INSTITUTE OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN STUDIES BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

2.36 p.m.

The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Institute of Southeast Asian Studies will be the first of its kind to be established in this part of the world. It will be a centre of research into the history, the people, and the cultures of Southeast Asian countries. The Institute will have no teaching functions and will not, therefore, duplicate the work of the existing institutions of higher learning. Its functions will be pure research and nothing else.

To provide the research material a library will be built up which will eventually be one of the best in Asia on Southeast Asian affairs. Internationally known authorities on South-east Asia, both local and from overseas, will be appointed as research fellows of the Institute to conduct research. Local graduates of promise will be sent to established centres of Southeast Asian Studies in overseas universities to do post-graduate degrees before joining the staff of the Institute. In this way it is hoped that the Institute will become a repository of scholarly information on as well as a generator of analytical studies of Southeast Asian affairs.

The research activities of the Institute will increase our understanding of our neighbours and help us to play our role more effectively in this part of the world.

This Bill seeks to establish the Institute as an autonomous body governed by a 24-member Board of Trustees. The Chairman, the Deputy Chairman and four members are to be appointed by the President. Three other members are to be appointed by the President on the nomination of such professional bodies as the President may consult. Other members are to be appointees of the Chambers of Commerce, local foundations and universities with the Director of the Institute as an ex-officio member.

The Board will, therefore, represent a wide spectrum of interests: academic, professional, commercial, charitable and governmental. It will be invested with all such powers as may be necessary to enable it to carry out its functions, including the power to approve the budget and research programme of the Institute. The day-to-day administration of the Institute will be the responsibility of a ten-member Executive Committee headed by the Director who will be the chief administrative and academic officer of the Institute. Three members of this committee will be appointed by the Board of Trustees from amongst its own members. Three other members will be staff members of the Institute appointed by the Director, and the remaining three members will be appointed by the Minister.

The Bill provides for Government grants-in-aid to be made by the Minister to the Institute from time to time. It is hoped, however, that substantial financial aid will be forthcoming from foundations and from private individuals. Accordingly, provision is made for all donations to the Institute to be exempted from income tax.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

2.41 p.m.

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully support this Bill. Singapore is in the centre of Southeast Asia. All along we have been in close contact with our neighbouring countries in all fields of activities, such as trade, communications, shipping and aviation. These neighbouring countries have been making use of this place as a most convenient transit centre. We occupy a most important position in Southeast Asia. But we also realise that Southeast Asia is a very complicated area. The Vietnamese people are suffering from the ravages of war. Other countries are also suffering many calamities. They have different historical, political and social backgrounds. The people of these countries have different faiths, beliefs, creeds, customs and traditions. In order to understand the religious, cultural, political and social backgrounds and the conditions of our neighbouring countries and their people, it is necessary to set up the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies which can make a thorough study of all these matters. The emphasis in international relationships at present is on regional co-operation, either political or economic. It is in their mutual interest if they seek a wider and higher level of co-operation. The setting up of this Institute, therefore, is very necessary and timely at this juncture.

If my memory does not play me false, I recollect that our scholarly Minister for Education has mentioned earlier in this House about the setting up of such an Institute as is now envisaged under this Bill. If action had been taken earlier, the Institute would already have been set up.

I would now like to ask the Minister a few questions. What work has this Institute done so far? Has the Government allotted any sum of money to the Institute to carry on with its work? Where is the Institute and who is responsible for it?

2.45 p.m.

Mr J. F. Conceicao (Katong): Mr Speaker, Sir, there would seem to be many factors in favour of setting up an agency like the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies which this Bill seeks to establish.

It would be fair to say that our well-being, if not our survival, is related, to some extent, to the destiny of the countries in the region of which (to quote a most recent document) we are the fulcrum. It is to our advantage to encourage systematic garnering of more and more critical knowledge of the countries around us.

It is appropriate for us to conduct regional studies in the way we propose to do. Singapore's strategic location makes it an eminently desirable and suitable spot to become not only a centre, but the Centre for Southeast Asian Studies. A successful Singapore Institute of Southeast Asian Studies will certain1y reflect favourably on our national prestige, where previously we have had to note the existence of South-east Asian Studies centres in exotic places like Yale; Harvard: Washington - Washington, Missouri; Canberra; Hull; and London where I believe South-east Asian Studies comes under the generous umbrella of the School of African and Oriental Studies.

It is good to envisage numbers of scholars, not only from the region, but also from the Far West, that is, from Europe and perhaps Africa and from the Far East, like San Francisco on the west coast of the United States, coming to Singapore to share their knowledge. But there is also the practical advantage that spreading knowledge of the region will result in more people with lay interests wanting to come to Singapore and to this region. And they will come here, Sir, not to seek the flesh-pots by which, alas, tourists are only too frequently beguiled, but to seek repast of a more intellectual kind.

There are also other interesting and possibly profitable by-products. With improved and wider knowledge of the region, there may also be knowledgeable interest in the possibilities of investment and economic development in the region. Political and international decisions in other countries may also derive from a more informed public opinion. There is some testimony to the sad condition of uniformed public opinion about South-east Asia in far-away countries. Too often have our emissaries abroad been asked if Singapore is situated in South China.

May I now mention one or two points relating to the development of the proposed Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. If initially the director of this Institute be a visitor to this region, a pundit so to speak from abroad, in other words, an expatriate, could we initiate steps as soon as possible to ensure that we have a director who is indigenous to the region, preferably a Singaporean?

I make this point because I feel, and this feeling has been to some extent substantiated in conversations with one or two people, that scholars in this region would be more ready to establish rapport with somebody whom they feel may be more spiritually sympathetic with their aspirations. Whether we, in our prudent objectivity, like it or not, there are people in the region whose sense of nationalism has been so exacerbated by their experience of recent history that they even carry the fear of so-called neo-colonialism into the academic sphere.

Another point I would like to make is that this Institute could also provide opportunities for the study of languages in the region. I notice that the erection, equipment and maintenance of libraries feature in the provisions of the Institute. This would certainly involve the acquisition of local materials, however poorly organised the local book trade of the region may be. In fact, this aspect may make the problems of translation into a lingua franca more urgent. I am sure the very latest devices will be used in the rapid study of local languages. Presumably, the erection of laboratories mentioned in the Bill would refer to language laboratories.

Yet another point is the possible extension of the resources and facilities of the proposed Institute to a wider audience than that consisting only of professional scholars and their ancillaries. Perhaps some of the members of the general public in Singapore, who are suitably inclined, could benefit from the Institute's activities - perhaps through seminars, public lectures, lecture courses and the like. The general adult education potential of the Institute should not be ignored.

I know that the publishing of books and other publications features among the provisions of the proposed Institute. But a layman like myself may find deterring the presence of footnotes, learned annotations, and similar rubrics which formidably characterise the work of scholars. It would be useful if books popularising area studies could also be forthcoming, with the contents of these books not in any way losing in accuracy and scholarship by the simplicity of their presentation.

Lastly, and as a relevant corollary to all I have just said, could encouragement be given to area studies being actively extended in our universities? I say this because recently I received an enquiry about the possibility of someone following a programme of area studies in the University of Singapore in a certain discipline. I shall not mention the discipline concerned because of the fear of having to make a reference to a specific department in the University. I found that area studies were not conducted in this particular discipline. Relations between the Institute and our universities would be more productive if area studies are encouraged as much as possible in our universities.

I would like to underline my support for this Bill.

2.55 p.m.

Mr L. P. Rodrigo (Serangoon Gardens): Mr Speaker, Sir, much as I appreciate the establishment of an Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, my appreciation is imprecise. There has been an inadequate amount of publicity of the possibilities of this Institute.

From the explanatory statement appended to the Bill and from the tenor of the whole Bill, I am supposed to be persuaded into believing that there is abundant research to be done on Southeast Asia and on all matters appertaining to Southeast Asia. I not only hope, but I can even believe that there is. But what I feel is important is that the research intended should be contemporary in nature. It should be research into fields of knowledge which are directly relevant and contributory to' the many facets of our national growth at this crucial stage of our history.

I hope that the Institute will produce findings which can be translated into added verve and vitality for our society and not only findings which are meant for the academician and the pedagogue.

2.57 p.m.

Mr Ong Soo Chuan (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, like the three hon. Members who have spoken before me, I wish to support the Institute of South-east Asian Studies Bill.

I appreciate the interest and initiative taken by the Member for Sembawang in speaking on almost every Bill that has come to this Parliament.

Mr Speaker: One matter Mr Teong missed was to say that the Institute will increase employment opportunities in Singapore!

Mr Ong Soo Chuan: But I regret to inform him, Sir, that he was speaking on the issue without referring to the contents of the Bill. He asked the-Minister for Education whether the Bill will involve the Government in any extra financial expenditure. If he had read the last two sentences in page 9 of the Bill, he would have got the answer.

The introduction of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies Bill will serve as an impetus and a guide to those who have been looking forward to the establishment of such an Institute to do research into the various aspects of this region. The establishment of a research centre, especially a centre to study the problems confronting Southeast Asia, is, vital for Singapore. Singapore realises her significance in the region and is taking cautious steps to promote regional co-operation. Such an Institute not only provides an academic research centre for our intellectuals but it also helps to resolve the problems of Southeast Asia by coming up with methods and answers.

Sir, in my maiden speech in this House I touched on the problems of this region. I pointed out that Southeast Asia has all along been the centre of attraction of the world. This is not because this area is rich and strong but because it has been recognised and considered as one of the weakest areas in the world. As we know, most of the countries in this region are newly emerging countries. We are all classified either within the economic scope of under-developed countries or developed countries. Southeast Asia has been looked upon as a region which is not able to mobilise its political and economic resources to bargain with the more advanced countries or super powers on an equal footing. One can hardly deny that all these factors were created by human beings in past decades when the political situation in the world was entirely different. Now that most of the newly emerging countries in Southeast Asia are struggling to achieve progress and the ultimate aim of equal status with the advanced countries in the world, we must find ways and means to counter these prevailing factors.

What are the problems confronting the countries in Southeast Asia? What are the factors hampering the progress of countries in this region? How can these problems be solved? What measures are ideal to solve these problems? All these questions can be closely studied by a critical examination of the nature of the conflicts and disputes that occur in our midst if we have a Research Centre. Hence the establishment of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies which will shoulder the task of enlightening us with a clearer picture of the problems in this region in the crucial 1970s. If one speaks on the problems of Southeast Asia without pointing out the root or complexity of the problems and the methods to solve them, one is just being impractical. We must find out the true facts of the problems and the fundamental factors causing such problems before we can solve them. In this respect, Sir, I am of the opinion that the establishment of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies will be able to make an immense contribution.

Let us look into the historical background of the newly emerging countries of Southeast Asia. One struggle comes after another. These struggles, whether of a bloody or peaceful nature, have no ultimate aim. These occurrences in a country, whether of an advantageous or a disadvantageous nature, will certainly influence the economy and the social pattern of another country because we are all situated within the same region and surrounded by the same waters.

Sir, the countries in Southeast Asia have gone through similar stages when struggling for their independence. We were all once upon a time colonies of the big powers. We all fought against colonialism to achieve independence. Nevertheless, it would not be untrue to say that after independence some countries still carry on on the same basis as their former colonial masters did, with their direct experiences of societies in the west. Some countries have even turned to dependence on guarantees from the big powers for survival.

Sir, in the midst of these complexities, it is essential to study all affairs and matters appertaining to Southeast Asia. In this multi-racial region, besides having gone through the same struggle for political independence as other countries, we too have similarities in the social structure, behaviour of people, culture, religion, etc. So if differences of interests which arise within this region are unresolved, they could ultimately threaten the peace and progress of this region. On the basis that the countries in Southeast Asia are inter-dependent on one another in this new era, each country must develop regional initiative in economic co-operation and mutual assistance and understanding. The establishment of such an Institute emphasises the importance we place on our own region and the importance of understanding our immediate neighbours. Through participation with intellectuals, scholars, teachers, etc, of other countries around us, we are able to know our neighbours better and they will understand us better.

Sir, co-operation is a necessary ingredient for progress. You may agree with me that with the establishment of this Institute, we are paving a more radical approach towards cultural and educational co-operation with countries in this region. Although the establishment of such an organisation will involve the Government in extra financial expenditure, I consider this expenditure to be necessary if we are to become more vital and creative.

In addition, I am happy to note that in clauses 16 and 17 of the Bill, the Board is given power to accept gifts on behalf of the Institute, and it is also provided that gifts to the Institute shall be exempt from income tax. I am confident that such provisions in the Bill will encourage more aid and assistance from the general public to ensure the success of this Institute.

Sir, looking at this Bill, I am confident that it will receive acclaim and support from those who are interested in problems concerning our nation and Southeast Asia.

3.10 p.m.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad that the proposed Institute has evoked among our Back-benchers such a lively interest in Southeast Asian affairs. This awareness that the countries around us have a bearing on our development and our survival, certainly augurs well for our country.

I do not propose to reply in detail to all the comments made by Members of this House, as they are all in support of the Bill to establish this proposed Institute. However, a number of questions have been raised by the Member for Sembawang and I propose to answer some of them.

The Director of the Institute has been appointed and he will assume duty probably from the 1st of July this year. He is Prof. Harry J. Benda, Professor of History, Yale University, and now con currently Acting Director of the Southeast Asian Studies Programme in Yale University. The University of Singapore has lent the Institute one of its large bungalows within its grounds. Alterations and additions are being carried out to this bungalow and work is expected to be completed in the first week of June. This will be the temporary home of the Institute until it moves to the three top floors of the new University of Singapore library building which is planned for completion in roughly two years' time. The Government has set aside a sum of $262,000 in this year's Budget to expand the Institute.

The Member for Katong has raised the point that the Director should as far as possible be a local man. I am sure the Government is quite alive to this problem. If a suitable local candidate is available he will be appointed.

As for the area study programmes to be carried out in our universities, 1 am sure the Minister for Science and Technology will look into this problem. Now that there is leadership in the University of Singapore, I am sure there will be a revival of research activities in Southeast Asian affairs in the university.

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.