. Member would look a little more carefully at the terms of reference, he would not ask these rhetorical questions with which we have been this morning bombarded. Where are we going? Quo Vadis! What is our aim? Are we going to have Anglicization? Would he look at those last words, "in the interests of Chinese culture and orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence"? So the effort is not merely to strengthen Chinese education, but to strengthen it in the interests of Chinese culture within the framework of orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence.

The Committee, Sir, was chosen with the assistance and at the suggestion of the Committee of Selection of this House, with the particular question of Chinese education in mind, and the terms of reference were so framed that I, for one, though not a Member, would understand that the Members are completely free and, in fact, are compelled, in the interests of strengthening Chinese education within the framework of our movement towards an independent Malaya, to consider not only Chinese education in Chinese schools, but the general education of Chinese pupils in schools teaching Chinese, and within that framework, it seems to me, they would be free to consider and advise on matters of languages to be taught in those schools other than Chinese.

It is my view, Sir, that to seek to burden the Committee with parallel issues of vernacular education in other vernacular schools may impede what we desire in the way of rapidity in recommendations and their early implementation. It is unquestionable, Sir, that this House must be seized of the fact that the question of education in vernacular schools, other than Chinese, is under consideration by Government. The reorganisation of our entire educational system is under consideration, but the recent unhappy incidents, indicating an unhealthy position in a very important sector of our community, make it imperative that we should now move with some rapidity in order to clarify the issue and to see wherein lie our immediate efforts to strengthen Chinese education within the framework of an independent Malaya.

The Member for Serangoon (Mr Lim Choon Mong) expressed the fear that we may be seeking to use the Progressive Party as a rubber stamp for our day-to-day problems. Now, Sir, I will confess that I have a high regard for the abilities of the Progressive Party as a rubber stamp, but I can assure them, and every Member of this House, that this Government does not use rubber stamps and has no need for them and, I hope, never will. I am happy to inform the Member for Serangoon that the idea is for long-term recommendations in order to strengthen Chinese education, to strengthen discipline within those schools, and to aim at fusing strong differing cultures into one whole - what my friend opposite, the Member for Tanjong Pagar, describes as synthesising the various cultures.

I must confess it is with some surprise that I heard the Member for Tanjong Pagar again speak of the suspicion that we seek to destroy Chinese culture by Anglicization. The Committee, Sir, consists of nine members, of whom seven are Chinese, and eight of them were returned by the people in open elections. Apart from the impossibility of seeking to destroy culture which has survived, I am reliably informed, for seven thousand years, it seems to me the height of absurdity that there should be such a suggestion levelled against such a body, and if so levelled, I cannot see how the expansion of the terms of reference would in any way give it a better basis for working.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: On a point of clarification, Sir. I did not suggest that the suspicion exists against the Committee which this House will this day constitute. I say this suspicion existed and still exists against the educational authorities of the former Colonial Government and the present Colonial Government cum Labour Front Government.

The Chief Minister: Sir, I must confess to a certain amount of, shall I say, unhappiness at the thought that there is anybody of intelligence in this country who would, for one single moment, imagine that the Coalition Government of this territory has any such ideas in mind. All our efforts have been directed toward the interests of the people, and at no time, despite our short life, have we failed them or showed any indication of what is called a colonial Anglicized outlook. However that may be, speaking now, Sir, on the amendment, I cannot see that the burdening of this Committee with the additional terms would, in any way, assist this body in coming to some clear decision on the policy it is necessary to formulate for the future of Chinese education within this territory. I feel, and I hope hon. Members here will agree, that the terms of reference are clear and that the Committee may, if it so feels inclined, recommend features of education in schools dedicated to teaching Chinese students in Chinese as well as in other matters, that they can indicate the languages which they think should be taught, and I am certain that this House will take full note of such recommendations. Other vernacular schools, Sir, will come under review at a later date.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: On a point of information, Sir. May I ask the Hon. the Chief Minister whether, in his opinion, the terms of reference as they are would include the consideration of the teaching of the Chinese language in English schools?

The Chief Minister: May it please you, Sir, I do not know if there is such a thing as a "point of information"?

Mr Speaker: You need not answer, Mr Chief Minister, if you are not ready to answer.

The Chief Minister: Not at all, if it please you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I mean if there is such a thing as a "point of information", I will be glad to answer. I can give my personal view, and it is: the answer is, "Yes, certainly." You are to consider the strengthening of Chinese education -

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: In English schools!

The Chief Minister: Naturally! The strengthening of Chinese education is Chinese education, in schools dedicated to Chinese, and in all other schools. Sir, I do not like to say, "Chinese schools", "English schools", "Malay schools". May we say the strengthening of Chinese education in all schools in the Colony?

Question, "That the words 'and to review the whole policy of English and vernacular education in Singapore in order to formulate a considered linguistic policy for an independent Malaya' proposed to be added, be there added," put, and negatived.

Main Question, as amended, proposed.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Mr Speaker, Sir, before I support the motion, I wish to make it clear to the House that if this motion is approved and carried, despite my appointment as a member of the Committee to investigate the situation in Chinese schools and to make recommendations for the improvement and strengthening of Chinese education, etc., I will reserve the right to express openly in this Assembly all my Party's views on educational policy and recommendations made by the said Committee.

I hope and plead that someone who is really interested in Chinese education, someone who really realises the importance of Chinese education in this country should come forward - I sincerely appeal to these gentlemen to study and understand thoroughly the problems of the non-English-speaking people before they may reach any definite conclusions on Chinese education. I sincerely hope that this House will study and give us the full history of the growth of Chinese schools in Singapore.

Personally, I much regret the recent trouble over the closure of the two Chinese schools. In my opinion, because I read two papers - English and Chinese - I feel that there is much difference of public opinion regarding this matter. I sincerely believe, Sir, that merely calling those Chinese students "little red devils" will achieve nothing.

Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this Assembly is of the opinion that a Committee be appointed with the following terms of reference -

`to investigate the situation in Chinese schools, in Singapore and to make recommendations for the improvement and strengthening of Chinese education in the interests of Chinese culture and orderly progress towards self-government and ultimate independence';

that the Committee do consist of the following - 1. Mr Chew Swee Kee (Chairman) 2. Mr Richard Chuan Hoe Lim 3. Mr Wong Foo Nam 4. Mr Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat 5. Mr Lim Yew Hock 6. Mr Lee Kuan Yew 7. Mr Goh Tong Liang 8. Mr Lim Cher Kheng 9. Mr M. P. D. Nair; that the Committee have powers to send for persons, papers and records; that 5 members of the Committee shall form a quorum; that the Committee do meet inside the Assembly House building.