Page 60 of 382
98
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
There is a tendency in this modern, insecure world of ours to concentrate our attention on matters of immediate moment and seldom, if ever, to raise our sights to see further into the future. In a closely-knit city state like Hong Kong with its multitude of pressing daily problems, there is an undoubted pressure on us to restrict our attention in this manner. I would venture to suggest that we more often than not concentrate our attention in educational matters to the pressing problem of the moment and allow the overall, long-term picture to get distorted and out-of-focus.
In the particular deliberations of this Council Chamber we have sitting with us appointed and elected councillors, the heads of certain departments, the nature of whose work Government requires to be explained and/or justified by the person best qualified to do so. Because the work of this Council has expanded out of all proportion to the pattern envisaged by its founders, it seems to me that a department, whose work is of paramount importance to the future well-being of Hong Kong, has been passed over unwisely in the allocation of seats in this Council. Since the Urban Council is dealing more directly with the people than virtually any other organ of Government, it is only natural that a fundamental requirement of the common people to-day—that is, education—should form the subject of questions asked and matters discussed in this Chamber.
As we are at present constituted, there is no one here who is, strictly speaking, competent to pronounce on or defend Government's educational policy. Nor from a mere reading of the minutes of the deliberations of this Council will the Director of Education be able to feel the pulse of the people's views, aspirations or disappointments in this matter. Any governing body anywhere in the world to-day will be judged by its educational policy as much as by its defence, or health, or housing policies. Only if the Director of Education sits here among us will it be possible to get quickly and accurately, satisfactory answers to problems or questions that may be raised in this Council. You, Ladies and Gentlemen, are every bit as much aware as I am of how the work to be dealt with in this Council is growing. You are, I take it, as anxious as I am that it should be dealt with in as fair and efficient a manner as possible. No written reply, however long and comprehensive, can replace for efficiency, fairness and speed, the actual voice of the head of the department dealing with the matter here among us.
Our educational system is far from perfect. Yet we have many reasons to be proud of it. Whether we like it or not, educational questions are going to be raised here and more frequently in the immediate future. It is not a matter we can afford to ignore. We have a moral obligation to our citizens to deal with all questions relating to it seriously and carefully. We cannot honestly do that if our relations with the Director are second or third or even twentieth hand. Without him among us, if we are to devote the attention the questions demand, we will spend long hours here that could be as well employed on other questions, because we are involved in rounds of discussions that could be resolved in five minutes or less by a word from the only person competent to know—the Director of Education.
Sir, for the reasons I have set forth above, I have great pleasure in supporting the resolution before this Council.
MR. BERNACCHI:-On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I would refer the last speaker to Standing Order 10(6).
MR. HENRY HU:-Mr. Chairman, I also support the motion. First of all, I am grateful to you for sending me this White Paper on Education Policy. I support the motion because there are several loop-holes in this White Paper. May I refer you first of all to the Education Policy in page 2, item 9: "School places. It is intended to extend the number of places in government and aided primary schools as rapidly as possible, and to introduce a scheme of subsidized places in private schools, so as to provide for all children who seek any such places." This only stipulates subsidized places, but it does not indicate how much the Government will subsidize. Government may subsidize for $3, then after 5 years when we implement this policy the education fee may go up by $5. This is loop-hole No. 1.
If you turn to page 6, paragraph 17: "It is proposed further to allow pupils who have completed the extra primary year referred to in para. 10 to enter the School Certificate examination after four years of secondary education if they show themselves capable of successfully completing the course in that period. Notwithstanding the introduction of the additional year into the primary school course, there is no intention of shortening the present five-year secondary course for all pupils until there is evidence to show that this can be done without serious detriment to academic standards." Now this paragraph 17: It has been suggested that Government has not decided whether a period of four years or five years should be adopted. Why then should the Education Department take all the schools in the Colony as an experiment? Why should the Education Department not choose one or two schools to have this experiment carried out? If Government is satisfied that four years is better than five years or five years is better than four years, then that policy will be fixed and it will be carried out in the whole Colony. Then it will be for the benefit of the whole Colony. That, I consider to be loop-hole No. 2.
CHAIRMAN:- May I respectfully draw your attention to Standing Order 10(7): a member shall direct his speech to the question under discussion. Sir, the motion under discussion concerns the enactment of
Page 61 of 382
99
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 60
Page 61
382
Page 60 of 382
98
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
There is a tendency in this modern, insecure world of ours to con- centrate our attention on matters of immediate moment and seldom, if ever, to raise our sights to see further into the future. In a closely-knit city state like Hong Kong with its multitude of pressing daily problems, there is an undoubted pressure on us to restrict our attention in this manner. I would venture to suggest that we more often than not con- centrate our attention in educational matters to the pressing problem of the moment and allow the overall, long-term picture to get distorted and out-of-focus.
In the particular deliberations of this Council Chamber we have sitting with us appointed and elected councillors, the heads of certain departments, the nature of whose work Government requires to be ex- plained and/or justified by the person best qualified to do so. Because the work of this Council has expanded out of all proportion to the pat- tern envisaged by its founders, it seems to me that a department, whose work is of paramount importance to the future well-being of Hong Kong, has been passed over unwisely in the allocation of seats in this Council. Since the Urban Council is dealing more directly with the people than virtually any other organ of Government, it is only natural that a fundamental requirement of the common people to-day-that is, education-should form the subject of questions asked and matters discussed in this Chamber.
As we are at present constituted, there is no one here who is, strictly speaking, competent to pronounce on or defend Government's educational policy. Nor from a mere reading of the minutes of the deliberations of this Council will the Director of Education be able to feel the pulse of the people's views, aspirations or disappointments in this matter. Any governing body anywhere in the world to-day will be judged by its educational policy as much as by its defence, or health, or housing policies. Only if the Director of Education sits here among us will it be possible to get quickly and accurately, satisfactory answers to problems or questions that may be raised in this Council. You, Ladies and Gentlemen, are every bit as much aware as I am of how the work to be dealt with in this Council is growing. You are, I take it, as anxious as I am that it should be dealt with in as fair and efficient a manner as possible. No written reply, however long and comprehen- sive, can replace for efficiency, fairness and speed, the actual voice of the head of the department dealing with the matter here among us.
Our educational system is far from perfect. Yet we have many reasons to be proud of it. Whether we like it or not, educational questions are going to be raised here and more frequently in the immediate future. It is not a matter we can afford to ignore. We have a moral obligation to our citizens to deal with all questions relating to it seriously and carefully. We cannot honestly do that if our relations
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
99
with the Director are second or third or even twentieth hand. Without him among us, if we are to devote the attention the questions demand, we will spend long hours here that could be as well employed on other questions, because we are involved in rounds of discussions that could be resolved in five minutes or less by a word from the only person competent to know-the Director of Education.
Sir, for the reasons I have set forth above, I have great pleasure in supporting the resolution before this Council.
MR. BERNACCHI:-On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I would refer the last speaker to Standing Order 10(6).
MR. HENRY HU:-Mr. Chairman, I also support the motion. First of all, I am grateful to you for sending me this White Paper on Education Policy. I support the motion because there are several loop-holes in this White Paper. May I refer you first of all to the Education Policy in page 2, item 9: "School places. It is intended to extend the number of places in government and aided primary schools as rapidly as possible, and to introduce a scheme of subsidized places in private schools, so as to provide for all children who seek any such places." This only stipulates subsidized places, but it does not indicate how much the Government will subsidize. Government may subsidize for $3, then after 5 years when we implement this policy the education fee may go up by $5. This is loop-hole No. 1.
If you turn to page 6, paragraph 17: "It is proposed further to allow pupils who have completed the extra primary year referred to in para. 10 to enter the School Certificate examination after four years of secondary education if they show themselves capable of successfully completing the course in that period. Notwithstanding the introduction of the additional year into the primary school course, there is no inten- tion of shortening the present five-year secondary course for all pupils until there is evidence to show that this can be done without serious detriment to academic standards." Now this paragraph 17: It has been suggested that Government has not decided whether a period of four years or five years should be adopted. Why then should the Education Department take all the schools in the Colony as an experi- ment? Why should the Education Department not choose one or two schools to have this experiment carried out? If Government is satisfied that four years is better than five years or five years is better than four years, then that policy will be fixed and it will be carried out in the whole Colony. Then it will be for the benefit of the whole Colony. That, I consider to be loop-hole No. 2.
CHAIRMAN:- May I respectfully draw your attention to Standing Order 10(7): a member shall direct his speech to the question under discussion. Sir, the motion under discussion concerns the enactment of
Page 60Page 61
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.