NANYANG UNIVERSITY (AMENDMENT) BILL

3.31 p.m.

Order read for resumption of on Question [5th December, "That the Bill be now read a time."

Question again proposed.

Mr Speaker: Mr Lim Guan Hoo.

Mr Lim Guan Hoo (Bukit Merah): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have already spoken on the Nanyang University (Amendment) Bill at the last sitting, but I could not finish my speech because of the time and I will now avail myself of the opportunity to continue with it.

This Bill introduced by the Minister for Education to amend the original Ordinance is necessary. Anti-national elements have opposed it in their speeches for their own ulterior motives. Today it is necessary for us to understand and appreciate the analysis given by the Minister for Education when moving this Bill, and we can appreciate the necessity for it to be passed by this House. My personal opinion is that the amendments are not only necessary but that there should be more amendments to the original Ordinance to make it more water-tight.

In the past, Nanyang University has been bedevilled by various problems and difficulties, such as the engagement of the Chancellor. The problem started from the time when a foreigner was recruited to be Chancellor of the University. Up to now, the post of Chancellor is still vacant. The new Ordinance on Nanyang University has not been formulated and the University is still within the purview of the original Ordinance. The post of Vice-Chancellor was not provided for in the original Ordinance. Therefore, the present amendment Bill is necessary to put right the position. One odd thing is that today we forget about the Chancellor whereas we provide for the Vice-Chancellor. In the past, people knew about the Chancellor but forgot about the Vice-Chancellor. It is not possible to go without a Chancellor, but in the Ordinance there is no provision for a Chancellor. Since there is no such provision in the Ordinance, then nobody would dare suggest or say who should be the Chancellor. That is something which should be looked into. If the Minister for Education thinks that it is necessary to provide for the post of Chancellor as well in the Ordinance, then I will welcome it very much. This is one defect in the present Ordinance which I hope the Minister will look into.

I will now deal with the donations to Nanyang University. I have some queries to air also. When Nanyang University was first set up, members of' the public in all walks of life promised various sums as donations to the Nanyang University Fund. But so far not all the donations promised have been collected. Without further information, it is not possible for the public to know who have or who have not paid the sums that they have promised to give to Nantah. This is something to which the Government should pay attention. I would like to know what measures the authorities concerned will take with regard to the collection of such promised donations in order to augment the Nanyang University Fund for the maintenance of the running of the University.

Another point is that whenever we talk about Nantah, it is inevitable that we also think about the question of the recognition of Nanyang University degrees. The Government has promised on many occasions that it would aid Nanyang University and it has allotted quite a great deal of money to it. Members of the public are still looking forward to the day when those who promised donations to Nanyang University will come forward to fulfil their promises. Many people are also awaiting the day when the Government will come out openly and say that Nanyang University degrees will be recognised by the Government. According to the present rate of progress of Nanyang University, the Government can draw up its plan for the recognition of Nanyang University degrees and members of the public are waiting for this question to be answered.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, with Singapore becoming an independent Republic, the introduction of the Nanyang University (Amendment) Bill is necessary. There are anti-national elements with ulterior motives who make use of this amendment Bill as a pretext to accuse the Government of wanting to destroy Chinese education and of trying to further control Nanyang University. All these accusations are groundless. In fact, the people of Singapore know what kind of people they are who say such things. It is very obvious from the statement of the Minister of Defence that all these accusations are made by only a minority who are anti-national elements and who have close relationship with the anti-national Barisan Sosialis.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the people of Singapore know very well that the Government is implementing the policy of equal treatment to all the four streams of education. It is allotting large sums of money for the development and promotion of the four streams of education.

It has also allotted large sums of money to aid Nanyang University, such as the building of a Library. All this goes to show that the Government does not discriminate against Nanyang University. In other words, this shows that the Government is actually promoting Chinese education by actual deeds. It is proof that the Government is looking after the highest Chinese educational institution --- Nanyang University. This is the correct attitude taken by a responsible Government. This attitude and action on the part of the Government of Singapore should be supported and praised by all conscientious people. Therefore, the accusations by the anti-national elements with ulterior motives are puerile and sheer nonsense.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the present problem facing Nanyang University is how to raise its academic standard. After the passage of the Nanyang University (Amendment) Bill, which is now before the House, I hope that the Ministry of Education will adopt quicker measures to implement the various recommendations of the Nanyang University Reform Committee, such as the revision of salaries and better working conditions of the teaching staff in order to enable the teachers, professors and lecturers to devote more time and energy to raising the academic standards of the students so that they will be well educated and be able to contribute to nation-building. There is a great difference between the salary scales of the teachers of Nanyang University and those of the University of Singapore. There is a saying that we want the horse to run well, but we also want it not to eat any grass. How is it possible? I hope the Minister concerned will look into the working conditions and salaries of the teaching staff whilst he is promoting Chinese education.

Mr Ho Cheng Choon: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in full support of the Nanyang University (Amendment) Bill.

Nanyang University was first conceived in 1953 and it started classes in 1956. Its inception took place during the colonial days under circumstances in which many obstructions were placed by the colonial masters. Despite this, people from all walks of life in Malaya and Singapore donated generously towards the establishment of Nanyang University. Its main objective was to pave the way for further studies for graduates of secondary schools. The second objective, of course, was to provide a source of teaching staff for secondary schools. The third objective was intended to link the oriental and occidental cultures and also to develop Malayan culture.

Ever since the establishment of Nanyang University, the organisation of this University was run by multi-millionaires and very rich businessmen. Although they were enthusiastic in this pursuit, which is praiseworthy, they lacked experience in running an academic institution. They managed the University as though they were doing business in a big enterprise. Because of this, and owing to various other factors which presented a lot of problems to Nanyang University, there was a lack of Chinese scholars coming forward during the initial stages to give the necessary assistance and guidance.

Undoubtedly and undeniably, Mr Speaker, over the past 10 years of its existence, Nantah has indeed trained and fostered great talent in various fields, such as commerce, education, industry, etc. But in so far as the organisation and structure of Nanyang University, the economic problem, and the question of academic staff are concerned, Nanyang University lags far behind any other university. The main reason is that the University Council is improperly organised. The second reason is that there has been no expert scholar to fill the role of Vice-Chancellor of the University ever since its inception. Mr Speaker, you will agree with me that these two factors are very essential to a university.

Before the reorganisation of Nanyang University, the main powers of the Nanyang University Council lay in the hands of Mr Tan Lark Sye. He was the Chairman of the University Council. Mr Tan, of course, is a very successful businessman, but I am afraid he knows next to nothing about the organisation and administration of a university and university education. Because of this, he had to rely on some useless, good-for-nothing and incompetent followers of his to run the University in so far as administration was concerned. For example, in the administrative structure of the University, although there existed an Executive Committee which was the supreme administrative organ of the University, the University authorities appointed a Secretary who was directly responsible to Mr Tan Lark Sye. The powers of the Secretary included the control of financial affairs, the academic staff, their recruitment and dismissals, the administration and policy making of the University. Because of such wide controls, he became in practice the un-crowned emperor of the University. His followers held key positions in Nanyang University, and they had no regard for the sacred mission of the University as such. Because of this, the organisation of Nanyang University was such that people who were capable and scholarly were reluctant to continue serving under the unlearned, useless and good-for-nothing leadership of the incompetent followers. And even those who were quite prepared to stay on only stayed on for a while because they could not tolerate these unreasonable circumstances. And those who had come to serve would not think of staying on for long. Of course, this affected the treatment and the pay structure of the academic staff, which accounted for the University's failure to get internationally reputed scholars to serve.

Mr Speaker, as I have already said, the powers of the Secretary conflicted with the administration of the Executive Committee, and this conflict brought about the Prescott Commission Report which took away the tenure of office and the powers of the Secretary, and the Chairman of the Executive Committee had to resign. This, of course, was very, very comforting to Nanyang University and it gave a ray of light, a hopeful light indeed, to Nanyang University. So at that time when people from all walks of life were very confident and hopeful about Nanyang University, it failed again in the selection of proper personnel in the administrative and executive fields. And so Nanyang University underwent another chaotic state of affairs.

Mr Speaker, the loose organisation of Nanyang University and its incompetent administration can be likened to a crumbling feudalistic structure which provides good opportunities to pro-Communist elements. Under those circumstances, pro-Communist cadres took over Nanyang University; they were well trained people. Because the Nanyang University Students' Union had all along been controlled by the pro-Communist students who knew that the University could be manipulated at their will, these pro-Communist students had complete disregard for discipline in the University campus. They took Nanyang University as a hotbed for the training of Communist cadres. Through the Nanyang University Students' Union they propagated Communist ideology and ideas. They even made use of the property of the University for illegal activities. In the University itself these pro-Communist students had no respect for law and discipline. They beat up students with different ideologies, and because of this, the situation was very, very unsatisfactory. They even went so far as to coerce the authorities to fine or dismiss those students who dared to oppose them. These students wasted their time doing other things instead of studying. They failed in their examinations as a matter of course, and because of that they threatened the lecturers and teachers, asking them to pass them in their examinations.

Ever since 1961 these pro-Communist students blatantly linked themselves with the Communist organisations outside the campus and formed a united front for activities against the nation. They even held political meetings in the campus of the University and carted a lot of workers and other students to break up the peaceful atmosphere of study in the Nanyang University campus. They brought politics into the Nanyang campus. As a result, Nanyang University was drawn into the political vortex. Nanyang University suffered in its reputation. It was unable to live up to the hopes of people from all walks of life who had confidence in its future. As a result of such shattering of their confidence, the future of Nanyang University and the students was also adversely affected, and members of the public had a wrong impression of the University. So the innocent students suffered. This is a very sad situation indeed, Mr Speaker. Because of a small group of extreme elements who were pro-Communist and who had no love for Nanyang University, Nanyang University was used for the evil political purposes of certain people. Those who really love Nanyang University are the studious students and generous donors from various walks of life.

Mr Speaker, it is the duty of a responsible elected Government of the people to guide the University in healthy and good development. The Government has therefore taken the initiative to help Nanyang University reorganise in this direction. This is necessary. It also helps in the realisation of the hopes of those who have contributed financially to Nanyang University so that it may not fall into the hands and continue to be in the hands of the Communist cadres. The Singapore Government has shouldered this great responsibility. It has already taken steps to reorganise Nanyang University. It has got rid of the undesirable elements. It has given Nanyang University the necessary financial support. It has made adjustments in the pay and treatment of the teaching staff and increase the facilities of Nanyang University, such as the new library and science equipment. Within a short period the Singapore Government has given $6.7 million to Nanyang University. This, of course, is a praise-worthy move. It shows that the Government is paying attention to the development of the University. I hope that it will continue to do this, and I also hope that people from various walks of life will, in the same spirit as they have helped Nanyang University, continue to donate generously from now on.

Mr Speaker, the aim of the Nanyang University (Amendment) Bill is to strengthen the organisation of the University Council to implement more effectively the development of the University. The membership of the Nanyang University Council includes people from various strata of society, such as representatives of the Government, the University, and the Graduates Organisation, and well-wishers, some of whom come from Malaysia. An organisation on this basis is a very reasonable and enlightened one, as the Nanyang University Graduates Fellowship had made it clear in a statement on the 26th of October as follows:

'Because of the past and the future necessity of the Nanyang University to foster more effectively high talents for the nation, it is necessary to set up as early as possible an effective central administrative organisation so that all such matters as the administration, curricula and academic standards will be well taken care of, including the matter relating to the salaries of the teaching staff. Such changes in the organisation of the Council and in certain names are also in keeping with this spirit without any harm to the University organisation.'

I would like to quote one more extract to conclude my speech, Mr Speaker. From the same Fellowship, it says:

'As one of the highest educational institutions of our country, the Nanyang University will shoulder the responsibilities for the further education and studies of Chinese secondary graduates.'

4.00 p.m.

Mr Tay Boon Too (Paya Lebar): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, as one who has been educated in Chinese, I am very concerned with the highest of Chinese academic institutions, namely, Nantah. When Singapore achieved independence, members of the public had high hopes of Nanyang University. Everybody thought that it was the highest expression in higher education. It is one of the supports of our society. It is everyone's duty to give encouragement and support to Nanyang University because this institution is a very important factor in our society. They all hope that the University will provide opportunities and facilities for students so that in future they can put what they have already learnt in the University at the service of society. In view of this, the previous University Council have requested the Minister for Education and the Nanyang University authorities to make a careful study of the Nanyang University organisation and the Nanyang University Ordinance. They have formulated and recommended amendments to the original Ordinance which are now before the House. We all remember that under the Nanyang University Ordinance, 1959, its organisation and composition are not in keeping with the present requirements and time. The section on the composition of this Council very clearly provides that 20 University members should be elected by the Council and at least one of them should be a resident of Singapore, and at least one each should be a resident in the various States of Malaya.

[Mr Tang See Chim in the Chair]

4.02 p.m.

Mr Tay Boon Too (Paya Lebar): From this it can be seen that it is necessary to amend this provision in regard to the composition of the Council. Otherwise a few anti-national elements would be able to manipulate the organisation and to infiltrate into this Council because foreigners can come into it and manipulate it to carry out their nefarious subversive activities. On the other hand, we should also encourage those who really love Nanyang University and Chinese education to be in this Council. I therefore support the present amendment to the composition of the Council which inter alia provides for six members to be appointed by the Government, of whom three may be members resident outside Singapore. But I feel that in the composition of the Council they have neglected representatives from the working class. In other words, there is no provision for such representatives on-the Council. The Nanyang University Fund is made up of donations from people in various walks of life, including taxi-drivers, trishaw riders and workers. They have shown great enthusiasm in their support of Chinese education and Nantah. Therefore, in the new Council in the amendment Bill, I feel that clause 7 (1) (e) should be amended to include representatives from the working class, say the N.T.U.C. With such an amendment, I feel the composition of the Council will be perfect, more effective, and more representative and, as a result, will have a greater contribution to make to the future of Nanyang University. The few undisciplined students who hold their teachers in contempt, who have destroyed University property and have carried out nefarious acts of vandalism, will be wiped out, so that those students who are really sincere in their further studies in the course of the next four years may be enabled to pursue their studies in peace and in a better environment.

4.07 p.m.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Nanyang University (Amendment) Bill. As what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development has said, ever since its inception Nanyang University has been bedeviled by defective organisation, bad administration and ignorance of the University Council. The top policy-making body, the Nanyang University Council, knew nothing about University education. Therefore, it was possible for the Communists and pro-Communist students to make Nanyang University a breeding-ground for their cadres and to exploit Nanyang University for their anti-national activities and evil purposes and to bring down the name of the University. In order to make Nanyang University a real institution of higher learning - and this is the hope of all who love Nanyang University - they will agree that it is necessary to wipe out the influence of these pro-Communist elements as soon as possible. Only thus is it possible for Nanyang University to provide peaceful surroundings for the students to pursue their knowledge.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me quote a speech made by the Minister for Education on the 20th December last year in this House. He said:

'Universities represent the apex of the educational system in a country. They have an essential and influential role in society, and the quality and character of the universities are bound to have important impacts on the social, economic, and political life of a country. The role and character of universities have varied from place to place and from time to time. Universities are simultaneously conservative and progressive institutions - conservative in the sense that they preserve the best in the culture of a society, and progressive in the sense that they introduce new ideas, new discoveries, and new inventions, usually for the betterment of society. As institutions of higher learning, universities throughout the world share certain common functions, but they differ also because they have to cater for the different needs of the societies for which they purport to serve. It is obvious that universities in homogeneous societies with a well-developed sense of national identity have one important difference in role to play from universities in newly independent countries faced with the problems of building national identity out of a heterogeneous population.'

The speech I have just quoted refers to higher institutions of learning in general, but Nanyang University, ever since its inception, and especially since the publication of the Wang Gung-Wu Report, has again and again emphasised that the Nanyang University students should be at least bilingual, if not tri-lingual, and be able to fulfil the special needs of the society they will have to serve. Mr Speaker, Sir, all the past facts have shown that the Nanyang University students have distinguished themselves in service. Although they have come from a different stream of education, their loyalty, their patriotism and their work are no less excellent than those of the others.

Mr Speaker, Sir, ever since the founding of the University, people from all walks of life in Malaya and Singapore have contributed generously to the University, especially people from the middle and lower strata. But what is deplorable is that this non-Government University, ever since its inception, has passed into the hands of those evil-doers who have ulterior designs and these elements, because of the support given by certain rich business tycoons, were able to carry out their evil deeds in the University and land it in a mess. The control of the University passed into the hands of certain multi-millionaires. These people knew nothing about university education. They thought that money is everything. But they have forgotten the old maxim: "To die of hunger is a small matter, but to succumb to evil forces is a real disgrace." Many people with academic qualifications were hesitant in coming to the University. Those who did come very soon left. What is absurd is that a general meeting - they have a membership of 1,500 -had not been convened even once.

Mr Speaker, the reason why I have quoted so many examples is that I wish to show that because of the incompetence of the people in charge of the University, it was possible for the pro-Communists to infiltrate into the University. By their actions, they brought down the name of the University and landed it into difficulties. Teachers, administrators and the leadership were surrounded by pro-Communist elements. They made use of the University campus as their training ground to carry out their evil deeds and nefarious designs. These people profess to love the University, but, in actual fact, they have been indulging in acts of vandalism by damaging University property and burning down University buildings, thus making it necessary for the University authorities to spend a large sum of money on repairing the building. Is this the behaviour of one who loves the University? This only worsens the financial position of the University.

Mr Speaker, Sir, ever since its inception in 1953, many people have made generous contributions to the University, ranging from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. But the actual amount collected is only $12 million. If this sum is compared to the amount contributed by the Government, it is very insignificant indeed. The Government has contributed $6.7 million in a short period. The people donated money to the University because they love it and pay a high regard to the sacred task of education. It was because the Council members did not set a good example that the collection of money was made very difficult. For example, Mr Tan Lark Sye, who promised to donate $5 million, actually paid up only $2.5 million. The Hokkien Huay Kuan promised to donate $600,000 for the erection of an auditorium, but the actual amount collected was only $200,000. The Nanyang Siang Pau Co. Ltd, promised to donate $1 million, but the actual amount collected was only $94,000. Another reason was that the University was in a topsy-turvy condition and control of it had passed into the hands of the anti-national elements, and the future of Nantah was in danger. Therefore, these people did not pay up the full amount.

Nanyang University is a non-government institution. Apart from the grant by the Government, it has to receive support from the public. Ever since the wiping out of the pro-Communist anti-national elements, Nanyang University has been put on a proper footing, especially in view of this amending Bill. Therefore, I appeal to those who love education and the University to keep their word and pay up all that they have promised to donate. This will be beneficial to the development of the University and to society in general. To all people from all walks of life, I make this appeal - that they should continue their support for Nanyang University. Although the University is now receiving aid from Government, it does not mean that the people should stop giving aid to it. With ample finance it can be managed in a better way.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the pro-Communist elements thought that as the University was founded by people from all parts of Malaysia, people outside Singapore should have more say and control in the running of the University. This is absurd. Because of different political situations, the citizens in Singapore should have a bigger say and control in the running of the University. This is only proper and is in keeping with our national interest. But, at the same time, we will allow Malaysian citizens to play their part within certain limits. This is provided in the amendment which allows for three Council members from Malaysian territory. We also welcome people outside Singapore giving aid and constructive suggestions to the University and their continued support. The Singapore Government and people are now subsidising about $1,300 for every outside student per year. In spite of that, the Government still welcomes genuine students from abroad to study here. At the same time, I hope the Malaysian Government will discard their narrow racialist ideology. They should absorb Nanyang graduates into their Government departments just as the Singapore Government is doing. If they can do this, then we can say that the Malaysian Government is not discriminating against Chinese education. I fully support this amendment Bill.

The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Sir, I think it is hardly necessary for me to argue further the case for the amendment Bill. The support given to it by Members of this House, particularly from the former graduates of Nanyang University, is most welcome.

The Government realise that the present amendments to the Nanyang University Ordinance are inadequate. There are, in fact, many other sections of the Ordinance requiring suitable amendments to make Nanyang University and its Council function more efficiently. However, the present amendments are what the existing Council is prepared to accept to avoid unnecessary suspicion from certain sections of the public who might still be fearful that the character of the University might be altered. However, the Government shall always keep in touch with the future Council to ensure that, should further amendments be necessary, these will be brought up for consideration in this House at the appropriate time.

The Member for Bukit Merah has made certain references to the composition of the Council and the difficulty in calling for a general meeting of members to elect from amongst themselves three members to the Council. These difficulties have been envisaged, but I am sure the Council will be able to sort them out by introducing new regulations, if necessary, to govern the conduct and procedure of such general meetings.

The Member for Bukit Merah has also mentioned that we have been too concerned with the status of the Vice-Chancellor in this present amendment Bill to the neglect of the Chancellor. However, section 12 (1) of the existing Ordinance has already provided for the Chairman of the Council to be the head of the University, and as such the provision for the post of Chancellor is unnecessary at this stage.

The Member has also raised the question of contributions from members of the public who have pledged various sums at various times in the course of the history of the University. If he will table a question on this subject in this House, I shall attempt to get the relevant information for him. Right at this moment I have no such information at hand.

I am as anxious as the Member that the question of recognition of Nanyang University degrees should be resolved as soon as possible. In fact, last year I did mention that the Government would consider recognising Nanyang University degrees in about three years' time. I think the more important question is whether the University will be given the opportunity to reorganise without being interrupted by pro-Communist agitation, and whether the quality of the staff can also be improved. In my view, if Nanyang University could be reorganised without any interruption and both the quality of the staff and the students could be improved - and I think it could, which would lead to the raising of the academic standard - then the question of recognition could come in a matter of two years, perhaps three.

The Member for Sembawang has brought up the question of salaries for the staff of Nanyang University. Perhaps he is not aware that since 1966 we have raised the salaries of the staff of Nanyang University to the same level as that obtaining in the University of Singapore.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

4.28 p.m.

The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Pang Boon): However, since then the University of Singapore has had another revision to their salaries to bring them in line with the salary scales now obtaining in the University of Malaya. Therefore, the present salaries of the Nanyang University staff are not as attractive as those of the University of Singapore. However, these disparities can be put right as soon as the time is appropriate. What Nanyang University lacks, of course, is a gratuity scheme for its staff, and on this subject I think Government is always prepared to consider any suitable suggestions from Nanyang University.

The Member for Paya Lebar has mentioned that there is no provision for representation from the workers on the University Council. Although no specific provision is made for a representative from the N.T.U.C., nevertheless, the amendment to section 19 (1) (e) does not preclude nomination of a representative of the N.T.U.C. if he is noted for his interest in higher education for workers. As I have mentioned earlier, the present amendments are not comprehensive enough for the efficient working of the University, but I can assure Members of this House that, as soon as the time is opportune and further amendments are necessary, I shall bring up the subject again in this House.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[Mr Ong Pang Boon]

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.