[Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair.]

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Ulu Pandan): (In Malay): Mr Kandasamy, on the subject of education which has just been debated, the Member for Mountbatten referred to the Labour Ordinance, and to the working hours as stipulated therein. I believe she does not know the contents of the Labour Ordinance as I am quite sure that teachers are not mentioned therein. However, there is no need for me to explain it in detail, because a moment ago, the Minister for Labour and Law touched on the Labour Ordinance.

Concerning the working hours of the teachers, the Member for Mountbatten stated the teachers are overworked, say, for instance, in the correction of books, preparation of lessons and so on, with the result that they are dissatisfied with the present education system. It does not occur to me that these teachers wilt not agree with us on the present education system. Probably with an additional half session the result may be that the teachers may have to do slightly more work. But because these teachers had received many privileges from the previous Government, it is possible that on account of too many free periods and because of the system of automatic promotion, they had less to do; so much so that these teachers had been accustomed to have less to do. After the present Government took office, it gave them a little extra work to do, and these teachers are now grumbling. These teachers had experienced an easy time during the past Government. What I am surprised is why these teachers who had to prepare lessons, correct books and so on, and who had been so accustomed to their privileges, could still find time to see blue films? It was alleged that these teachers required time to prepare lessons. But there exist among the teachers some who so availed themselves of their leisure time on the beach that they became involved in an unfortunate incident. I am quite sure the Opposition Members know about this. Lately a teacher was busily enjoying his time on the beach with the result that someone was drowned. In view of this, I cannot see how we can say that these teachers have no time at all to fulfil their responsibilities just because of an additional half-session being introduced.

Touching on textbooks, I confess that the ones used at present are unsuitable, especially those for adults. The Government is making efforts to provide textbooks with a Malayan outlook, A Textbooks Committee and also a Syllabuses Committee have been formed with a view to drawing up suitable textbooks, which are Malayan in outlook, for children as well as for adults. However, the Member for Mountbatten suggested that textbooks dealing with subjects such as family planning should be introduced right from the primary school. I am apprehensive lest such textbooks would be of the same quality as those in use at present. Now, the pupils are unaware of the subject, but when such textbooks on family planning are introduced, the children of primary schools may wish to know how family planning is practised. So I think such textbooks are undesirable for primary school children.

Concerning the six-day week, I would like to explain to the Member for Mountbatten that when I was schooling I attended a six-day week school. At that time Malay school pupils attended school five days a week but before they went to English schools, they had to attend special Malay classes on Saturdays. The Member for Mountbatten said that only on Saturday and Sunday can pupils be reunited with their parents. When I was attending a Malay school, before I could further my studies in the English school, I had to attend a special Malay class on Saturday, too; but still I found time to be with my parents, although I could not have time to get together with them on Saturdays.

Mr S. Ramaswamy (Bukit Merah): (In Tamil): Mr Kandasamy, the Opposition Members have criticised the Government benches and most of the criticisms have been answered. I wish, however, to talk on one subject and that is about the children who learn Tamil and Malay in English schools. There has been an accusation that these children have been segregated from the others and put in separate places. I wish to answer these accusations. In Malaya and Singapore there are many schools in which Tamil is being taught to the Tamil children. But the standard of Tamil taught in these schools is not up to standard. There are many reasons for this. One reason is that there are very few students who learn Tamil and the other reason is that there are very few trained teachers to teach the language. I am not, however, going to list all the reasons.

7.00 p.m.

Anyhow, one of the very important reasons for such a low standard is that, when a Tamil student learns Tamil in an English school, the language is not being taught in a suitable manner.

Our Education Minister, while talking on the general discussion of the Estimates, said that a language cannot be studied by learning it only one day in a week, but it should be learnt daily. At present there are very few Tamil children in English schools who learn Tamil. In a class there are four or five such children, and if we are going to have a class for each and every one of such children, it will be quite impossible and we will find that not only the 67 teachers of Tamil who are at present teaching Tamil in English schools will not be sufficient, but even 670 teachers will not be enough to teach the 9,000 children who are learning Tamil. We are now having one common Tamil class for all the first four Primary classes. They are being taught on Saturdays. If we want to remedy this, we could do one thing, that is, we can transfer the children in four or five schools to one school where they can get instruction from a teacher who is appointed separately for them. But if they are going to level the accusation that such arrangements mean segregation, then we cannot help it. They have forgotten the fact that the minority interests should be and are looked after. But no one compels that a Tamil student should learn Tamil. If a student does not want to learn his mother tongue, nobody is going to stop him and no one forces him to learn his language in the schools.

The Member for Mountbatten appears to know these complaints pretty well. She really spoke in support of the Government plans.

There is another matter that must be mentioned. Under existing conditions, Chinese pupils form the majority in all schools. The children who wish to learn Tamil and Malay will be transferred from about four or five schools to one school. Even so, in any one school there will not be more than 200 Malay or Tamil pupils. But the average number of total pupils in any English school is about 1,200. What is the percentage constituted by this 200 out of 1,200 pupils? Therefore, the accusation that segregation is being brought about cannot be accepted. There cannot be any sense in saying that segregation is being carried out on a racial basis. If there are parents who consider that their vanity will be injured if their children learn their mother tongue, they can deny the opportunity to their children to learn their mother tongue. The Minister for Education has explained both in this Asembly and in the newspapers exactly what the position is. Despite this explanation, it is regretted to note that this subject has been raised and the real situation has not been understood despite this explanation.

Mr Lee Teck Him (Tiong Baum): (In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, originally I had no intention to speak, but the Member for Mountbatten has been attacking our education policy and it is completely unfounded. In the past few days, at the Happy World Stadium, a Teachers' Loyalty Rally was held. In this rally, teachers of all races were represented. Their representatives stood up and made speeches. They all thought that our education policy is correct and that there is no bias. But I do not see any reason why the Member for Mountbatten has deliberately attacked our education policy. This means an obstruction to the future of our country. The Member for Mountbatten does not understand the state of our country. We have achieved self-government. We have become bosses ourselves. But being a boss is not an easy job. We must suffer a bit. We must pay for our own lands, municipal bills and so on. We have to work a bit longer, a bit harder, otherwise we will not be able to become bosses.

In the past colonial government, the former Minister for Education was incapable. He was unable to give school admission to our children. They have therefore become over-aged. If we fail to give accommodation to them, how can we face the people of Singapore? And yet Members of the Opposition still do not know about our responsibilities. It is in this sense that we have to suffer and work a bit harder. These over-age students - where are they going? The schools will not absorb them. They have to go astray. They have become loafers. This is the result of the past colonial government, because they overlooked the education policy.

Today, our Minister for Education has made arrangements and adjustments and he wants the teachers to work a bit longer for the sake of these over-age students, and for the sake of our country. This is right and this must be done. If we look at our society, we will be able to realise why many parents have said that the education policy of the new Government is very good, because we do not allow school children to go and play outside and make themselves dirty. Our Government is doing this for the benefit of the school children. This has been reported to me by many parents. Therefore, we have received the support of the students' parents. This is proof that our education policy is correct and without bias. If there are teachers who are against this policy, then they are not those teachers who dedicate themselves to the teaching profession, and we will have to advise them. The Member for Mountbatten should withdraw what she has said just now, because all of it is unfounded.

Mr Teo Hock Guan (Changi): (In Mandarin): Mr Kandasamy, will you please permit me to bring forward some instances in history to prove that the increase in the teachers' work and the cut in their salaries is correct? During the industrial revolution in the United Kingdom, there were many people who had to move to the city areas to find a means of livelihood because, as a result of industrialisation, many people became unemployed. I do not mean to prove that industrialisation is correct or not correct, but to say that there are always difficulties in the transitional period. Similarly in Russia and China, and even in the United States of America and Great Britain, during any transitional period, people have to suffer more or less. The P.A.P. Government has just got rid of colonial rule and the people, of course, have to suffer a little hardship. The Member for Mountbatten has all day long in this House talked about the pay cuts and the increase in the working hours of the teachers. Being a teacher myself, I can understand that this transitional period is a period of hardship and therefore we have to serve the society and work for the country. We are educated and if we are reluctant to work for the society and for the country, it would be very undesirable. Since we have become the Government, we cannot stand aside and see the majority of the people suffer and a small minority enjoy happiness. To increase the working hours of the teachers and to cut a little bit of their pay is to increase the happiness and the well-being of the majority of the poor people.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the Member for Mountbatten has said that some teachers have resigned. But we must understand the important point. All the teachers who have resigned belong to the minority and some are selfish. Since the P.A.P. Government took office, some teachers have resigned. We can divide them into three categories.

(1) During the reorganisation in the Ministry, we made a study and inquiry into unqualified teachers. They were afraid and so they quickly tendered their resignations.

(2) Probably owing to the pay cuts and the increase of work, they were unwilling to continue with their work. This is selfish.

(3) Probably they were not selfish but they had some better job or because they thought that if they remained in the service of the Education Ministry, they might earn less, and maybe they could get a better job outside the education service.

7.15 p.m.

At present our work is very difficult, and because of this difficulty, the people have to suffer hardship. But the Member for Mountbatten has just now made certain calculations, saying that in a week the teachers' working hours have increased by more than 10 hours. Now I will make some calculations, The Primary school teacher is working about 4 to 5 hours a day with a ½ hour recess. The Government at present has decided to increase their working hours to about 3 to 4 hours a week, roughly at the average of ½ hour a day. How does she get more than 10 hours in a week? I do not know how she gets that figure or whether she has calculated wrongly.

Talking about the increase of work and pay cuts. This is psychological selfishness. Just now she touched on extra mural activities, duty before school and duty after school on Saturday, but these are only excuses.

There is a point which is unworthy of mention here. That is the teachers have to correct exercise books or examination papers, filling report cards or registration books, etc. Does she mean that the Government has to employ an extra clerk to do all this work for them?

7.18 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Mr Teo Hock Guan (Changi): Concerning school playgrounds, she alleged that the playgrounds are too small. It is quite true that the playgrounds in certain schools are not adequate, but since those schools' playgrounds are adjacent to big buildings, it is impossible to expand them. It is not the fault of the present Government. The previous Government was responsible for this. But in the case of the new schools which are going to be set up, the school playgrounds will be quite sufficient. And hon. Members can come and have a look when the new schools are built next year. The Member for Mountbatten says education does not mean for the children only. She is right. Education is to educate everybody. The Government wants to educate the teachers, and others citizens to serve our people and our country. We start adult classes in the community centres in order to educate adults to be good citizens. We have also started Malay classes, Chinese classes, Tamil classes and English classes and recreation in the branches of the P.A.P. We have done our duty. Is not all this education?

Mr Speaker, Sir, we are educated people. To build a good society is not possible if we talk all day long about money or salary. In England during the German attack, Winston Churchill asked everybody to mobilise in order to defend the country. The people in England were very willing to defend their country. At present we are not suffering similar hardships as they did in England, and we hope that we should not bargain over this small matter of pay cuts.

Dr Lee Siew Choh (Queenstown): Mr Speaker, Sir, like culture, education is a most fascinating subject. It has become an almost free-for-all, and although only half of the battery of the P.A.P. has started, we can see most of the Members opposite have already run away.

The Chairman: I quite appreciate that this debate is becoming heated, but I do not think it is right for a Member to say that a Member of the Opposition or a Member of this Assembly has run away. He must withdraw that expression.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I have been advised to say that they have retreated from this Chamber.

But, Sir, of all that we have heard, I only want to make a very small point, and that is that the Member for Mountbatten has very laboriously worked out her arithmetic, and we could see that she was comparing herself or the teachers to workers. The teachers have always prided themselves on their profession and on the nobility of their profession. If they want to do so, then they must work according to the rules of the profession. I can tell you, Sir, how a doctor works. A doctor works at all hours of the night and day. There is no talk of overtime.

I would just like to make another point: that the teachers, knowing their full responsibility, should now condition themselves to a certain reflex, an example of which has already been given by the Deputy Prime Minister. They must condition themselves to work a six-day week and an extra half-session whenever the school bell rings.

The Chairman: We have had a number of repetitions. I do not know whether the Minister would like to -

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Wind up.

The Chairman: No, I cannot ask the Minister to wind up the debate. Perhaps the Minister would like to put the debate on a level keel. But if the Member for Mountbatten would like to step into the breach, she may do so.

Mrs Seow Peck Leng: Mr Speaker. Sir, I just wish to make clear a few points. The Minister for Culture has prided on the imagination that goes on in his Department when arranging for public concerts, but I am afraid this imagination seems to have groped about a little too far. I do not understand. I did not say anything about segregation. I was not even suggesting it. As a matter of fact, I was relating my personal experience to back the Minister for Education and to prove that it was not segregation, but that it was something very necessary and unavoidable. But I was accused of accusing him for segregation, which I never did. I do not know what made the hon. Member imagine that I did. I did not! And the Minister for Education can vouch for that.

Another point is that I was said to have attacked the six-day week, and then could not make up my mind and finally said it was good. My remark was that I hope Government will continue with the six-day week, but my suggestion was to reserve Saturday for extramural activities which the children would otherwise have to sacrifice if Saturday continued as a school day. And I gave examples of lack of premises which I myself have experienced in my 30 years of teaching. The schools I have been in, unfortunately, have had small playgrounds. If some Members of the Government were lucky to have schools with big playgrounds, well I did say that those schools were fortunate.

The other point is this; the Member agreed with me that it is good for children to go to school on a Saturday, otherwise they would be playing in the drains. Yes. I did say that. But some parents would be most indignant if we suggested that every child in Singapore plays in the drains, and therefore must be a rogue and should be kept in school on Saturdays. That is not the idea. I said that it would be a blessing to bring only the children who would otherwise be playing in drains to school on Saturdays. I said, let us make it optional - extra-mural activities for those who need them and for those who will benefit by them. I did not attack the principle of a six-day week. I made that very clear.

It was also pointed out that I said schools should teach pupils to buy better food or do better cooking - I did not quite catch this point as the speech was delivered in Mandarin and the translation was not very clear. I said nothing of the sort. Possibly I was misunderstood or the interpretation was wrong. I do not remember when I said that. I never said buy better food or do better cooking or extra cooking or anything like that!

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Join the adult education class for language study!

[Interruption].

The Chairman rose -

Mrs Seow Peck Leng: No, no. I do not mean that-

The Chairman: Order! Mr Speaker is being ignored! Perhaps the Member needs adult education!

Mrs Seow Peck Leng: Mr Speaker, it is not I who need adult education. It is somebody who has misunderstood me. I know what I said. Somebody misunderstood me and said I said about buying better food and doing cooking.

Somebody said if the family becomes good, surely the Government does not become good? I argue it does, because the government comes from our families. If our families are all well brought up, the Government will be a good government. Sir, the whole nation is made up of little units of families. So if we have good families, we will have a good nation and a good nation brings forth a good government. Good government has to come from good families.

My argument about stretching the working hours of teachers was that maximum output stretched over a longer period does not produce extra efficiency - that was my argument.

7.30 p.m.

Someone said, "I had been to a Chinese school, and I had been through a six-day week and it had not affected my brain." Of course, it has not. I said the same thing. I said that the extra hours should not cause undue strain on the children. What I said was that Primary I students who were so new to the school, probably because of the newness of it, might feel the strain. But I never said that it would be a strain on the brains of the children. By no means.

The other point which I really want to make very clear is this. I did not advise the Government to teach family planning in Primary I. I did not say that as someone was accusing me of saying. What I was doing was to give an extreme example of how a desired atmosphere could be put into a textbook. But I did not advise them to teach family planning. Somebody said, "Supposing they come with embarrassing questions on family planning?" I did not mean family planning in that sense. Do not let the Press get me wrong and say that I said teach family planning in Primary I. No.

Someone said that I had been talking about salary cuts the whole day. In my whole speech I did not mention or touch upon salary cuts. That is where I said imagination had groped about. I did not mention salary cuts and I was accused of that.

Somebody then said that all my accusations were unfounded. I did not accuse anybody of anything at all in my speech. I made a few suggestions but I made no accusations against anybody.

The other point is about school functioning 3½ hours a day. They asked: How can the Member for Mountbatten increase it? I would like to read a circular from the Education Department.