TNAG-1361-FCO40-1807-Hong-Kong-Hansard-reports-and-minutes-of-the-meetings-of-the-1985 — Page 322

- 2

Sir, I wish to take this opportunity to reiterate my remarks made at the last policy debate about the

recommendations made by the Working Party on the Chinese Language Foundation. The Working Party submitted its report to the Government in March 1982. It has become a matter of growing concern to me that after a lapse of almost three full years, there is still no indication from the Government as to how and when the recommendations of the Working Party would be implemented. The Education Commission notes in para. 3.10 that consideration is still being given to the establishment of a Chinese Language Foundation. I urge the Government not to drag

its feet on this issue any longer.

On the teaching of putonghua in schools, the Education Commission recommends in para. 3.28 that schools should be encouraged to teach putonghua during school hours or as an extra-curricular activity. I agree that considering the political change which is to take place in Hong Kong in the next decade, putonghua will be used more extensively than before. I think the recommendation made by the Education

Commission on this issue is timely and appropriate.

However, there is another aspect in the encouragement to use putonghua. I am sure we are all aware of the plight of the Cantonese-speaking pupils. They face the difficulty of reconciling the spoken and written form of Chinese in the Cantonese context. Let me illustrate " 食嘢 (means "to eat") is the spoken form (#). Whereas in a composition, the pupils will have to use the written form "" (same

吃東西

11

meaning). The use of putonghua will not only remove this obstacle, but will also make easy and raise the standard of written Chinese. This had been recognised by the Working Party on the Chinese Language Foundation.