ADMISSION TO SCHOOLS (Priority)

Dr Tan Cheng Bock asked the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education why priority is given to the 3rd child, who has an elder brother or sister studying in the school, over the 1st or 2nd child with a parent who has been sterilized after the birth of the 1st or 2nd child and whether this move is unfair to parents who have been given to believe that sterilization after the 2nd child would give their children priority of admission to schools over 3rd child siblings whose parents are not even required to be sterilized.

The Minister of State of Education (Dr Tay Eng Soon) (for the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Phase 1 registration is for a second or third child who has an elder brother or sister studying in the same school. The reasons for this are obvious. Parents need not transport their children to different schools and the elder brother or sister can look after the younger one.

Phase 2 registration is more extensive. It includes, among others, children of parents who have direct connections with the school; parents, brothers or sisters who are former students of the school: members of the advisory or management committees or staff of the school. Parents who have undergone sterilization after the first or second child are accorded the highest priority under Phase 2, namely, Phase 2A. Far from being unfairly treated, parents in this category have priority under Phase 2A which is valid at any school. In contrast, Phase 1 priority applies only at a school which the siblings are attending.

I do not know how the hon. Member has been led to believe that sterilized parents have been promised priority by the Ministry over third child siblings whose parents are not sterilized. The Ministry has never made such a promise.

The matter raised by the hon. Member is academic. Since 1977, the number of children of parents sterilized after the birth of the first or second child varied between 1,100 and 1,779. Last year, it was 1,379. In every instance, the children of sterilized parents in this category have been placed in the schools of their first choice.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock (Ayer Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, before I ask my supplementary question, I would just like to enlighten the House on the family planning programme of our nation.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Tan, will you please keep it brief because we have quite a few questions today?

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Yes. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to draw the attention of this House to the Family Planning and Population Board which was established by an Act of Parliament and inaugurated in January 1966. I refer you to the Family Planning Board Paper 45 and the Family Planning Board Paper 52.1. I would also like to draw the attention of the House to a set of social policies introduced in 1969-70.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Tan, what is your supplementary question?

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Sir, I think I need to explain before I come to the supplementary question. I think you must allow me to continue, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Yes.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Thank you very much. These policies were further intensified in 1972. These include, among others, higher priority for choice primary schools for children, one of whose parents has been sterilized after one or two children. I ask, higher priority over whom? Obviously it must be over those who are not sterilized.

In line with our national policy in 1975, a total of 9,495 women were sterilized. 16% of those who ligated did so after one or two children, Why did I choose 1975? I chose 1975 because children born then will be going to school now. 16% works out to 1,520. These 1,520 mothers made a bold decision. They underwent an operative procedure and not without its hazards of surgery and anaesthesia, only to realize six years later that what they were promised in 1975 did not materialize to their expectation in 1981. They may have other reasons for sterilization but one of their considerations is priority over those not sterilized after two or three children. This is the policy of our family planning. Unless the Ministry of Education thinks otherwise, I feel very sorry for the Family Planning Board and I am wondering how are they going to explain to the people in future.

The First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education (Dr Goh Keng Swee): Point of order, Sir. Is the hon. Member delivering a speech or asking a supplementary question?

Mr Deputy Speaker: I have asked the Member for his supplementary question. Dr Tan, please let us have your supplementary question. If you cannot make up your mind, I will have to rule you out of order,

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Sir, if you stop me at this stage, it is not very fair. I think I must continue further.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Then get on with your point, please.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: What I want to point out is that we must not give Singaporeans the impression that we -

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I must insist that the hon. Member complies with Standing Orders. This is Question Time. I want to know what his supplementary question is.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Tan, let us have your supplementary question. If not, I have to call on Mr Ho for Question 2.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: My question is whether the Ministry of Education has taken into account the family planning policy of our nation. The Minister of State has said that the Ministry of Education has not made any promise to the people of Singapore on this priority. Can the Minister of State of Education clarify this point for this House?

Dr Tay Eng Soon: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have already said that those parents who were sterilized after one or two children have the highest priority under Phase 2 at any school in Singapore.

This was the same understanding which the Ministry announced in 1974. I refer the hon. Member to the Straits Times of 22nd July 1974 in which we said that if one of the parents had undergone sterilization, the children would be given priority under Phase 2. This is applicable to all schools.