LEMBAGA GERAKAN PELAJARAN DEWASA BILL

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Order read for resumption of debate on Question, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Question again proposed.

5.31 p.m.

Mr S. T. Bani (Thomson): Mr Speaker, Sir, as from the 1st of March 1960, the Singapore Council for Adult Education will cease to exist, and a statutory board will be set up to take over the assets and property and the functions of the Council consequently. While realising the fact that the achievements of the Council for Adult Education cannot and should not be measured with a yardstick with what similar organisations have done elsewhere in their work, it is necessary to state that the scope and extent of its functions have been limited. It is a fact, as has been stressed by those responsible for adult education hereto, that lack of funds had prevented the Council and other voluntary organisations from making the literacy campaign large and wide to extend to all organisations and institutions for the masses, to provide adequate facilities and conditions for the requirements and furtherance of knowledge of the educationally under-privileged. This has been one of the factors, and perhaps the most important factor. But apart from this, lack of self-sacrifice for the organising and teaching of literary classes has also contributed to the limitation. Aided by an indifferent Government with an incompetent Minister whose interest lay elsewhere, perhaps far, far away in the tin mines of Perak, this made matters much worse.

The Council, gathering from its final report, had roughly on the 30th September, 1959, just over 560 basic literacy classes. They were known as basic education classes with student strength of about 15,000. In any case, not more than 17,000. Sir, in an island of one and a half million people, where roughly about 50 per cent are adults, it is evident that this student strength does not represent even a sizeable proportion. These figures are what were officially known to the Council and they therefore appear in the records. But it has been clearly known to people who have been associated with adult classes, in their organisation and function, that in numerous cases the strength of the classes was not what it was recorded to be. For example, if the teacher had about 10 regular students in his class, his register had been found to show an average attendance of about 30 students. I do not say that that was the case with all teachers in all adult education classes. But there have been cases. The significance of this is clear. If - and we know that - teachers were paid $7.50 per hour, and they taught a class with a minimum number of students as stipulated by the Council or its affiliate organisations, it became imperative that they, at least on paper, had to maintain a class above the minimum strength required, otherwise they would have to lose their $7.50 as their class might be dissolved.

To further elaborate on this, I must say that when the Ad hoc Committee on Adult Education appointed by the Ministry took over the management of the S.C.A. night classes, it was found in quite a few cases that the student strength was far below what it was officially recorded to be. Sir, there is no need for me to explain in great detail why it is necessary for the Government to take over and unify the running of the literacy classes, because I am sure that the Government, particularly the Ministry of Education, has expounded on this.

It will suffice if I say that if we are seriously to put into effect the drive for mass education and mass literacy, then it is absolutely necessary that the planning, the organisation and the implementation of these classes must not and should not be entirely left in the hands of voluntary organisations. This does not mean that the Government does not recognise the valuable work that has been initiated and done by such organisations. What I do mean is that, in addition to unifying the system of teaching adults, it is necessary to have the whole machinery of the State fully backing the objectives. Just now, when the hon. Member for Tanglin was speaking, I gathered the impression that he was afraid that if the Government is to take over the running of these classes, it may limit the scope of spreading literacy, and tie the hands of people who are responsible for the management of the literacy classes. But, Sir, I think to the contrary. If you want the night classes to be effective, if you want our campaign to provide facilities sincerely and honestly to the bulk of the people who are educationally under-privileged, then it is an absolute must that the Government throw its weight behind anybody. instead of the Government just supporting the Council of Adult Education, I think it is imperative that the Government should seek to do what it is seeking to do by this Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, perhaps this is the appropriate moment to examine the popular conception of adult education here in Singapore with that of adult education organisations in other parts of the world, and to examine the existing conception of adult education with the objectives of a Party that is dedicated to the cause of the masses. In Singapore, Sir, our adult education has actually meant, at least so far, providing facilities for basic education.

Mr Speaker: Order. The hon. Member gives the distinct impression that he is reading his speech. I know that he is not. But the impression he is creating in my mind and perhaps in the minds of other hon. Members is that he is reading his speech. Perhaps he could refrain from lifting up his file, which makes it appear that he is reading.

Mr Bani: As a matter of fact, Sir, I was not reading. As I was saying, in Singapore, at least up to now, adult education has meant the teaching of languages - basic education. If one goes around to the various centres, one will find the teaching of A, B, C in the various languages. One will find men and women learning to speak, learning to write and learning to read the various languages. But in other parts of the world, things are quite different. In countries like India and Indonesia, for instance, besides what is popularly known as workers' education, they have mass literacy classes spreading far and wide; they extend to all the institutions of the masses - to the farms and to the slums. Workers' education as such is perhaps not as wide as it is in those countries, which I am about to name.

In countries, which are highly industrialised and developed, like those in Europe, the term "workers' education" has a historical distinction. Whatever workers' education is interpreted to be, it has often been debated, and it has been a point that is still in dispute. Various countries have got various interpretations for the meaning of "workers' education".

It is not possible to define in one way or another what actually workers' education is. But what I do intend to point out is this. Quite apart from just teaching the A, B, C of the various languages, in countries like Denmark, in Scandinavia and other countries in Europe, workers' education has meant providing facilities for professional training. They provide facilities to enable the workers to attend work in their own organisations, and to be able to carry out effective functions in organisations like the trade unions and other societies. But I am not here to elaborate on what workers' education is. I am not suggesting that in Singapore we should disregard the literacy classes, and start teaching technical subjects to workers in classes organised by the trade unions and by the Government. But what I do say is that a start must be made in this direction, as a start has already been made: in countries like India and Indonesia.

In Singapore, as I have said, it is true that basic education classes are necessary for the time being, because without basic literacy, you could not provide technical education to improve the professional knowledge of the workers.

Sir, education is first and foremost the transmission and acquisition of language. It should be our purpose to enable students to acquire comparatively complete knowledge and not incomplete knowledge. The education must provide an all-round development and be the medium of producing fully developed human beings. Facilities and conditions must be provided for the educationally under-privileged in Singapore with this in mind. Just because adults are grown-ups. I think we should not disregard this fundamental requirement.

It is also necessary to state that if and when the Board is instituted and starts functioning, the success of the literacy campaign will not entirely depend on the Board. To a very large extent, the voluntary organisations, the cultural bodies, the various associations will have to play their part in contributing to the substance of the drive. Especially in the initial stages, the devotion and dedication of the teachers will be a must.

Sir, until recently, teachers of adult classes, as I have said earlier, received $7.50 per hour, and more often than not, the incentive for teaching adult classes had been the lucrative conditions that prevailed. Under the present circumstances, it is extremely necessary that teachers should come forward with a national consciousness and self-sacrificing attitude in trying to aid the Government to make this campaign for mass literacy a success, and to help their brethren by providing and teaching languages and the rest in order to achieve the ultimate objectives of the campaign.

Education is the most important factor for the true transformation of a society, and therefore, at this stage in Singapore, it is completely a necessity that there should be every force turned and united to bring about a revival of our greater values and our educational values.

I would end by saying this. Although the teachers may be missing the $7.50 very badly, it must be brought to their minds that what is at stake is the national interest - an interest far above the financial interests of the teachers as a whole.

5.50 p.m.

Mrs Seow Peck Leng (Mountbatten): Mr Speaker, Sir, I appreciate the Government's effort to improve and unify the system of adult education. However, the community's contribution towards the promotion and improvement of adult education in the country is valuable, and that is why my colleague, the Member for Tanglin, has advocated that the Board should not be too heavy on the Government side, but should be as representative as possible.

For example, it is all very well for the Government authorities to work out a formula on the number of hours of teachers' work. But as I have always tried to impress upon the Minister for Education, it is the implementation and the practice of it that is the most important, because in practice, it is not always what it appears to be on paper. I will give one example. A teacher who is supposed to do an extra hour in the afternoon actually does two hours, if not more because it takes half an hour to go and half an hour to come back. Therefore, it takes two hours of his time, and sometimes one hour of travel takes more out of him than one hour's teaching, especially if there is a traffic jam. The reason why we want the Board to be representative is that people who have gone through the mill are the best people to draw up this formula. The Minister has indicated just now that the publicity given concerning the strain on the teachers caused by the imposition of these extra hours is grossly exaggerated. He has quoted as proof of this the number of teachers that were doing extra paid jobs last year and this year. It must be pointed out, however, that in the instances quoted, it was open to the teachers to choose, and it was the teachers who can stand the strain who applied for the extra hours of work. Not everybody is capable of the same amount of work. There are some who are full of energy and for whom the number of normal hours' work was not sufficient, and they wanted to do more. There are others who did it because of financial pressure. If I remember right, the fact that about one-tenth of the number of teachers applied for permission to do extra teaching this year as compared with that of last year shows that the strain is telling on them.

I hope that the Minister for Education will take a serious view of this matter. He is going to offer a transport allowance. But, nevertheless, I would say that if it is possible for him not to make it compulsory, probably some teachers who could not stand the strain may not apply for the extra allowance to do the extra job.

The Member for Thomson has mentioned that a necessary quality of a teacher is dedication to his or her job. It is very true, and one cannot be dedicated to his or her job when one is forced to do what one feels is more than humanly possible in his or her particular case.

5.56 p.m.

The Minister for Culture (Mr S. Rajaratnam): Mr Speaker, Sir, listening to some of the speeches by the Members opposite, I was reminded of the story of the Polish patriot. When he was asked to write an essay on an elephant, he began by saying: "Now, let us start with the Polish question." Similarly with the Members opposite. This is a Bill dealing with the problem of adult education, and we have had very passionate discourses on overworked teachers and back pay for teachers, which have nothing to do with this Bill. I therefore feel that perhaps -

An hon. Member: Nobody said this!

Mr Rajaratnam: The Member opposite did not listen to the speeches of his colleagues. He probably focused his attention on what happened op this side of the Bench. But there was a plea made for back-pay. I feel that it would, therefore, be appropriate to draw the attention of this House to the importance and purpose of this Bill.

The first point is, as the Minister for Education has indicated earlier, that there are about half a million illiterates. I would say, Sir, in view of the fact that we have accepted Malay as the national language, perhaps the term "illiterate" should be extended to include those persons who have not become proficient in the national language, and today, there are half a million illiterates. It would be most unwise to let them remain illiterate, in view of the fact that we have now ventured into this new political experiment of having a Government elected by the people. So if you are going to have half a million illiterates - although that does not necessarily mean that they have no political wisdom - then certainly if you provide them with the opportunity to be able to make political decisions to elect candidates from time to time, perhaps with a greater increase in literacy, there will be more Members on this side of the House than on the other side. But if it is necessary for democracy to function efficiently, then we should provide people with the means of acquiring the necessary knowledge to be able to choose wisely and to ensure that democracy succeeds. That is one of the purposes of this Bill, and to that extent it is an important Bill; because if we do not educate the half million illiterate people in this country, then we are going to weaken the foundation of democracy. It is not only a question of educating them. The illiterates must also include those adults who terminate their education once they leave school. It is a fallacy often propagated that because a person has been to school for 15 or 16 years of his life, he will, once he has finished his schooling, remain a literate person for the rest of his life. Literacy should be something going all the time. People should always be learning, especially in a complex society like ours where knowledge is advancing and the issues become more complex. It is necessary that even those who have had the benefit of education should be continually educated, and one of the functions of adult education would also be to enable people who have left school to keep up with their education.

One of the points, which was stressed, by one of the Members opposite was that there is not enough representation for teachers. Another Member indicated that there was no representation for this or that community. Obviously, Sir, every community group - from bricklayers to mothers, artists and musicians - can make claims to be represented on this Council. But obviously we have to draw the line somewhere as far as the composition of the Board is concerned. We have to choose a limited number of people, and obviously a great many will have to be left out. But that does not preclude, for example, teachers from participating in the work of this Council, because there will be various opportunities afforded to them to help in the work of the Adult Education Council. Therefore, the claim that this group or that group is not represented on the Council is one, which can be made by any body.

As for the claim that Government will be more than well represented on the Board, may I draw the attention of Members opposite that, if they look back to the history of the adult education movement in Singapore during the last 10 years, they might have had occasion to read stories of some peculiar goings-on in the field of adult education? There were investigations into the accounts of adult education organisations. Certainly when you are dealing with half a million dollars which the Government is paying out, it is necessary for the Government, because of the importance of the work of providing adult education, and in view of the past (I am not referring to what has happened in the recent past, but to the early days of the Adult Education Council when money obviously was treated in a very cavalier fashion and was never accounted for) to have a tighter control over this Board. But if members of the public, whether they be teachers or musicians or artists or the Member for Tanglin, wish to contribute to the work of the Council, there is nothing to prevent them from doing so, and certainly there is nothing to prevent the Minister from inviting them to participate in the work of this Council.

6.05 p.m.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Ulu Pandan): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, while debating this Lembaga Gerakan Pelajaran Dewasa Bill, which is a very important Bill for adults if they wish to get a proper education, we may recall that in the past no progress could be seen in adults who received their education through the Singapore Council for Adult Education. Since the progress achieved by the Singapore Adult Education Council was negligible; the Ministry of Education under the present Government has therefore laid emphasis on giving education to adults. With this aim in view, the Ministry is introducing this important Bill, which is one of the means whereby education for adults can be provided. At the moment, there are adults who are in need of education. I can say that every active labour organisation is running adult classes for the purpose of providing education to its members.

Mr Speaker, while debating this Bill, the Member for Kampong Kembangan initially argued that he did not know how to debate it. He continued further by saying that it is a Bill for which credit could be given but that he regretted that in clause 5, there is an element of discrimination because the Malay Education Council is not represented. Mr Speaker, as far as I know, the Malay Education Council (and I believe the Member for Kampong Kembangan is a member of the Malay Education Council) has no interest in giving education to adults. The Malay Education Council concentrates only on Malay education in Malay schools. Under the circumstances, Mr Speaker, it is not true to say that the Minister for Education is treating the Malay Education Council as a stepson. The Malay Education Council has been invited. There is a representative from the Malay Education Council who sits on the Malay Education Committee of the Ministry of Education. There is also one member who sits on the Education Advisory Council. Quite recently, Mr Speaker, the Member for Kampong Kembangan referred to an appointment to replace an outgoing member in the Malay Education Committee suggesting that the person should sit on the Malay Advisory Council as well, because the other member had left for Kuala Lumpur. On account of the fact that the Minister for Education had given his full attention to the Malay Education Council, this matter was left entirely to the discretion of the Malay Education Council to appoint a suitable nominee to the composition of the Malay Education Committee.

The object of this Board is to provide education for adults. Its composition is fitting and proper because the Teachers' Training College in Singapore provides education for teachers; the Nanyang University and the University of Malaya are also institutions, which provide education for adults; and there are two members representing trade unions. I mentioned earlier that every active trade union is running adult education classes for its members. The appointment is therefore proper, Mr Speaker. The accusation was levelled by the Member for Kampong Kembangan that as the Malay Education Council is not mentioned he considered that this was treating the Malay Education Council like a stepson. In the report of the Malay Education Council, there is no mention whatsoever of its object for giving education to adults.

Inche Mohd. Ali Bin Alwi: On a point of explanation, Sir.

Mr Speaker: If the Member will give way?

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi: Afterwards, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Did the Member say afterwards? Afterwards may be too late.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi: (In Malay): Yes, Sir. The memorandum from the Malay Education Council sent to the Minister for Education in 1957 made no mention of adult education. The Malay Education Council concerned itself only with Malay education in Malay schools. The Minister for Education has given an opportunity for a representative of the Malay Education Council to sit on the Education Advisory Council and also to sit on the Malay Education Committee. If the Member for Kampong Kembangan fears that the Malays are not represented on this Board, this is because he has not made a thorough investigation. Among the representatives of trade unions, there are a number of Malays who are actively taking part in conducting Malay classes. These members are well versed in the Malay language. I believe the former teachers also teach in these special classes run by the trade unions. I know that the T.U.C. will nominate suitable persons to represent the workers in the Lembaga Gerakan Pelajaran Dewasa. I hope that with the enactment of this Bill, the Member for Kampong Kembangan will not have fears about the composition of the Board.

Inche Ahmad Jabri Bin Mohammad Akib (Southern Islands): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, I believe nobody who is of sound mind will say that this Bill is no good, or that its objects are bad, because we all know the importance of knowledge and education to the people as a whole. Therefore, I rise to say that the aim of the Government is good. I am of sound mind and I know the meaning of education and the value of knowledge to society. We have listened to many speeches made by the Government side comparing the work done by the past Government with the present Government's efforts to unify the education system so as to inculcate into the people of Singapore a sense of responsibility towards the State through the medium of education and knowledge, which they have gained. But we must not forget, Mr Speaker, that these efforts require a tremendous amount of manpower and entail sacrifices, especially from the Government side and from those who have been entrusted with the task of implementing this Bill. They must have a full sense of responsibility and a love for the work, which they are doing, in the interests of the State of Singapore.

What has been said by the Opposition Bench is that persons who will be assigned to fulfil the tasks must also be given opportunities to express their opinions, which will be useful to the Government. In clause 5, on the composition and constitution of the Board, the Government is concerned about the administration and expenditure of moneys. This Government need have no fear about this. This is not an essential factor of our criticism. It can be said that, on the whole, the appointments are all agreed to by the Government. What I mean is that no nominee can sit on this Board without the sanction of the Government. If we need the co-operation of those who will be responsible for implementing the policy of the Lembaga Gerakan Pelajaran Dewasa, then I feel, Mr Speaker, that work through pressure or coercion will not bring about the desired results, unlike the results that could be achieved from persons who fulfil their task with a sense of dedication to their job and a sense of self-sacrifice. Such people are prepared not only to work for eight hours but they are prepared to work longer and, therefore, they must be given an opportunity to express their views on this matter.

Reverting to what the Member for Ulu Pandan has said on the Malay Education Council, and as mentioned earlier by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, Mr Speaker, I am afraid that the Member for Ulu Pandan himself does not know what the Malay Education Council is. Indirectly the Malay Education Council does not merely lay emphasis on Malay education. But from what I know, it has affiliate bodies of about 30 associations. They form the Malay Education Council for the purpose of Malay education. There must be some connection in the work they are doing with the Board, which is going to be initiated by the Government. Surely the Government will also include Malay as a subject. It is essential, therefore, that the Council, which is recognised by many Malay educational bodies, should be given an opportunity to express its views concerning the implementation of this Bill.

6.25 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker. Sir, I should like to answer the Member for Tanglin who fears that the proposed composition of the Board for Adult Education and the taking over of adult education by the Government through a statutory Board might stifle the efforts of private enterprise. One would have thought that the manner in which Government has been conducting its affairs would have been sufficient answer that such fears are unjustified and that, if any, the Government is afraid that when it comes to work there will not be enough people around to do the hard work.

Several Members of the Opposition have raised the point that the Board, as proposed, has too heavy a Governmental representation. My colleague, the Minister for Culture, has already indicated that some years ago the public were shocked at the report that was released on investigations into funds which were handled by the then Council for Adult Education, My colleague, the Member for Thomson, has also disclosed certain facts that records of attendances in classes for 30 or 40 students had actually 10 students. It is, I think, essential that the Government should ensure that public funds are properly spent and accounted for. This Adult Education Board, when established, would, I think, be handling funds to the tune of a million dollars, for besides the half a million dollars which the Government would grant to this Board, it would also be in receipt of fees which, on the present enrolment of 40,000 at $1 a month, would be $480,000 a year. So I think it is essential that the Board should have reasonably enough Governmental representation to ensure that the Government's policy on adult education is properly conducted and that sufficient care would be taken to ensure that the classes are properly held. As you can see from the clauses in the Bill, there would be properly audited accounts, copies of which would be presented to this Assembly for their information.

As regards the criticism that there is no representative of the teachers' unions on the Board, I expect that teachers' unions would ultimately come within the purview of the Trades Union Congress and that the teachers' representative would then come through that nomination.

My colleague, the Member for Ulu Pandan, has already answered the Member for Kampong Kembangan as to why the proposed Bill does not include a representative from the Malay Education Council. I am only sorry that the Member for Kampong Kembangan should consider it discriminatory just because there is no representative from the Malay Education Council. I suppose if there is a representative from the Council then it is not discriminatory. I am afraid I am not inclined to follow that line of argument. The Member for Kampong Kembangan also asked about back pay. It is not the policy of this Government to talk in terms of back pay. My announcement this afternoon did indicate that from Monday onwards, which is only about 48 hours from now, all so-called volunteers will be reimbursed at the rate of $2 per session. I think it is not too long a time for them to wait for this transport allowance.

Both the Member for Tanglin and the Member for Mountbatten raised the question of hardship and strain on the part of teachers in respect of extra session work. I think the Member for the Southern Islands also mentioned that coercion or pressure would not bring about the desired results. If the Government could be confident that teachers would volunteer in their thousands to do the work of adult education, then I am sure that the Government would be prepared to forget the idea of the extra session work and let the work be done by voluntary teachers. But let us be realistic. Mr Speaker, Sir, I have already mentioned that we have an illiterate population of half a million people and that, despite the fact that Government is now conducting classes for 40,000, we are only scratching the surface. We are not even handling ten per cent of what we intend to handle. As an example of the nature of voluntary work, may I refer to the call for blood donors started by the Ministry of Health? The call was made for volunteers to donate blood. I was rather disappointed when the final returns came to hand, because out of the 10,000 teachers, only 741 volunteered. If we call for volunteers for adult education and other aspects of education and the same result should come to pass, then I am afraid that our illiterate population in Singapore will remain as it is five years from now. I agree that in the matter of implementation, hardships may be caused but these are details which could be arranged. If names of teachers in schools responsible for the despatch of teachers miles out could be mentioned, surely the Ministry of Education and its officials are not that irresponsible in that they refuse to see reason or to discuss the matter. If, as the Member for Tanglin suggested, certain teachers are not sufficiently strong to stand the strain of extra sessions and would be so medically advised, surely the Ministry of Education is not going to ignore the medical certificates to that effect and exempt the particular teachers when even in the course of their ordinary duty they are not supposed to teach in schools if they produce medical certificates. I would have hoped that the Members for Tanglin and Mountbatten, as ex-teachers or as people who are so much interested in education, would appreciate the problems that face this Government; but we welcome constructive criticisms from them, who are Members of the Opposition.

Regarding the strain on teachers, the Member for Mountbatten, I am afraid, has ungallantly misquoted me when she says that I stated in my speech that the publicity given to the strain on teachers was grossly unjustified (I took it down exactly as she stated it). What I said in my speech was that undue publicity was not justified, and I am afraid she has introduced words, which I have not used. If, instead of beating the big drum about the strain on teachers, the Members of the Opposition would see the problem as it faces the Government, and our endeavours to do what we can to make Singapore a shining example in the whole of South-East Asia, they will then appreciate why it is necessary to call upon teachers to do their little bit for their country. In this respect, the speeches made by the Member for Kampong Kembangan and the Member for the Southern Islands strike a different tone. The first Member said that there should be less talk and more work. The second Member also spoke about sacrifices for the country. That is exactly what we are asking for. In nation building, one does not relax in a chair and let others do the work. Let us, by example, show what we can contribute to the well-being of the country. I say that those who are fortunate enough to have been educated have a greater responsibility to the country, and especially to those who have been denied the opportunity of education and who are blind to all the wonders which literature can offer. Therefore, I say that the burden of nation building is greater for teachers and I hope - we all hope - that they will be able to rise to the occasion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr. Speaker, Sir, as you had ruled that in your opinion this bill is a hybrid Bill, I therefore move under Standing Order 65 (1),

That the Bill be referred to a Select Committee consisting of Mr. Speaker as Chairman and the following seven members: Mr S. T. Bani. Mr Chan Sun Wing. Inche Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi. Inche Mohd. Ali bin Alwi. Mr Teo Hock Guan. Mr Thio Chan Bee. Mr Yong Nyuk Lin.

Mr Speaker: Will the Minister put that in writing?

Motion handed in.

Mr Speaker: The Members of the Committee have been named. I think I will take the motion in two parts.

Question, "That the Bill be referred to a Select Committee," put, and agreed to.

Question, "That the Select Committee do consist of Mr Speaker as Chairman and the following seven Members: Mr S. T. Bani. Mr Chan Sun Wing. Inche Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi. Inche Mohd. Ali bin Alwi. Mr Teo Hock Guan. Mr Thio Chan Bee. Mr Yong Nyuk Lin." put, and agreed to.