considered to be cost-effective; and it would not necessarily result in any improvement in the quality of post- Form III education. Instead, the Commission recommended that funds should be used to build more good quality secondary schools, improve the teacher quality and the quality of technical and vocational education, which would be timed for the phasing out of the JSEA in 1991. A working group consisting of Education Department staff, secondary school heads and educators would be set up to work out a new means of allocation in 1991. The Curriculum Development Committee would also examine the feasibility of introducing more interesting and less academic studies in the secondary school curriculum.
Dr Henrietta IP spoke in support of the Commission Report. She considered that while buying Form IV places in private schools irrespective of quality might bring forward the date for the abolition of the JSEA, she preferred the more rational and cost- effective approach adopted by the Commission. She said that vocational education should be promoted as being equally important and meaningful for the community and individuals and she urged that a coordinating and accrediting body should be set up for the large number of open education programmes in Hong Kong.
Mrs Rita FAN asked for a commitment by the Government that 1991 would be the latest possible date for the abolition of JSEA. In the interim, she hoped that the relevant authorities would make an effort to reduce pressure for the junior secondary students. She supported the Commission's recommendation that subsidised post-Form III education opportunities should comprise of both vocational education as well as Form IV places in secondary schools. As regards Putonghua training in school, she proposed that the possibility of using audio-visual methods should be explored in case of shortage of qualified language teachers and that Putonghua lessons should be made part of the formal curriculum in every school. She also spoke in support of the Commission's recommendation concerning the qualitative improvement of the teaching service. In particular, she strongly supported the proposal that teachers of craft and technical subjects should be encouraged to update themselves on
the latest technological developments. As regards the next phase of the Commission's work on improvement for kindergarten teachers, she stressed that kindergarten teachers should not receive any less attention than teachers at other levels. She also suggested that Government should give due consideration to the possibility of subsidising suitably qualified students on "approved" training courses.
Mrs Pauline NG urged the Government to speed up the building of the 24 schools proposed in the Commission Report and to bring forward the date of completion of the 10 schools under Stage V (Phase II) of the Secondary Schools Building Programme to 1989. She also hoped that the Commission would give priority to drawing up a
comprehensive plan for the promotion of civic education in primary and secondary schools.
Mr YEUNG Po-kwan spoke as a member of the Commission and supported the proposals made in the Report. While the intention was to phase out the JSEA gradually by 1991, he hoped that the abolition of the system could be advanced to an earlier date if conditions became more favourable in the future. He also spoke in support of bilingualism and teacher training.
Mr Peter C WONG strongly supported the proposal of the Education Commission to phase out the JSEA by 1991 and considered that its recommmendations had
harmonised the needs of the community and the wishes of the individual within the resources available.
In reply, the Secretary for Education and Manpower reassured that the recommendations put forward by the Education Commission were in line with its aim to improve the secondary education system as a whole in quality and quantity. He emphasised that the Commission was a standing commission and would continue to review its own recommendations and tackle further problems not covered in its first report.
The proposed title of British National (Overseas), BN(0)
In opening the debate on the Second Reading of the Hong Kong Bill in the House of Commons on 21.1.85, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Sir Geoffrey
Howe, announced that pursuant to the UK Memorandum associated with the Sino-British Joint Declaration on the future of Hong Kong, a new form of British nationality would be introduced under the schedule to the Bill. Sir Geoffrey said,—
"Following consultation with the Hong Kong Executive Council, it is intended that the title of the new form of nationality should be 'British National (Overseas)'".
In recognition of the far-reaching implications of the proposed title and the need for public discussion on the subject, Members agreed at the LegCo in-house meeting on 30.1.85 that an adjournment debate on the proposed title of British National (Overseas) (BN(O)) should be held on 6.2.85. Four Members spoke during the debate.
Mr Andrew SO stressed the importance which Hong Kong people attached to freedom of travel and movement. He welcomed the provisions in both the Chinese and the UK memoranda which allowed HK BDTCs to retain some form of British
status and to use travel documents issued by the British Government after 1997. However, he pointed out that the memoranda were not as binding as the Agreement itself. He was of the view that the new title was not only a matter of concern for over 3 million BDTCs in Hong Kong, but also for the whole population as this was regarded as the touchstone for all the commitments promised in the Agreement.
Mr CHEUNG Yan-lung said that people were more concerned with the rights given in the proposed new travel document than with its name. He pointed out that an endorsement on future BN(O) or British Overseas Citizen (BOC) passports to the effect that the holder had a permanent identity card of the HK SAR and a right of abode in Hong Kong was absolutely necessary to make the new travel document acceptable to third countries. He stressed that such an endorsement was in line with Section 14 of Annex I to the Joint Declaration. In addition, he raised a number of issues regarding the proposed travel document which included whether BN(O) passport holders had to carry their HK SAR identity cards as proof of their right of abode in Hong Kong; whether the new document would be valid for 10 years; and whether the same rules that applied to registration
2233
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.