INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS (Increase in fees)

Mr Goh Choon Kang asked the Minister for Education whether there is any measure to check fee increases in independent schools.

Mr Chng Hee Kok asked the Minister for Education if he will implement a financial scheme to assist those students who are adversely affected by the new independent school fees.

Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for Education whether his Ministry had given approval formally or informally for independent schools to raise their fees to $100 per pupil per month.

The Minister for Education (Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, my answer to this question will also cover the points in the next two questions because the three questions essentially deal with the same subject, ie, the increase in fees next year by the five independent schools and Raffles Institution.

Sir, the announcement on 2nd November by the five independent schools and Raffles Institution (RI) of their increase in fees from January next year has drawn a number of responses from Members of Parliament and members of the public. Some have been supportive of the fee increase. Others have been critical. One MP commented that the reasons given for the increase in fees are, I quote him, "too weak and difficult to accept". Another MP felt that the fee increases are way out of proportion in comparison to those of tertiary institutions. And to avoid large fee increases, a third MP suggested that the independent schools should adopt a more moderate pace in improving the quality of education in their schools, ie, they should, in effect, slow down and seek to do less for their pupils.

Sir, these reactions are understandable but, in my view, they do not address the nub of the issue. The nub of the issue is not the size of the fee increase. The nub of the issue is: what are parents willing to pay for the more varied and comprehensive education programmes which independent schools want to implement and which parents desire for their children? This is the question which we should address.

Sir, the independent schools and RI are committed to raising the quality of education for the pupils in their schools. They are doing this because parents want it. To raise the quality of education, the schools need well-qualified staff, better facilities and a more favourable teacher/pupil ratio so that they can reduce class size to give pupils more individual attention. All this means that their operating costs must rise.

Sir, it is not the business of the Government to hold back the independent schools and RI from improving their educational programmes. Indeed, we should encourage them to take advantage of their autonomy to try out new and innovative educational programmes. Their success in achieving their educational aims will help the Ministry of Education to assess what is desirable and effective to raise the quality of education in schools in Singapore. In this way, all children in Singapore will eventually benefit from the establishment of independent schools within our education system.

Neither is it the Government's responsibility to tell the independent schools and RI how they should finance their increased costs or what fees they should charge. The Government gives to each of these schools a per capita grant equivalent to what it would cost to educate a child in a Government or a Government-aided school. If the independent schools and RI improve their educational programmes to meet the expectations of parents who want a more comprehensive and varied education for their children, it is surely only fair that the burden of the increase in costs should be borne by the parents who send their children to these schools.

The fixing of fees is the responsibility of the schools. The responsibility of the Government is to ensure that there are adequate financial assistance schemes in place so that every pupil who qualifies for admission to the independent schools and RI will not be denied a place in the schools simply because his or her parents cannot afford to pay the fees.

Pupils who are unable to pay the fees can apply for assistance under the Government's financial assistance scheme. If further financial assistance is needed, the schools have established their own scholarship funds which can provide financial assistance, where necessary, over and above that provided by the Government. Clan associations, Old Boys' Associations, Old Girls' Associations and private foundations can also assist. No child, if he is academically qualified and deserves a place in an independent school, will be denied admission to an independent school simply because he or she is unable to pay the fees.

Mr Goh Choon Kang (Braddell Heights): Sir, since the independent schools are still receiving per capita grants from the Government, is it not reasonable to expect that the Government should exercise some checks so that fees in these schools will not be increased and become so exorbitant?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Sir, the schools are independent. If we tell them what fees to charge, how can they have flexibility and autonomy in their operations? The admission of pupils, the recruitment of teachers, the fixing of fees, is the responsibility of the independent schools. We give them a per capita grant. They determine their own educational programmes. They determine how they would raise the finance to meet the additional costs that are incurred.

Mr Goh Choon Kang: Is the Minister advocating a laissez-faire situation where the schools can fix whatever fees they want? If that is the case, I would say that we stop subsidizing the independent schools.

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Sir, I do not follow the reasoning of the Member at all. The parents of the children who go to these independent schools pay taxes, just like you and me. When they pay taxes, their children are entitled to the same per capita grant which will cost the Government to educate the child in a Government or a Government-aided school. Why should we deny these children the per capita grant which they should have because their parents have contributed to the same tax pool?

Dr Lee Siew-Choh (Non-Constituency Member): The Minister has said something about the desirability of a higher quality of education and the wish of parents. Does he imply that the parents of other schools are not desirous of a higher quality of education?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Sir, I do not imply any such thing. All parents want to have high quality education for their children. As I said, we will give a per capita grant to the independent schools. If the parents who send their children to these schools want a more varied education, the additional costs should be borne by them. But of course we will learn from the independent schools what are the programmes which are desirable, which are effective, to raise the quality of education in Singapore. Then we can spread these programmes to the other schools in Singapore and, in that way, as I have mentioned in my reply, all children in Singapore will eventually benefit from the establishment of the independent schools in Singapore.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, if the independent schools are allowed to escalate their fees, then would these schools not become elite schools and only cater for the rich in time to come?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: I have said, Sir, that the responsibility of the Government is to ensure that there are enough financial assistance schemes in place so that no child who is academically qualified and deserves a place in an independent school will be denied a place in those schools, simply because his or her parents cannot afford to pay the fees.

Sir, the independent schools in a joint statement issued last week have made a commitment that the ability of parents to pay will not be a criterion for admission to their schools. The schools have a tradition of accepting pupils from all strata of society. The schools intend to continue their policy of admitting pupils on the basis of merit. I think this shows that the schools have a responsible attitude towards the admission of pupils and they will conduct themselves responsibly.

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: Would it not benefit all the children in all the schools if the Government should raise the standard and quality of all the schools?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Yes, of course, Sir. It will certainly benefit all pupils in every school in Singapore if we were to raise the standard of education. And surely this is what we all want. This is what all parents want. But what standard, what quality, what costs should we incur in raising the standard? I think Members should not afflict themselves with a cargo-cult mentality with the Government being the cargo plane. Just ask and we are expected to come out with an endless supply of goodies from a bottomless package. Every improvement, Sir, incurs a cost. Every benefit that we implement, every standard that we raise must incur a drain on the public purse. It is not that the Government does not want to raise the quality of education in schools. It is that we have to do this in a responsible way.

Sir, effectively, the Member is asking that since parents want a high quality of education for their children, should the Government not meet the expectations of parents for high quality education? If I were to answer this question, first of all, we have to deal with it in a larger perspective and consider how our schools are funded and managed today. Because of the need to expand school places rapidly when we gained our independence in 1965, less than two-thirds of children were in schools. Today, almost every child has a place in school. And as a consequence of some of the political problems which we had in the 1950s, which the Member will be aware of, we have today evolved a highly centralised system of educational control in Singapore. By and large, schools in Singapore are almost entirely dependent on Government for their financing. The schools cannot make any significant decision without reference to and getting permission from the Ministry of Education which in turn has to consider the financial implications and discuss with the Ministry of Finance before communicating their decision to the schools.

The Government, therefore, decides for each school in Singapore how much money should be spent on the physical facilities, how many teachers the school should have, how many pupils should be enrolled in the school, what fees the school should charge and how much the teacher should be paid. The school must obtain the permission of the Ministry of Education before it introduces any variations from the norms which have been established.

The result of all this, Sir, is a slowdown in decision making and a stifling of initiative. Because almost every improvement in educational programmes requires money at some stage or other, effectively no school in Singapore can embark on any improvement without getting the approval of the Ministry of Education. Hence, the many complaints about excessive bureaucratization of the education system in Singapore and the lack of initiative among our principals and teachers which Members have voiced time and again.

When we were faced with simply providing more school places and ensuring minimal standards, such bureaucratic control of education may be tolerated. There was no choice. The alternative was simply that very little would have been achieved and even that would have been achieved at a very much slower rate.

Sir, there are undoubtedly many aspects which all parents would like to see in the education of their children - good academic development, preparation for future employment, building up strong and healthy bodies, building of character and building of strong moral values. All parents want to see these in their children. But more and more parents will not be satisfied with simply achieving minimum basic requirements. All parents will want to have educational programmes that are tailored more closely to the abilities and talents of their children. They will want to see more individual attention given to children so that every child can be developed to his or her fullest potential.

Yes, Sir, there are gaps in education and there are areas in education which Government should properly attend to. We have to upgrade our primary school education. We need to have more and better designed secondary schools so that all secondary schools can go single session by the 1990s. In particular, I would say we need to provide more opportunities for training at the post-secondary and at the tertiary levels, especially in the technical and vocational fields. This means that Government must incur more expenditure on education.

Provided that our economy continues to grow at a healthy rate and there are no extraordinary demands on Government expenditure, it is right that we should be prepared to allocate sufficient funds, even ample funds, to sustain our drive for excellence in education.

While we are committed to upgrading the quality of education and meeting the aspirations of parents, the question which is pertinent which Members should ask themselves is: whether by relying on Government alone to provide all the funds, will we be able to provide the varied and comprehensive educational programmes which, as the Member says, more and more Singaporeans will want for their children? If I were to give an answer to this question, Members really need to know how much it will cost to provide a really good education which will fully satisfy the expectations of parents. Parents differ in what they would like to see in their children's education. They want the minimum, but after that each parent will have his own aspirations. The cost will differ accordingly. There is therefore no definitive answer.

It costs us at the present time about $3,000 per annum in recurrent expenditure on the average to educate a child in each of our secondary schools. At this level of expenditure, with variations for primary education and tertiary education, total Government expenditure on education amounts to slightly under 4% of our GDP or between 11-12% of total Government expenditure. If we reduce class size to give more individual attention to students, if we provide a wider variety of enrichment and elective subjects, if we improve our school facilities, then of course Government expenditure must rise and this is right. But to what extent? Instead of $3,000, should it be $6,000, $7,000, $8,000? Where will the limit be? That is a subjective question.

But, Sir, we can get a very rough idea about what it would cost to provide very good quality education in Singapore if we use very roughly as a guide some of the fees charged by some of the foreign schools in Singapore, because these schools have to charge their pupils economic rates of fees. They do not receive any subsidy. And it may interest Members to know some of the fees which are charged by some of these schools.

Let me just take three of them. For example, the American School. For students from Grades 9 to 12, which I think is equivalent to our Secondary 3, Secondary 4, Pre-U 1 and Pre-U 2 (the last four years of high school), the cost in fees alone, excluding registration fee and so on, is $11,400 per annum. United World College of Southeast Asia, for their secondary school and pre-university classes, $10,950 per annum. The ISS International School for Grades 9 to 12 again, $10,000 per annum. These schools are not profit-making enterprises. All of the revenue which they get from their fees is used to fund their operations. And even with these fees, the schools run at a deficit, not large, but they have a deficit every year which has to be covered and made up by gifts and donations.

If we want to give a very good education to every child in Singapore, which I am sure all of us want, and if we were to ignore all economic considerations altogether and very roughly as a guide, say, we take a figure of $12,000 per annum as the cost required to finance the cost of a very good education for every child in our schools and compare this with the $3,000 which we are now spending at the present time - it does not require mathematical genius to work out - roughly speaking, if all of these additional costs were to come from the Government, we should raise our educational expenditure by roughly four times. What this means is that we should devote 15-16% of our GDP on education or roughly 40-50% of total Government expenditure. Obviously, this cannot be done without cutting down on other vital programmes, such as defence, internal security, housing and health.

We therefore have to consider whether there is a means whereby we can allow those parents who want good education for their children to have it within Singapore and at the same time keeping Government expenditure on education to reasonable limits and to allow variations so that Government provides a good basic education. Anything above that should be paid for by the parents.

In addition to increasing Government expenditure, Sir, I think the key is to change the system of financing schools. Effectively, the system which we are now using is called line by line financing, which means we approve every item of expenditure. It may be worthwhile to switch over to a system of block financing which is the system we are using to fund the newly established independent schools in Singapore.

For the independent schools, instead of funding them on a line by line basis and determining the number of teachers, the number of pupils the schools should enrol, the programmes that they should run, we give each of these schools a block grant which on a per capita basis is equivalent to the cost required to educate a child in a Government or Government-aided school. In return for this block grant, the schools agree to follow basic Government educational policies, of which the most important is our bilingual policy, the teaching of English and the mother tongue. The schools also prepare children for our national examinations and teach the Civics/Moral Education Programme which is available in all our other schools.

The crucial difference is that the independent schools have the flexibility to determine their own programmes, recruit their own teachers and charge their own fees. In this way, they have been able to raise the finance to fund new educational programmes without reference to the Ministry of Education. They have introduced smaller classes for better teacher-pupil interaction. They have introduced new elective subjects and enrichment programmes to cater for pupils with different talents and abilities. To attract good teachers to join them, the independent schools have introduced innovative compensation packages such as merit increments, responsibility allowances and year-end performance bonuses.

As the schools are not tied down to simply being funded by the Government or through donations, they are able to respond more quickly and effectively to the different aspirations of parents. If the schools have to obtain the permission of the Ministry before they initiated any programme, I believe that many of their initiatives would not have got off the ground.

To sum up, Sir, the thrust of my remarks this afternoon is that we want to raise the quality of education for all children in Singapore and we will do this. But to improve the quality of education to meet the aspirations of parents, it is not sufficient merely for Government to spend more money, although this is necessary, and the Government has never stinted on its allocation of funds for education.

But, Sir, we have to take a wider perspective and consider not only spending more money but also giving schools more control over their finances and educational programmes so that they can meet what parents want and change the system of funding schools. If you like, Sir, this is in a sense introducing a degree of market diversity within the general framework of centralised Government educational policy. Our overall educational policy will ensure that all schools in Singapore adhere to common goals which are consonant with our national and social objectives. But freeing the schools and giving them greater flexibility in operations and funding will, I believe, in the end, enable the schools to respond more effectively to the needs and aspirations of parents. In this way, we will at the end of the day have a more responsive, a more flexible education system which will more fully meet the needs and aspirations of parents in Singapore.

Much obliged, Sir, for this long answer.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, the Minister has mentioned that the average recurrent expenditure per pupil is about $3,000 a month. Is this the amount the Government gives in per capita grant to the secondary schools? That is the first question. The Minister said that the per capita grant to the secondary and independent schools are the same. Is this the amount of the per capita grant given by the Government for the average child in secondary schools? What is the average recurrent expenditure per child per year in the independent schools?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: $3,000. It is not per month. It is per year, Sir. It is the average cost incurred by the Government in educating a child in one of our Government or Government-aided schools. Using this as the basis, this is the amount which we give to each of the independent schools for each child who is enrolled in the independent schools. But of course the amount varies from year to year. I have used $3,000 as the average. Next year, I think the amount will be increased to $3,100. It depends, because costs increase every year.

As for the average cost of educating a child in one of the independent schools, it varies from school to school. It depends on what the school provides. [Mr Chiam See Tong interrupted] I do not know. It is up to the schools, as I said. The school has more programmes, it has got more facilities, it has music lessons, dance lessons, it has got smaller classes, the cost must rise. My point is that it is right and fair that the additional cost should be borne by the parents.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam (Fengshan): Mr Speaker, Sir, will the Ministry assist the independent schools which want to start scholarship and welfare funds to obtain IPC status quickly, so that these funds can be available by the time the new term starts?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Sir, the Ministry has always assisted the independent schools and any schools which want to start their scholarship funds. The independent schools already have their own endowment funds. And I think the public should read the statement by the independent schools which was issued last week. It was stated that any pupil who requires financial assistance is requested to get in touch with the schools as soon as possible. And I would urge any pupil who needs assistance to get in touch with his school.

Mr Chiam See Tong: The Minister is aware that Asians are reluctant to go and ask for assistance. I think most parents, if they can afford it, will send their children to independent schools, and if they cannot afford it they will send their children to the ordinary Government schools. My point is eventually if there is a runaway in fees ---

Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, what is your question?

Mr Chiam See Tong: If there is a runaway in fees, eventually these independent schools will become the herald in Eden of Singapore. Is it not correct?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Sir, I am glad the Member has raised this question. I read in the press of some parents who said that they would not want to enrol their children in independent schools because they would not want to ask for assistance, because they will lose face and so on, which the Member has just said. Sir, I think this is a very wrong attitude. Any parent who does not give his child, if he is of the right quality, the opportunity to enrol and get a place in the best school that the child can get in, is doing his child a great disservice. We have said that, get your child in, then see the school and we will ensure that he has the means to pay the fees. But if you do not simply because you do not want to ask for assistance and you deny the child the chance of going to a school which he wants to go and which is good for him, I cannot think of any greater disservice which any parent can render to his child. My advice is to repeat what the independent schools have stated in their joint statement. They have encouraged all children who are able, who are of high quality, apply for admission to the independent schools. Once you are in, we will see what assistance which you will need in order to pay the fees. But not even to apply for admission simply because you do not want to ask for assistance, I think this is an attitude of mind which we should correct, and as soon as possible.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I suspect that people who say that they are shy in asking for assistance are not really giving the true reason. I think it is economic reason. The fees probably are so high that they are afraid to ask for assistance and they are afraid they might not be able to repay them back. Assuming the fees escalate to as high as $12,000 a year, how can a working taxi-driver or a hawker dare even to go and ask for assistance when the fees are so high?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: I am not sure what is the question. But, never mind, it is all right. [Mr Chiam See Tong interrupted] No. I have never said the fees will be as high as $12,000 a year. This is a yardstick which I used in order to get some testing. But the schools have said that if the pupils need help, come and ask, and we will ensure that they will get help. Why assume from the start that they will not get the assistance?

Dr Lee Siew-Choh: If it is the intention of the Government to get the better qualified students to go into the better quality schools, wouldn't it be better, to save the spectacle of causing inconvenience and loss of face to parents, for the Government to select a group of students who should be in the better schools rather than asking them to go by themselves?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Sir, the Government has a responsibility to educate all children, not only bright children or children of above average quality. What we are doing by this system is to allow variations. I also do not believe that all wisdom in education resides within the Ministry of Education. Parents have different expectations, different aspirations. The people who should decide what is best for students are the principals and the teachers. They are the ones who are closest to the ground. They are the ones who know their pupils best. They are the ones who should decide what programmes are most suitable for the children who are in their charge. We should devise a system which will enable them to do this. And if the progress of the independent schools is any indication, it may be that the system of funding which we are using to fund these independent schools may provide the path which we will need in the future.

Dr Vasoo: Sir, would the Ministry be monitoring the impact of the implementation of this independent school programme, and at the same time to ensure that children who are able to get in but who are from poor families still will be able to get into these schools?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Yes, of course, the Ministry will be monitoring these programmes not only to ensure that children from poor families are able to get in but also to see what these schools do because they have introduced innovative programmes. One example which Members will know is that we have just introduced responsibility allowances for heads of departments in our secondary schools and junior colleges. The reason why we have done so is because this was introduced by the independent schools first and we have found that it has worked in getting teachers who want to assume positions of responsibility. So we will monitor the schools not only with regard to the admission of pupils but also with regard to what these schools do and what we can adopt and apply to other schools in Singapore. The final results, Sir, must be that we want to upgrade the quality of education for all children in Singapore. That must be the aim of the Government.