In Singapore, the debate over whether neighbourhood schools are inferior to so-called elite schools rages on years after years. I think we need to looks at different perspectives to draw a conclusion.

In my opinion, all these debates are mainly due to people’s obsession with image. The phenomenon in Singapore is that majority of the population take image issues seriously. In the same article, one student from an elite school comments that elite schools help to project a good image on the students. This belief reverberates among many Singaporean students and their parents. As a result, many strive for the best school possible, as they believe that elite schools are superior to neighbourhood schools.

In terms of providing opportunities, neighbourhood schools may not do as a good job as elite schools because they have a different focus from each other. Different schools have different admission criteria. Singapore is a nation that emphasizes on meritocracy, which also forms the basic guideline that all schools adhere to when it comes to formulating their respective educational policies. As a result, if your scores are fabulous, more choices of schools, both neighbourhood and elite, will be open to you to further your education. If your results are not up to certain schools’ requirements, then you are likely to be rejected and your choices of schools will be limited. So, the standard of most schools are actually fixed in the first place, with good schools enrolling only top-notch students. For instance, Raffle’s Junior College only recruits students with grade of A1 in all subjects in their “O” level examinations while some eighbourhood Junior Colleges take in students with Bs and Cs. The system in elite schools only cater to students who are good at grasping knowledge and have potentials in attaining various kinds of scholarships. They focus a great deal on portfolio building rather than academic achievements, as they are confident that their students are academically capable and able to score well in the end since all of them have met the strict criteria at the admission point. However, for schools that accept students with decent grades, their focus is to push their students to a greater height on the academic ladder. They are not aiming for scholarships. Logically, if one is not performing well academically, they may have difficulties in entering local universities, let along obtaining scholarship and allocating time for non-academic activities. Thus, in neighbourhood schools, opportunities are not off wide range. It is not that the schools are not willing to provide the chances. The problems lie in the lacking of capable students who can cope with both academic load and intensive co-curriculum programmes such as competitions and activities aiming at developing various life skills in students. It is not realistic for the school to start a course just for a small group of pupils. It has to utilize its MOE-allocated fund appropriately and wisely and ensure that every sum of money spent would bring benefits to the general population of the school. In Strait Time article, titled “neighbourhood vs. elite schools: Does it matter?” a student grumble that when it comes to picking students to represent Singapore in overseas trips, like conferences and seminars, those chosen usually come from the elite school. Those from neighbourhood schools have a much lower chance of going. Unfortunately, Singapore is run based on merit, opportunities are often granted to students with good scores. Thus, opportunities in elite schools are generally wider than neighbourhood schools.

However, the quality of teaching would be the same across the board and facilities are comparable. All teachers in Singapore have undergone professional training and they are equally capable in guiding their students, instilling knowledge in and motivating their students. Almost every school has an advisory committee to provide financial support besides the fixed amount of funding allocated by the government. Facilities in some neighbourhood schools may be better than some elite schools. In this case, I do not find any difference between neighbourhood schools and elite schools. All schools have computers and science laboratories for students to research. No students are denied the resources to grasp knowledge and to score well in examinations.

There are essentially no differences between neighbourhood schools and elite schools. Students have to evaluate which school best suits their needs. Like what teachers and principals here always stress, it is of “no point choosing a school which has a good name and good academic results, but where one cannot catch up”. Also, being enrolled in elite schools does not mean that one will definitely do well, as constant hard work is still essential.

Freedom Of Speech In China

The status quo in China is that freedom of speech is not encouraged. People are deprived of the right to express views openly and caustically regarding government policies, sensitive pass events such as the infamous Tiananmen Square event and of course the Communist idea that rules the nation. They are likely to be charged if they are caught criticizing the central government. According to a Newsweek article titled, “Blogger Nation”, all newspapers are state controlled and they contain information that have already been carefully censored and processed. The most recent controversy would be over its strict policies to restrict the scope of topics that bloggers’ can blog on. Blogs that contain prohibited contents will be shut down with the composers charged as well.

From China’s point of view, all these apparently extreme measures are necessary. It needs to safeguard it national interest. Issues like Tiananmen Square event, where democracy advocates were harshly suppressed and the Cultural Revolution are highly sensitive. They may likely to stir up anti-communist feeling among the youngsters who are increasingly exposed to Western cultures. China is a communist country. It is being ruled by communist ideas. Anti-communist sentiment will likely abate the sense of belonging to China in the younger generation. The people who would question the party are always those who are educated, intelligent and skilled. Nevertheless, they are the elite and talented. China needs them to drive its economic development. If they become increasingly skeptical about the party and the government, they would not feel willing to contribute to China, which holds an ideology they greatly loathe. Brain drain may occur as a result. China’s high-speed economic development is likely to be hindered. Also, these sensitive issues may further jeopardize the already deteriorating social stability in China. When pro-democratic emotion is aroused, movements requesting for review of the Tiananmen Square event, such as demonstrations, would likely be triggered. Social unrest problem will then be exacerbated. As a result, in order to safeguard the peace in the nation, control on freedom of speech is necessary. National interest dominates.

Moreover, China also controls bloggers’ freedom to express anti-Japanese feeling. This control helps to preserve bilateral ties with Japan. Japan’s role as China’s economic partner has growth more significant. It is wiser for China to regard Japan as a friend rather than enemy. Although Japan conduct some unacceptable acts—revision of its history textbook, visiting of War Shrine by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi—what it receives from China are merely written and oral criticisms and nothing else. Economic cooperation between Japan and China continues. For instance, although Chinese Vice Prime Minister Wu Yi refused to meet Koizumi after learning that he has paid a visit to the War Shrine, she continued to meet businessmen in Japan. China does not allow political problems to obstruct it economic development. Allowing people to express anti-Japan emotions online may anger Japan and stalemate Sino-Japan relation. As a result, it is necessary to restrict people’s views.

In addition, China has supporters, too. According to the abovementioned article—Blogger Nation—“at least three dozen governments around the world try hard to control the online environment. Many of the most extensive efforts are found in regimes in the Middle East, in places like Iran, Saudi Arabia. Asian regimes, like Uzbekistan, Burma also filters the Internet. Some nations are actually importing the techniques and software for Internet control developed in China, such as Iran and Vietnam.” Although there are overwhelming criticisms, they are mainly from the Western world, where anti-communist sentiment is high. It would be unfair to judge China’s control of freedom of speech based solely on Western ideas, as there are nations that uphold the same ideologies as China and are supportive towards its policies.

On the other hand, I think it would be a little too strict as open and unfettered discussion of policies actually helps to formulate better policies and improve people’s standard and quality of life. Freedom of speech brings social problems into light. The central government would be more informed about what is going on from blog entries online. It is broadly known fact that reports, which most provincial governments summit to the central government, carries little credibility. Sometimes, truth is likely to be found from the stories and angry cursing words put up by the bloggers. In the case of combating corruption problem, I think bloggers can do a better job. For instance, an anti-corruption crusader exposed officials who had forced a woman to be fitted for an IUD for birth control, helping the government to bring them to justice. I think the government should allow bloggers to join its battle line against corruption by loosening its control on their views. Discussions on government policies should be encouraged.

Also, with regard to the Japan issue, some may find it a little ironic that it instills in its younger generation a negative perception of Japan, and yet desperately attempts to prevent them from unlashing their anti-Japan feeling. People in this sense are seriously tantalized. I have received education in China for ten years and I had never been informed anything good about Japan. What the education system had indoctrinated into me was the wide range of excesses the Japan conducted during its invasion of China. Most historical books portray Japan as a cruel, inhuman and barbarian nation. As a result, people are bound to have negative views. In my opinion, the party should include some positive aspects of Japan to minimize, if not eliminate, blog entries against Japan in its teaching materials. For instance, it should be made widely know that Japan is the biggest foreign aid donor to China. I believe that people would think twice before expressing negative views towards Japan.

All in all, I support China’s stand to control freedom of speech.

Do you think it is right to sideline the respect for a brain-dead person in order to prolong the lives of others?

I think it is not right to sideline the respect for a brain-dead person in order to prolong the lives of others. Like what Ho said, the medical facts are but one perspective. The concerns of loved ones must not be taken lightly even if the end result is to give life to someone else. No one would like to see his or her loved ones being treated disrespectfully. Usually to the family members and friends, brain-dead is not equivalent to death since patients’ hearts are still beating and their bodies are still warm. Subconsciously, they tend to cling onto the mere hope that the one lying motionlessly on the bed would one day wake up. In their eyes, their loved ones are still living. We thus have to have regard for the brain-dead. We need to take into consideration the feelings of the people who are related to the patients. The power of human ties must not be ignored. In Japan, most people regard brain-dead people as living souls. It is predictable that strong sentiment of unhappiness would be aroused if doctors were to remove organs without family’s approval. Thus, it passed a law that makes it illegitimate to harvest organs from a braid-dead person without family members consent.

Also, instead of sidelining the regard for a brain-dead person, we should respect he or she even more since he or she helps to prolong the lives of others. If the law makes it legal to remove organs from brain-dead people for transplant, doctors should immediately removed the organs wanted and preserve them, allowing funerals to proceed, instead of administering drugs that only sustain the live of the organs but do harm to the patients. It would be cruel to allow the family members to witness the bodies of their loved ones not being taken cared of, but instead being treated as a place of preserving organs. It is also cruel to treat the brain-dead merely as a source of organs. We can prolong the lives of others and at the same times, respect the brain-dead person. I believe that the immediate removal of organs serves as a form of regard for the brain-dead.

Does Google deserve to be criticised?

When Google first entered China’s market, it was not well accepted by the Chinese Government. It was not sure about the rules that it has to comply with in order to strike a successful deal with the government. Now it has learnt its lesson. Together with other big Internet search engines like Yahoo, it has decided to censor its own web contents to fit itself into China. However, its act has drawn overwhelming criticisms from critics of the Western nations. Does it deserve those criticisms? I do not think so.

Google is now a publicly owned company, its ultimate aim is to gain profits besides its ambition to boost information accessibility across the globe. We thus can not blame it for its launching of this commercial strategy to maintain its own sustainability as well as enhance its profitability to survive. After all, it does not inflict any harm on anybody by doing this. Since it is a profit-driven corporation, we should expect it to be flexible according to different needs of different situations, in this case, to comply with the set of rules formulated by the Chinese government. One golden rule to have successful businesses done on a foreign land is that one should be ready to follow the regulations established by the local government as a form of respect for that nation's political system. No nation would welcome a defiant group. Critics from the Western nations tend to adopt a wrong perception of Google, taking it to be a Speech Freedom advocate. They expect Google to be like all Newspapers in Europe and US, disseminating whatever it knows to the public, to the world. However, it is globally known fact that China suppresses freedom of speech heavily. It is thus not realistic to expect Google to perform well in China with its usual tactics of supplying readers with whatever it has. Moreover, critics are simply over worried about Google’s decision. According to the Time article titled, “Google Under the Gun”, China has 4 million bloggers and the number are rising at a rate 18% per year. This figure has far outnumbered the population of the Internet cops. It is impossible for them to exert total control over online content and restrict what people can obtain from online. There are softwares available to overcome the constraints and public can always use spelling and capitalization to outfox the online filter, which is robotically designed. So, why are they worrying so much?


What is more, other foreign search engines are also doing the same thing in China. According to the same article, Yahoo! handed over the computer IP address of a blogger, who used Yahoo! for his e-mail to transmit sensitive state documents, causing him to be jailed for 10 years. Also, when the Chinese government took offense at the entries of a blog hosted by Microsoft’s MSN service, it immediately clamped it shut. Google will be of no exception. Sooner or later, it would encounter things of this nature. As a result, it has to get ready to avoid conflict with the state government should it want its business to prosper.

Another reason why I believe that it does not deserve the criticisms is that it plays a great role in making Chinese people more informed about things happening outside China. China only prohibits discussion of sensitive issues like the Tiananmen Square Event, Cultural Revolution and Reunification with Taiwan for the sake of safeguarding its social and political stability. It is done out of protecting its national interest. We have to respect a nation’s stand. Besides, news regarding global issues and scientific research results are free to be disseminated among people. With its powerful engine, it can boost the information flow in China a great deal. It would be unfair to judge Google simply based on this action of its. It carries some more precious values, which we cannot ignore.

In the end, we should not dwell on its decision to censor its content; instead, we should take a closer look at its real contributions to the information flow in China. To survive and maintain its sustainability, it has to comply with China’s regulations. After all, it is the Chinese people, who are going to decide whether Google has benefited their lives or has brought disasters upon their lives.

Singapore’s ageing population

Soon, Singapore will be greeting another generation of people, born in the postwar baby boom period from 1946 to 1964, who are entering their 60s. This indicates that Singapore’s population is gradually ageing away. Ageing population is a byproduct of development. With better standard of living and quality of life, people nowadays enjoy longevity. However, a burgeoning older population also means a wider range of welfare services needed for the maintenance of senior citizens such as better medical care services. Also, city planners will have to include more special infrastructures, especially for old people, in their blueprints. All these actions and planning are costly and may be a burden to the country. Adding to the problem, Singapore is having less young workers to support the senior group due to a falling birth rate. The fund to take care of senior citizens is usually taxes paid by the working group. As a result, the government may have to impose heavier taxations to generate the fund. Thus, ageing population posts a great burden to the working population as well as a great challenge to the government.

Although an ageing population will drain a substantial amount of resource, the Singapore government seems to be prepared to deal with this upcoming challenge. One of the government’s strategies is to encourage more companies to employ older worker beyond their retirement age. This is a measure the government came out with after it has studied the policies formulated by the Japanese government in dealing with an ageing population. Japan is having an ageing population right now with around 20% of its population being 65 years or above. The fact that it continues to prosper with this considerable number of senior citizens tells the success of their policies. It is important that Singapore learns from Japan to draw up other more comprehensive policies applicable to its own situation. In my opinion, this movement is beneficial. When older workers are kept in the workforce for a longer time, they would be able to generate their own income and pay for their own maintenance costs, such as medical fees, without depending too much on the welfare system. The burden on the dwindling young population will be much reduced.

The reason why many companies reject older people’s job applications is that they believe older workers tend to be less physically fit than younger workers and their productivity may be low. In fear of compromising their companies’ sustainability, many tend not to engage them. However, they should take note that among the older generation, there are skilled senior citizen, who are well equipped with knowledge, talents and experiences that have been accumulated over their years of participation in the nation’s economic development programmes. We could discover a valuable pool of skilled workers from the older population. Undoubtedly, they are capable to serve as mentors and advisors to the companies. For example, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, though has stepped down, continues to served the nation via mentoring younger politicians to help shape the leadership qualities of the nation’s future leaders and providing valuable advices to policy makers. Also, this concern over older workers’ competency is not a big problem right now, as the government is willing to provide training subsidies to train senior citizens to ensure their employability. With this measure in place, older workers’ skills will be upgraded and their capability would be comparable to that of young workers. According to a Straits Times article, the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) will bear 90 per cent of the training cost should a company decide to retrain their older workers.

Besides, a tripartite alliance—comprising the NTUC, employer and the Government—has also been established to draw up a list of fair employment practices towards workers regardless of age, gender, race or religion to ensure the successful launching of this policy.