Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698746888910.pdf (Malaysia)
Volume III No.

19 Thursday 19th October, 1961 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES DEWAN R A' AY AT CHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES) OFFICIAL REPORT CONTENTS BILL— The Education Bill [Col. 1927] ADJOURNMENT SPEECHES— Royal Federation of Malaya Police (Marine) [Col. 2009] Malayan Fishermen Fishing in the Straits of Malacca [Col. 2011] DI-TERBITKAN OLEH THOR BENG CHONG PEMANGKU PENCHETAK KERAJAAN PERSEKUTUAN TANAH MELAYU 1962 FEDERATION OF MALAYA DEWAN RA'AYAT (HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES) Official Report Vol.
III Third Session of the First Dewan Ra'ayat No.

19 Thursday, 19th October 1961 The House met at Ten o'clock a.m.

PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Speaker, DATO' HAJI MOHAMED NOAH BIN OMAR, S.P.MJ., D.P.M.B., P.I.S., J.P. the Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Defence and Minister of Rural Development, TUN HAJI ABDUL RAZAK BIN DATO' HUSSAIN, S.M.N.

(Pekan).

the Minister of Internal Security and Minister of the Interior, DATO' DR. ISMAIL BIN DATO' HAJI ABDUL RAHMAN, P.M.N.

(Johor Timor).
(Johor Timor).

the Minister of Finance, ENCHE' TAN SIEW SIN, J.P. (Melaka Tengah).

the Minister of Works, Posts and Telecommunications, DATO' V. T. SAMBANTHAN, P.M.N.

(Sungai Siput).

the Minister of Transport, DATO' SARDON BIN HAJI JUBIR, P.M.N.

(Pontian Utara).

the Minister of Health and Social Welfare, DATO' ONG YOKE LIN, P.M.N.

(Ulu Selangor).

the Minister of Commerce and Industry, ENCHE' MOHAMED KHIR BIN JOHARI (Kedah Tengah).

the Minister of Labour, ENCHE' BAHAMAN BIN SAMSUDIN (Kuala Pilah).
the Minister of Education, ENCHE' ABDUL RAHMAN BIN HAJI TALIB (Kuantan).

the Assistant Minister of Education, ENCHE' ABDUL HAMID J.M.N., J.P. KHAN BIN HAJI SAKHAWAT A LI KHAN, (Batang Padang).

the Assistant Minister of Rural Development, TUAN HAJI ABDUL KHALID BIN AWANG OSMAN (Kota Star Utara).

the Assistant Minister of Commerce and Industry, ENCHE' CHEAH THEAM SWEE (Bukit Bintang).

the Assistant Minister of the Interior, ENCHE' MOHAMED ISMAIL BIN MOHAMED YUSOF (Jerai).
ENCHE' ABDUL GHANI BIN ISHAK, A.M.N.

(Melaka Utara).

1923 19 OCTOBER 1961 1924 The Honourable ENCHE' ABDUL RAUF BIN A. RAHMAN (Krian Laut).

ENCHE' ABDUL SAMAD BIN OSMAN (Sungai Patani).

TUAN HAJI ABDULLAH BIN HAJI ABDUL RAOF (Kuala Kangsar).

TUAN HAJI ABDULLAH BIN HAJI MOHD.

SALLEH, A.M.N., P.I.S.

(Segamat Utara).

TUAN HAJI AHMAD BIN ABDULLAH (Kota Bharu Hilir).

ENCHE' AHMAD BIN ARSHAD, A.M.N.

(Muar Utara).

ENCHE' AHMAD BOESTAMAM (Setapak).

ENCHE' AHMAD BIN MOHAMED SHAH, S.M.J.


(Johor Bahru Barat).

TUAN HAJI AHMAD BIN SAAID (Seberang Utara).

ENCHE' AHMAD BIN HAJI YUSOF, P.J.K.

(Krian Darat).

TUAN HAJI AZAHARI BIN HAJI IBRAHIM (Kubang Pasu Barat).

ENCHE' AZIZ BIN ISHAK (Muar Dalam).

DR. BURHANUDDIN BIN MOHD.

NOOR (Besut).

ENCHE' CHAN CHONG WEN, A.M.N.

(Kluang Selatan).

ENCHE' CHAN SIANG SUN (Bentong).

ENCHE' CHAN SWEE HO (Ulu Kinta).

ENCHE' CHAN YOON ONN (Kampar).

ENCHE' CHIN SEE Y IN (Seremban Timor).


DATIN FATIMAH BINTI HAJI HASHIM, P.M.N.

(Jitra-Padang Terap).

ENCHE' GEH CHONG KEAT (Penang Utara).

ENCHE' HAMZAH BIN ALANG, A.M.N.

(Kapar), ENCHE' HANAFI BIN MOHD.

YUNUS, A.M.N.

(Kulim Utara).

ENCHE' HARUN BIN ABDULLAH, A.M.N.

(Baling).

ENCHE' HARUN BIN PILUS (Trengganu Tengah).

TUAN HAJI HASAN ADLI BIN HAJI ARSHAD (Kuala Trengganu Utara).

TUAN HAJI HASSAN BIN HAJI AHMAD (Tumpat).

ENCHE' HASSAN BIN MANSOR (Melaka Selatan).


ENCHE' HUSSEIN BIN T O' MUDA HASSAN (Raub).

ENCHE' HUSSEIN BIN MOHD.

NOORDIN, A.M.N., P.J.K.

(Parit).

TUAN HAJI HUSSAIN RAHIMI BIN HAJI SAMAN (Kota Bharu Hulu) ENCHE' ISMAIL BIN IDRIS (Penang Selatan).

ENCHE' KANG KOCK SENG (Batu Pahat).

ENCHE' K. KARAM SINGH (Damansara).

CHE' KHADIJAH BINTI MOHD.

SIDEK (Dungun).

ENCHE' LEE SAN CHOON (Kluang Utara).

ENCHE' LEE SECK FUN (Tanjong Malim).

ENCHE' LEE SIOK Y EW, A.M.N.

(Sepang).


1925 19 OCTOBER 1961 1926 The Honourable ENCHE' L IM JOO KONG (Alor Star).

ENCHE' L IM KEAN SIEW (Dato Kramat).

ENCHE' L IU YOONG PENG (Rawang).

ENCHE' T. MAHIMA SINGH, J.P. (Port Dickson).

ENCHE' MOHAMED BIN UJANG (Jelebu-Jempol).

ENCHE' MOHAMED ABBAS BIN AHMAD (Hilir Perak).

ENCHE' MOHAMED ASRI BIN HAJI MUDA (Pasir Puteh).

ENCHE' MOHAMED DAHARI BIN HAJI MOHD.

A LI (Kuala Selangor).

ENCHE' MOHAMED NOR BIN MOHD.

DAHAN (Ulu Perak).


DATO' MOHAMED HANIFAH BIN HAJI ABDUL GHANI, P.J.K.

(Pasir Mas Hulu).

ENCHE' MOHAMED SULONG BIN MOHD.

A L I, J.M.N.

(Lipis).

ENCHE' MOHAMED YUSOF BIN MAHMUD, A.M.N.

(Temerloh).

TUAN HAJI MOKHTAR BIN HAJI ISMAIL (Perlis Selatan).

NIK MAN BIN N IK MOHAMED (Pasir Mas Hilir).

ENCHE' NG ANN TECK (Batu).

ENCHE' OTHMAN BIN ABDULLAH (Tanah Merah).

ENCHE' OTHMAN BIN ABDULLAH, A.M.N.

(Perlis Utara).

ENCHE' QUEK KAI DONG, J.P. (Seremban Barat).


TUAN HAJI REDZA BIN HAJI MOHD.

SAID (Rembau-Tampin).

ENCHE' SEAH TENG NGIAB (Muar Pantai).

ENCHE' D. R. SEENIVASAGAM (Ipoh).

ENCHE' S. P. SEENIVASAGAM (Menglembu).

TUAN SYED ESA BIN ALWEE, J.M.N., S.M.J., P.I.S.

(Batu Pahat Dalam).

TUAN SYED HASHIM BIN SYED AJAM, A.M.N., P.J.K.

(Sabak Bernam).

TUAN SYED JA'AFAR BIN HASAN ALBAR, Tenggara).

J.M.N.

(Johor ENCHE' TAJUDIN BIN A L I, P.J.K.

(Larut Utara).

ENCHE' TAN CHENG BEE, J.P. (Bagan).


ENCHE' TAN PHOCK KIN (Tanjong).

ENCHE' TAN TYE CHEK (Kulim-Bandar Bahru).

TENGKU BESAR INDERA RAJA IBNI AL-MARHUM SULTAN IBRAHIM, D.K., P.M.N.

(Ulu Kelantan).

DATO' TEOH CHZE CHONG, D.P.M.J., J.P. (Segamat Selatan).

ENCHE' TOO JOON HING (Telok Anson).

ENCHE' V. VEERAPPEN (Seberang Selatan).

WAN SULAIMAN BIN WAN TAM, P.J.K.

(Kota Star Selatan).

WAN YAHYA BIN HAJI WAN MOHAMED (Kemaman).

ENCHE' YAHYA BIN HAJI AHMAD (Bagan Datoh).


1927 19 OCTOBER 1961 1928 The Honourable ENCHE' YEOH TAT BENG (Bruas).

ENCHE' YONG WOO MING (Sitiawan).

PUAN HAJJAH ZAIN BINTI SULAIMAN, J.M.N., P.I.S.

(Pontian Selatan).

TUAN HAJI ZAKARIA BIN HAJI MOHD.

TAIB (Langat).

ENCHE' ZULKIFLEE BIN MUHAMMAD (Bachok).

ABSENT: The Honourable DATO' SULEIMAN BIN DATO' ABDUL RAHMAN, P.M.N.

(Minister without Portfolio) (Muar Selatan) (On leave).

the Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs, Y.T.M.
TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN PUTRA AL-HAJ, K.O.M.

(Kuala Kedah).

the Minister of Agriculture and Co-operatives, ENCHE' ABDUL AZIZ BIN ISHAK (Kuala Langat).

the Assistant Minister of Labour, ENCHE' V. MANICKA- VASAGAM, J.M.N., PJ.K.

(Klang).

ENCHE' V. DAVID (Bungsar).

ENCHE' IBRAHIM BIN ABDUL RAHMAN (Seberang Tengah).

ENCHE' KONG KOK YAT (Batu Gajah).

DR. L IM SWEE AUN, J.P. (Larut Selatan).

DATO' ONN BIN JA'AFAR, D.K., D.P.M.J.

(Kuala Trengganu Selatan).

ENCHE' TAN KEE GAK (Bandar Melaka).


WAN MUSTAPHA BIN HAJI A LI (Kelantan Hilir).

The Honourable the Minister of Justice, TUN LEONG Y EW KOH, S.M.N.

IN ATTENDANCE: PRAYERS (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) BILL THE EDUCATION BILL Second Reading Order read for resumption of debate on Question, "That the Bill be now read a second time."

(18th October, 1961).

Question again proposed.


The Minister of Education (Enche' Abdul Rahman bin Haji Talib): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-hingga pada petang sa-malam saya telah menyentoh dengan rengkas sebab2 yang penting serba dalam Rang Undang2 ini.

Jika Dewan ini bersetuju saya suka memberi pandangan terhadap Dasar Pelajaran yang terkandong di- dalam Rang Undang2 ini.
'am yang Sa-bagaimana tersebut di- dalam permulaan (mukadimah) Rang Undang2 ini tujuan-nya ia-lah mengada- kan satu sistem pelajaran kebangsaan yang akan memenohi kehendak2 negara dan sa-berapa boleh kemahuan2 ibu- bapa—satu sistem, yang mengembangkan bahasa kebangsaan bahasa dengan maju-nya pengantar di-dalam yang sekolah2.

sa-bagai utama khas-nya, 1929 19 OCTOBER 1961 1930 Ini ia-lah asas2 penting bagi dasar yang Kerajaan telah jalankan dengan tegas-nya semenjak tahun 1956.
Chara menjalankan-nya ia-lah pada mula-nya mengadakanpelajaran rendah perchuma menerusi empat bahasa yang besar.

Yang demikian hampir sakalian kanak2 akan mendapat pelajaran per- mulaan-nya di-dalam bahasa keluarga- nya.

Mereka akan dapat pelajaran ini dengan perchuma dan kanak2 daripada kaum2 yang terbesar dalam Negeri layanan ini akan menerima yang sama pada masa yang akan datang.
Walau bagaimana pun sistem ini tidak merupakan benar2 kebang- saan itu jika perbedzaan bahasa di-kekalkan terus-menerus di-dalam sistem itu, ia-itu sa-lepas enam tahun di-peringkat rendah.

Demi kepentingan perpaduan kebangsaan maka Kerajaan telah memutuskan bahawa pelajaran yang di-belanjakan daripada wang Kerajaan sa-lepas daripada peringkat salah rendah hendak-lah menerusi satu daripada bahasa2 Ini bukan-lah baharu, satu keputusan bahkan ia ada-lah dasar Kerajaan ini semenjak lima tahun yang lalu.
rasmi.

Oleh itu Kerajaan chuba mengadakan satu sistem pelajaran yang berchorak pada kebangsaan dan pandangan maksud-nya terutama-nya berdasar- kan atas bahasa kebangsaan, dalam pada itu memelihara dan mengekalkan bahasa dan kebudayaan yang lain dalam negeri ini.

Tudohan yang mengatakan ia-itu dasar ini menghapuskan sa-suatu ke- budayaan yang itu ada-lah sa-mata2 tidak benar.

tertentu boleh Sa-tengah orang berkata ia-itu dasar ini mengancham kebudayaan China.

Bagaimana-kah benar?


ini Mulai dari tahun hadapan Kerajaan memberi pelajaran rendah perchuma dalam bahasa China.

Murid2 di-dalam sekolah2 rendah China mengambil pepereksaan masok sekolah menengah di-dalam bahasa China.

Bahasa China di-dalam mana2 boleh Sekolah Lanjutan yang ada 15 orang atau lebeh murid2 di-dalam satu darjah di-pelajari pun oleh boleh tahun China di-kehendaki ibu-bapa yang itu.
Murid2 bahasa mempelajari daripada sekolah2 rendah China di- benarkan sa-tahun lagi belajar dalam DARJAH PERPINDAHAN di-dalam sekolah2 menengah kebangsaan atau jenis kebangsaan bagi memahirkan bahasa Melayu atau bahasa Inggeris yang mereka belajar sudah lama-nya.
sa-lama 6 atau 4 Bahasa di-pelajari sa-bagai satu mata pelajaran dalam sekolah2 menengah kebangsaan dan sekolah2 jenis yang ini akan di-ajar di-dalam bahasa China dan peperek- itu di-jalankan saan mata pelajaran dalam bahasa China; sa-hingga 1/3 daripada waktu kanak2 itu di-sekolah2 boleh, dengan Undang2, di-tumpukan kapada pelajaran bahasa dan ke- susasteraan China.
Bahasa China boleh juga di-pelajari di-dalam tingkatan VI dan boleh di-ambil dalam Pepereksaan Sijil Tinggi Persekolahan—semua-nya memerusi bahasa China.

kebangsaan—dalam sa-umpama ibu rendah-nya Sa-saorang murid China boleh jika bapa-nya di-kehendaki oleh menerima pelajaran sa- mata2 dalam bahasa China dan boleh terus mempelajari bahasa dan ke- susasteraan China di-semua peringkat persekolahan-nya kapada sa-tinggi2 peringkat dalam University.
Ini boleh di-lakukan-nya di-dalam sekolah2 dan University yang di- tanggong oleh Kerajaan.

sa-hingga Sekarang saya berpaling kapada Fasal 136 Rang Undang2 ini yang mensharatkan ia-itu bantuan sa-paroh kapada mana2 Sekolah2 Menengah akan awal di-berhentikan mulai tahun hadapan.

Sekolah2 Menengah sa-paroh ban- ini, semua-nya, kechuali satu, tuan ada-lah Sekolah2 Menengah China.

Pada masa ini ada 34 sekolah2 sa- itu dengan murid2 yang umpama berjumlah 27,576 orang.
Ini berbanding dengan 48,000 orang murid2 China Sekolah2 Menengah dalam yang menerima bantuan penoh.

31 Sekolah2 Menengah China yang telah sa-paroh bantuan menerima 1931 19 OCTOBER 1961 1932 sekolah2 yang bertukar menjadi semenjak menerima bantuan penoh tahun 1957 dan sekarang menjadi sa- bahagian daripada sistem kebangsaan.

sekolah 34 belum buah yang keputusan menukarkan mengambil berbuat lagi boleh taraf-nya demikian.
Jika mereka memutuskan sa-belum akhir tahun ini mereka akan menerima bantuan penoh daripada Kerajaan mulai dari tahun hadapan, jika tidak mereka akan menjadi sekolah bersendiri (private) dengan menang- gong perbelanjaan masing2.

itu Kerajaan telah menawarkan satu peratoran gaji khas kapada guru2 di- dalam sekolah2 yang menjadi Sekolah2 yang menerima Menengah China bantuan penoh.
Peratoran ini mem- bolehkan semua guru2 yang tetap terus menerima tidak kurang daripada gaji- nya sekarang, dan sa-bagai tambahan, memberi mereka tangga kenaikan gaji, faedah kumpulan wang simpanan, dan jaminan di-dalam pekerjaan-nya.

Ini janji ada-lah bagi menyempurnakan yang telah di-buat di-dalam Penyata saya tahun yang lalu bahawa Kerajaan akan melindongi mata pencharian guru2 tetap di-dalam Sekolah2 Mene- ngah China.
yang kurang Saya sedar akan satu kesusahan bagi sekolah2 sa-paroh bantuan ini, ia-itu sa-tengah sekarang daripada-nya mempunyai murid2 yang lebeh umor kelayakan-nya.

atau Kerajaan bantuan tidak memberi penoh kapada sekolah2 dengan murid2 demikian itu, yang biasa-nya belajar di-sekolah2 bersendiri (private).
Walau pun demikian saya mengakui ada-nya sekolah2 yang kesusahan tidak sanggup hendak membuang murid2 yang kurang kelayakan dan sudah di-terima lebeh umor yang masok belajar itu untok melayakkan sekolah2 itu menerima bantuan penoh.

ini bagi Ini ada untok darjah2 sekolah2 dalam itu.


peralehan kira-nya ia suka, mengadakan darjah2 (private) di-bangunan-nya bersendiri pada sa-belah petang atau malam untok murid2 yang kurang kelayakan dan lebeh umor yang sudah sedia ada ada-lah dalam untok peratoran menolong sekolah2 berubah kapada menjadi bantuan penoh tahun hadapan.
Bangunan2 sekolah yang itu di-sa-belah boleh-lah di-gunakan bersendiri petang (private) mengandongi murid2 yang kurang kelayakan dan lebeh umor yang sudah ada di-sekolah2 itu.

Jika berhajat meneruskan sekolah itu sa- bahagian bersendiri (private) bagai akan tetap dan menerima murid2 baharu pula kapada bahagian bersendiri (private) ini maka pada fikiran saya patut-lah mereka membuat ranchangan dengan mengada- kan bangunan baharu atau berasing dengan perbelanjaan sendiri.
Saya sedia membenarkan masa yang mena- sabah untok perkara ini.

peratoran itu sekolah2 ini ia-itu harap peratoran akan Saya bersetuju dalam peralehan, yang baharu saya umumkan sa-bentar, akan mengatasi satu dari- pada masa'alah2 yang besar bagi sekolah2 sa-paroh bantuan dan akan memudahkan-nya menerima tawaran Kerajaan untok menjadi sekolah ban- tuan penoh pada tahun hadapan.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya harap ahli2 pelajaran China akan mengambil peratoran yang baharu saya umumkan tadi, berserta dengan peratoran gaji yang di-tawarkan kapada Guru2 China itu, sa-bagai bokti kejujoran Kerajaan untok melichinkan peralehan daripada bantuan bantuan sa-paroh kapada penoh bagi Sekolah2 Menengah China dan mengalu2kan sekolah2 itu masok ka-dalam sistem pelajaran kebangsaan kita.
Saya suatu sedia menimbangkan peratoran khas bagi sekolah2 ini ia-itu dengan jalan memberi bantuan penoh untok sa-bahagian besar sekolah itu yang murid2-nya layak dan umor-nya betul menurut atoran.

Ini akan di-beri walau pun manakala sekolah itu, sa- Bokti-nya amat-lah banyak ia-itu sudah mengakui ibu-bapa China bahawa ada-lah bagi fa'edah-nya juga menghantarkan anak2 mereka kapada Sekolah2 Menengah yang menerima bantuan penoh.

Bayaran sekolah-nya kurang dan pelajaran-nya lebeh baik.
1933 19 OCTOBER 1961 1934 Ada-lah fa'edah juga mendatangkan yang besar kapada guru2 bagi sekolah2- nya berubah menjadi sekolah bantuan penoh.

Dan juga akan mengurangkan bebanan kewangan yang berat serta bertambah bagi pengurus2 dan pe- nyokong2 sekolah itu.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dasar Kera- jaan ada-lah memberi ke'adilan dan lebeh baik kapada pelajaran yang Sekolah2 China dan barang siapa yang berkata ada-lah menyesatkan warga-negara kita dari- pada keturunan China serta guru2, ibu-bapa dan murid2 China.
sa-balek-nya Hanya satu perkara lagi yang saya ini tidak berniat hendak terhadap dasar-nya yang hendak nyatakan dalam perkara ia-itu Kerajaan menukarkan Sekolah2 Menengah China menerima bantuan sa-paroh.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, bagaimana ternyata di-dalam permulaan yang Rang Undang2 ada-lah ini maka maksud Kerajaan hendak menchapai satu perkembangan kemajuan bagi sistem pelajaran yang kebangsaan menjadikan bahasa kebangsaan bahasa pengantar yang utama.
Tujuan mu'tamad telah di- ishtiharkan di-dalam Penyata Razak tahun 1956 dan di-masokkan di-dalam Undang2 Pelajaran, 1957. ini Kemajuan sudah-lah terchapai ka- arah ini.

Hampir sa-paroh daripada jumlah murid2 sekolah rendah ia-lah di-dalam sekolah2 rendah kebangsaan yang menerima bantuan penoh dan bahasa pengantar-nya bahasa Melayu, dan satu daripada keutamaan saya ia-lah memperbaiki darjah pengajaran dan bangunan bagi ini.
Pelajaran Menengah dalam bahasa Melayu sedang di-perluaskan dengan sa-berapa chepat.

Sekolah2 Menengah Kebangsaan akan di-dirikan di-dalam daerah2 di-mana jumlah murid2 lepasan sekolah2 rendah di-anggap menasabah tersebut.

bagi mendirikan Ranchangan bagi melateh guru2 untok sekolah2 itu sudah pun di-buat dan sekarang sedang di-laksanakan dengan bersunggoh2.
Sijil Rendah Pelajaran sekolah2 sekolah2 tahun yang telah di-adakan dalam bahasa Melayu lalu dan mula'i pada mula'i pada tahun hadapan Sijil Pelajar- an Persekutuan Tanah Melayu akan di-jalankan dalam bahasa kebangsaan.

Pengajaran bahasa kebangsaan ada-lah sekolah2 wajib di-seluroh perengkat sama ada yang mendapat bantuan atau tidak.
University Malaya telah ber- setuju pada dasar-nya untok memula- kan dengan beransor2 bahasa Melayu sa-bagai bahasa pengantar di-kursus2 University yang tertentu dengan tujuan yang akhir hendak menjadikan Univer- (bi-lingual) di- sity berbahasa dua Kuala Lumpur ini.
Saya berhajat mengadakan aliran bahasa kebangsaan di-dalam rendah Kerajaan jenis kebangsaan, dan di-bawah Fasal 21 (2) dalam Rang Undang2 ini saya perubahan berkuasa mengarahkan kebangsaan jenis rendah sekolah rendah kebangsaan kapada sekolah apabila bahawa peratoran ini sesuai di-jalankan.
sekolah2 puas saya hati Dan juga sa-bagai galakan sa-chara langsong dan nyata dalam penggunaan bahasa dan pelajaran kebangsaan maka pelajaran menerusi segala bahasa Melayu akan di-beri dengan perchuma, dalam Sekolah2 Rendah bahkan dalam semua peringkat sistem pelajaran kita.

bukan sahaja di-atas tegoh-nya telah saya Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Dasar Pelajar- an Kebangsaan kita ada-lah berasaskan bahasa dengan kebangsaan.
Sa-lain daripada itu, satu sistem sukatan pelajaran yang sa-rupa yang menggalakkan pandangan ber- chorak Tanah Melayu dan menimbul- kan ta'at setia kapada Tanah Melayu, dan yang mesti di-ikuti oleh semua sekolah2.

Dalam pada itu, bagaimana terangkan, bahasa2 yang dan kebudayaan2 di-Tanah Melayu lain ada-lah di-pelihara dan yang di-kekalkan.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Kerajaan menda'awa ini ada-lah satu dasar pelajaran mustahak untok negara kita yang baharu dan satu dasar yang 'adil kapada semua, 'adil kapada ibu-bapa, kapada guru2, pembayar2 chukai dan kapada murid2, suatu dasar yang memenohi chita2 yang sah bagi sakalian warga-negara Persekutuan yang benar dan setia.
bahawa 1935 19 OCTOBER 1961 1936 lapan tahun bagi Barangkali saya boleh juga menda'- awa dengan bangga-nya bahawa sistem pelajaran kita, dengan pelajaran rendah perchuma sa-lama enam tahun bagi semua kanak2, dengan sa-kurang2-nya tiap2 pelajaran kanak2, dengan pelajaran menengah teknik dan jurusan akademik, mem- bawa maktab Teknik kita kapada kelayakan "Professional" yang penoh dan kapada kelayakan akademik yang sa-tinggi2-nya di-dalam University kita—sistem pelajaran ini.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, terkemuka di- dalam Asia dan ada-lah juga chita2 saya dan hasrat Kerajaan mendirikan- nya di-atas asas yang ada ini sa-hingga boleh sistem pelajaran di-mana2 juga.

(Tepok).
(Tepok).

berbanding sudah-lah dengan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, manakala rakan saya Yang Amat Berhormat Timbalan Perdana Menteri menge- mukakan Rang Undang2 pelajaran yang lalu di-dalam Majlis Undangan Persekutuan dalam tahun 1957, beliau mensifatkan Rang Undang2 itu sa-bagai piagam untok kanak2 Malaya yang Rang Saya kemukakan baharu.
Undang2 ini sa- ini kapada Dewan bagai keturunan yang terakhir sa-kali itu, suatu dan setia kapada piagam piagam bagi perpaduan dan kema'- amoran sa-bagai piagam yang membuka peluang kapada kanak2 kita.

kebangsaan dan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mohon menchadangkan.

(Tepok).

The Deputy Prime Minister (Tun Haji Abdul Razak): Tuan Yang di- Pertua, saya mohon menyokong usul ini.
I to take the opportunity (Seberang Enche' V. Veerappen Selatan): Mr. Speaker, Sir, rise to express the views of the Socialist Front.

But before I do so, I would like to thank the Minister of Education for, at this time, having given us greater time to study this Bill.

You will remember, Sir, that at the last time when we debated the Rahman Talib Report, we complained of the lack of time that was given to us.
Well, since August last year until now, least Singapore which is nearly fourteen months, we have had the opportunity of meeting various people and getting their views; responsible organisations also have had the opportunity of saying what they want, and I think today we have a better picture than we had at that time.
On this problem of education— I say it is a problem, because if it is not a problem, I do not think that our Prime Minister would have thought it fit at this stage, when he is considering the question of merger, to allow full is quite autonomy is happening aware of what in therefore he does not Malaya and want the problem more complicated.
Only a few days ago, I think, the newly elected President of the Johore State MCA stated on the there was a 11th of October, genuine the among Chinese parents at the fast space set by the Government.

He called on the Government to go slow over the con- version of Chinese Secondary Schools.

If that is not a problem, then I do not know what is the problem.
in education—he unhappiness to make retain that to Our Minister of Education has gone to great pains to explain to us the contents of this Bill and the policy, but what it appeared to me was that he was trying to wrangle his way out.

This Bill, is not necessary because although at the back you find many clauses purported to be new, but they are just old ones in new clothes.

in my opinion, language.


he gave the national the speech of Interior, when I think at this stage I must refer the Minister of to the an introductory speech here about cul- ture and I think we here are quarrelling don't over that.

He appreciated the contribu- tions that the the Chinese—at early Chinese—and the early Indians, who have come to this country and this who have been assimilated country in the course of time, have this made country.
He remember rightly, that the Malay culture would be used as a nucleus.

Well, we all hope the culture of towards said, least in if I 1937 19 OCTOBER 1961 1938 that one day we will have a truly Malayan culture.

He also said about the national language.

Well, I don't think any of us have refused to accept the Malay language as the National language of this country.

We are not quarrelling over that.


But at the last meeting when we debated the Rahman not Talib Report, we said that it was the to feel proud of enough the national in our ultimate, Sir, we must take care of rice bowl.

In other words, we want our education to be such that we may earn a living with it.
If you produce that if you enrich our national language to such a position as to be able to give the people the bread and butter or the rice and the curry, then we accept it, and there is then no problem in this country.

just language, but also language, AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Thosai!

(Laughter).

Enche' V. Veerappen: Mr. Speaker, Sir, let us go to the Bill proper.

This is is a simple Bill.


The Bill Bill entitled, "An Act to amend and con- solidate the law relating to Education We have seen and we have approved many Bills in this House with just that sort of title.
Our Minister has gone to say that there are many things new, though the old is actually one according to the Explanatory Statelment on page 65 where it is stated:— it the in features of is expressed "The Committee considered that the 1956 policy main (which the Education Ordinance, 1957, enacted shortly before Merdeka) are suited to the present needs of the country, and the recommendations the Committee may properly be of regarded as refinements or developments of that policy in the light of experience obtained the 1957 Ordinance."
the administration of in lipstick It is just like a lady who is powdering up to go for a dance, may be, or putting on and make-up.

Though there are 140 clauses, the 140 clauses do not bring any radical changes—that is my submission But the Minister tell us, or purposely refused to tell us, that the changes are in the preamble add the definitions, and my observations will be almost entirely based on those.
If forgot to centuries the definitions can be changed in five years, I do not know how we can call that a Charter.

We had the Magna Carta—how many back I don't know.

The Bill contains several little words and clauses which have them been changed and if we read superficially, we may miss them; how- ever, in actuality, Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Bill spells the death of a lot of things.

It is, in fact, not based on the Razak policy.

It is not a consistent policy.


In fact, it is a major operation and it murders the Razak policy of 1957.

Before I go into the details, I would just like to refresh the memory of the Honourable Members in this House of what certain people had feared, only last year.

I would like to quote from our Parliamentary debates.

The Member for Tanjong Utara—he the is not here—was all praise for Rahman Talib Report, but in praising it he asked for certain assurances.
He said as follows: — "The leaders of the Malayan Chinese Association have been able to discuss this matter with my Honourable friend the Minister of Education and we should be satisfied with the assurances that have been given by my Honourable friend the Minister of Education to the effect these that, recommendations, all concerned would be consulted."

implementation of the in I hope they have been consulted and they are satisfied with the assurances.
And the Member for Larut Selatan said this: — "I should, therefore, be very happy if the Minister of Education will tell us whether in 1961 it is possible to have the teachers"—the Member was rather worried about teachers—" and that in spite of 435 teachers that are graduate teachers that come out from these colleges 2,320 will be still short for all the Government secondary schools.
There- fore, I hope the Honourable the Minister of Education would enlighten me as to how and from where he is going to find these teachers to man these 41 partially assisted secondary schools they all decide to conform."

if that I hope the Honourable the Minister has given those assurances or has found the answers to those fears expressed by them.
Even the Deputy the Prime Minister, when he was 1939 19 OCTOBER 1961 1940 Minister of Education, had this to say in moving the adoption of the 1957 Ordinance: — "Sir, If I may humbly but confidently assert that this Bill is one of the most important legislations which have ever been introduced into this Council since it is the constitution, the charter for the children of the new independent Malaya which will emerge into full nation-hood in just over five months' time.
This is, therefore, one of important piles upon which, in the shifting sands which have hither to retarded our develop- ment as one nation, the future of this country is to be strongly and securely founded."

the most Well, within these five years what has happened?
Since we find that even those people of this country who are members of the Alliance are themselves still not satisfied, or who do not seem to have got the assurances, and also since I that the Minister has do not think found the teachers, what are we to make of his speech?

This Bill need not is before us be before us, but because, though the Minister said that he is consistent with the policy, the people do not believe him to be so.
They have lost faith; they cannot trust what the Government sets out to do.

This Bill would be superfluous and unnecessary.

Let us examine the preamble.


It says— it "Whereas the educational policy of the Federation originally declared the Education Ordinance, 1957, is to establish a national system of education which will satisfy the nation and promote its cultural, social, economic and political development:" the needs of in the clauses, but not If you look at the old Ordinance it is one of the preamble.

But if you look at it more closely, the most important word was that it was said to be a "charter".
But let us look at the preamble.

What are the words left out?

Why are they left out?

Is it not the policy?

If it is the policy, why do you leave them out— "acceptable to the people as a whole"?

Is it because it has been thorny?

Is it because it has been pricking too much?

Why?

If it is the Charter, how do you withdraw those words?

AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: YOU will get the answer.

Mr. Speaker: Please proceed.

Enche' V. Veerappen: Let us now look at the second paragraph.
It says towards the end—I won't bother you by repeating the whole thing—the last part of it says— ".

to that pupils are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents:" the general principle " wishes of their parents", that is the catch phrase.

Well, I am glad to note that it is almost the same as clause 4 in the original Bill.

But is our Government actually fulfilling the wishes of the parents?

I don't think so.

And what do you mean by educated in "education"?

It says."
It says."

accordance with the wishes of their parents:"—what do you mean by education?

Do you mean primary education only?

Do you mean second- ary education?

Do you mean university education?

What education?

It may be you will tell "primary education".

But education is generally accepted as all that.

Is it not?

Therefore, these few words "in accordance with the wishes of their parents" is to mislead the people and hoodwink them.
But please take a closer look at the words again "wishes of their parents" and see what our Government has done.

It actually fulfils the wishes of the parents.

It does!

Because you can see what our leaders want: they are parents also—what do they want?

Do they send their children to the national schools of Malaya?

Do they send their children to the English schools of Malaya?

No!

They want better English schools, not schools in this country.

They want schools in foreign countries.


That is the wish of the parents.

Yes!

(Laughter).

If our the leaders show other people?

Do our leaders them- selves have faith in the value of the national language?

Do they show it?

What does this show?

They don't have faith.

And what do the common people do?

They naturally If our Ministers and our rulers have no faith in our education, naturally they also would follow.

They get the second best.

to They don't send that, what about their children follow.
1941 19 OCTOBER 1961 1942 it in to there increase to build their children language and instruction, foreign schools and foreign universities, but they take the second best.

They send the English schools.

Let the Minister tell us today, where is the increase in schools.

Is there increase in the Chinese schools?

the national Is schools, or increase in English schools?

Definitely the great increase is in the English schools.

Therefore, can the people believe what you say?

Can they have faith in you?


Can they trust you?

It is my submission, Sir, that while the Government pretends the national language into the position of the the sole official is main medium of really building the English language.

I doubt if the Minister can deny that.

Soon there will be more and more English schools than Malay schools, or national schools.

There will be thousands more English pupils than national language pupils.
In fact, as I said just now "in accordance with the wishes of their parents" cuts both ways.

If that is not true, let us look at the answers the Honourable Minister of Education has given to us in this session.

I am sure Honourable Members have copies of this—it was distributed on the first day.

We have heard how volubly our Ministers have been telling that Malay will be the sole official language, that our national language will be the sole official language in 1967.
Let us go through the list of questions and the answers to them.

The answer to the first question says— "Under Article 152 of the Constitution it will be for Parliament to decide the the official Federation of Malaya after 1967."

languages of language or it will be for Parliament It says " to decide ".

But today we have everybody going everywhere telling that the national language will be the sole official language after 1967.

I think they should have guts in this Parliament also to answer like that.
Again, I asked— " if English is not one of the official languages after 1967, will the students who are now studying in Secondary fully-assisted English join they to utilise with Schools be able their English education advantage when the Government service after 1967, if not why does Government teach continue students in Secondary Schools."

in English to and the Minister's answer is in all pupils "Yes Sir.
It must be remembered that fully-assisted English Secondary Schools already learn the National Language as well as English."

If that is true, Sir Enche' D. R. Seenivasagam (Ipoh): Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise on a point of order.

I refer to S.O.
I refer to S.O.

37 where it is stated that— "No member shall interrupt another member except— (a) by rising to a point of order, ; or (b) to elucidate some matter raised Mr. Speaker, Sir, I ask that Orders of this House be enforced even to the extreme extent of ordering members out of the House if they don't behave themselves.
Mr. Speaker: Honourable Members, I wish to draw your attention to the provisions of this Standing Order that there should be no interruption while a member is speaking, unless on two points, one on a point of clarification and the other on a point of order.

If there is any gross misconduct in the House, I have the power to ask the member to withdraw from the House.
that was Enche' V. Veerappen: As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, the answer to my questions, and if that is the answer, then the Minister accepts one principle, and that is—I went at great pains to say in this House at the last session—the principle of the trans- fer of learning.

I said that if you learn in one language and you know another language well enough, you can utilise what you have learned in that language through languages you learned.
Here, he admits, if you are educated in English, you can still serve the other 1943 19 OCTOBER 1961 1944 Malaya when the National Language language.

If it is is the sole official good for English, why cannot it be good for other it appears the Govern- ment's policy is "heads I win tails you lose"—to put it very simply.

languages?

Well then, Sir, that learning language schools Another thing is the future of these English school pupils.

We have in our English thousands and thousands of students.
They are all the English through medium, but if, as he said, in 1967 English is not going to be the sole official Inaguage, will they be able to continue?

What would be the position of these students when they come out?

They pass very well.

Would they be able to secure employment?

Well, the answer has been given: they will.

Let us look at page 4—that is the "National Primary definition of a School".
This is what it says: — "in which facilities for the teaching of the Chinese or Tamil language (if not the main medium of instruction) shall, if it is reasonable and practicable so to do, be made available if the parents of fifteen children in the school so request".

whereas Clause 35 of the old Ordi- nance—well, anyway, the wording in the old Ordinance was different, and I do not see why this change should be so.
five-year And when we look at the definition of a secondary school, that is where I find is the unkindest cut of all.

A "National Secondary School" pre- viously was given only one definition.
The National-type Secondary School— on page 32 of the old Ordinance— means a secondary school providing secondary a national education language, the Chinese the Tamil language, or any two of such languages are used as the media of instruction and with the national language and the English language as compulsory sub- jects of instruction when such languages are not used as the media of instruc- tion.
Well, that was the definition in 1957 but to-day—1961—we have got to course in which the English language, of the language, or is that that definition.

If that then what change is a charter and if the words in the charter, and even the definition of the words in the charter, are going to be changed, I do not know why you can call it a charter.

But in the new Bill we have before us on page 5, we have two instead of one, where originally we have only National-type Secondary School.
We have two—one is "National Secondary School" and the other is "National-type Secondary School"— "sekolah menengah kebangsaan" and jenis kebangsa- "sekolah menengah an" — that Malay translation — our national translation—is a new thing.

But that is not all the new thing.

Let us look at item (b) there—"using the English language as the main medium of instruction".

Now, Mr. Speaker, Sir, does the Minister think that we are that we in this country such duds cannot know the difference between that and this?
Is that not a change of is not a change of policy?

If policy, two it?

Sir, languages are cut off—is that not then a change of policy?

I submit, Sir it is definitely a change of policy.

It is not just whitewashing, it actually kills the 1957 Ordinance.

It destroys this Ordinance.

We feel very strongly about this change of definition.

And there is something very strange in the definition also.

See what has been added.


I do not know whether in any country the definition of a school is fixed by the examinations that they have to take— I wonder whether it is true.

Here you have a new condition, i.e.

"preparing pupils for such examinations as may be prescribed".

Was that included in the 1957 Ordinance?


It is nowhere to be seen in the 1957 Ordinance, but you have Clause 55 the 1957 Ordinance, Sir, where it is stated that there will be a Federation of Malaya Examination Syndicate and the Syndi- the cate may, with the approval of Minister, make by-laws for or in respect of following matters, examinations and so forth and so on.

But it is not a condition and not a part of the definition of a secondary school.
But how this clause came to be included as a definition has a very interesting history.

the in 1945 19 OCTOBER 1961 1946 Sir, even in the 1957 Ordinance we do not have any condition requiring what language will be the medium of instruction.
Though it is not stated here, it is stated in the policy on which this Ordinance has been based: it is stated there—the Razak Report—in no uncertain terms: — " we can see no reason for altering the practice in Chinese secondary schools of using Kuo-Yu as a general medium provided that these Chinese schools fall into line with the conditions mentioned in the two previous paragraphs.
We see no educational objection to the learning of three languages in secondary schools or to the use of more than one language in the same school as the medium of instruction."

that submit in fact, languages: Is that not clear enough?

From that I the Razak Report envisaged that promotion examinations would be in the Malay, Chinese and Tamil later on I shall be able to quote the exact words of the Deputy Prime Minister, when he moved the adoption of the 1957 Ordinance.
Sir, how did it come about that this condition for examina- tion was included in the definition of a national-type school?

Now, Sir, the Report, though it does not meet with all the wishes of the people, it does go a long way to satisfy them—that is my humble opinion.

You may have the best of reports, the best law; but the people who imple- ment it mean a lot—they can put you in such a position it will be impossible for you to get out, and it is in that position that the Federation Government is to-day.
secondary that Even the Minister of Finance, who is sitting here to-day, had this to say in 1957: "One tip I would humbly suggest to my Honourable friend the Minister for Education, and that is, that I hope he will instruct his permanent officials in the implementation of this Bill to implement it the clarifications, amplifications and explanations contained in his speech."

light of the in Whose speech?

I take it that he meant the Deputy Prime Minister's speech.
Our Minister of Finance had misgivings about our expatriate officers who were the people going to implement our policy.

He had misgivings and he was right.

When it came for the Report to be implemented—this law did not specify the medium of examination— they had that power to manipulate in such a way that the spirit of the Razak Report was lost, was destroyed.
They rejected what was envisaged the Razak Report, that is that the medium of examination for promotion purposes could also be in Chinese and Tamil.

in When a certain Member of the previous Legislative Council asked for in what medium clarification as to would the the Minister for Education then said: — examinations be, "What language will the pupils sit it, if they come from a Chinese medium the Lower Cer- secondary school, for tificate of Education?
Well, I have explained in my opening speech that the Lower Certificate of Education Examina- tion Standard serves two purposes.

It is basically, as I said, a public examination for entry into Government service and, as such, the examination, except for the languages and literatures, which will be set in the language that was taught, will for the time being be set in Malay and English, and later on in Malay only.
But for those pupils who do not wish to enter into Government service but wish only to go for further education, the examination on the same standard will be established in the various media of instruction"—please understand "various media of instruction"— "so that a pupil from a Chinese medium school can, if he only wants to go for further studies, take that examination and be allowed to be promoted to the higher classes.
Of course, as I said, the details of this examination would be examined by the new Board of Education,"—I wonder whether the Board had examined it, who composed the Board and what were the recommendations Sir, that examination for promotion was never done, and it is one of the biggest tragedies in this country to-day.

If it was done, I do not think we will have any trouble over the Education Report—at least in my opinion.
What was the motive for doing away with this examination and compelling the pupils to take only the examination in the national language or the English language?

Well, officers in the Ministry at that time knew well that nobody was going to be taught at that time in language.

They the national Malay, 1947 19 OCTOBER 1961 1948 in English means knew very well what to do; they knew that the only way was for the people to learn English—taking the examina- tion in English.
If more and more pupils learn English the English language in this country be- comes strengthened.

Whether they were objective or subjective, I do not know.

the position of learning Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Saaid (Seberang Utara): Mr. Speaker, Sir, on a point of order—Standing Order 35 (1) which says: "A member desiring to speak shall rise in his place and if called upon shall stand and address his observations the Chair to " He is all the time addressing this side of the House instead of addressing the Chair.
(Laughter).

Mr. Speaker: It is a minor point.

Please proceed.

Enche' V. Veerappen: From that we can see that not only those who want to learn English but also those who do not want to learn English, or have no desire to learn English at all, are compelled to learn English and our Government has fallen into that trap, and it is now trying to justify itself— and it goes to any extent to justify itself.

I hope the Honourable Minister will disprove me.


Of course, it is well- known in this House that whatever twisted round or we say is always upside down.

However, there is one thing which strikes me at this stage and that is I wonder why that some of the school managers who have got the the means have not challenged Federation Government—I mean chal- lenge it in a court of law.
I feel that there for a challenge, because is stated so the definition of a clearly under national-type secondary school that you can teach in that language and then at the end you cut out examination.

Surely, if you allow one to teach in that language you must allow pupils taught in that language to sit for an language.

What examination do you expect to do?

According to the 1957 Ordinance, to be a conforming school you got to justification the pupils in that some is it it?
That prepare pupils for the L.C.E., but it is also stated there that preparation for the L.C.E.

means not only prepara- tion in one language medium but any of the four languages.

Then I ask, Sir, is it fair to deprive them of a grant if they do not prepare for the examina- tion in the national language?

Why did they stop is the primary question that is shaking the country to-day.

That is the thing which has brought all this unhappiness.
Therefore, Sir, the action to include the clause about examination is intended not to help the Malayans but the English.

Instead of punishing the Malayans, the Government should give the highest award to that expatriate officer, who has now retired.

It is not the spirit of the Razak Report.

Now, Sir, the Government did mention about free education.

It has said that this Bill is giving free educa- tion.

True, Sir, but did not the old Bill also say so—Clause 35 of the 1957 Ordinance?
Even for that matter there was a similar provision in the 1952 Ordinance.

The International Commis- sion also, I think, made a strong recommendation for compulsory and free education.

Sir, section 35 (1) of the 1957 Ordinance says: "A local education authority may, with the approval of the Minister declare primary education to be obligatory for children in any age category " Therefore, Sir, the law was there, the power was given to the Minister—he has just to declare the age; it can be 15 or even 20.
Compulsory to my mind means free also—you cannot compel if you do not give a thing free.

Therefore, it is just to hoodwink us, to divert attention, that the Government says, "Oh, we are giving free education."

from speeches of Now, Sir, I come to the last point— Clause 136, which is tucked so nicely away towards the very end.

I have quoted certain Honourable Members in this House so that they could have time to think.
They asked for assurances; and if they have the assurances, I would ask them to prevail upon the Minister to amend one little word.

If not I would like to 1949 19 OCTOBER 1961 1950 is this Bill becomes move an amendment, though I may be defeated, to Clause 136.

It says here "appointed date", but what the appointed date?

What do you think will be the appointed date, the date when law?

The appointed date could be 1st January, 1962—not very far off.
So, could you prevail upon your Minister to have that amended?

You wanted assurances and them by all If you have not got them, means that date could be any day—if could be 1967, it could be 1980, could be 1962, could be June, 1962. if you have got transitional period"—true; From our Deputy Prime Minister's speech, at one time he said that "the task of the Committee must be to plan for the immediate future"—true; "for a "of education in this country which must be regarded as the next ten years."
That, Sir, was in 1956, but this is 1961.

So it is only half the span of life.

Could we not then prevail upon our Minister to have it extended, in his own words, "for the next ten years"?

to establish Finally, Sir, from all that I have said, Honourable Members would note two things about this Bill—one is that the 140 clauses do not give anything new or anything wonderful or anything free or compulsory to any of the pupil.

They do not build, enrich, or nourish the Malay language.
None of the 140 clauses, Sir, help the National Language as the "rice and curry language", you may call it, of the people.

Whatever is intended to the people is already in the benefit 1957 Ordinance.

The only thing it gives is a strong, vigorous, English language with the the broadest base and strongest foundation which at no time the National could be shaken by Language.
That is what this Bill gives, but takes away from your Chinese and Indian brothers some- thing; it takes away very deceitfully and very cunningly the provision in law for a fair and just system of education with which everyone would have been happy if the expatriates had given it a chance for implemented it to be at least.

it does Do you think this Bill is fair and just?


Can we blame the Chinese for pleading, asking and agitating for something that was promised and agreed to in 1956 in the Razak policy and embodied the Education Ordinance of 1957?

I don't think Honourable Members would want me to put more bluntly, but please ask yourself this question and answer it.
law, the in in In my last question at this session, that is question 16 on page 10, I asked the Minister to state whether the Lower Certificate of Education and Federation of Malaya Certificate of Education Examinations will be con- ducted only in Malay, if and when it becomes the sole official language.

And what is the answer of the Minister?


It says— to take "If and when the National Language becomes the sole official language careful consideration will be given to the ability of school children the public examinations through the medium of the National Language.

As the House knows steps are being taken to ensure that all the National children in school therefore Language at all levels.

It can be school children will become more and more proficient in this language.
As far as lies in by power I would say that children to sit for public will not be expected the medium only examinations through of is the National Language before fair and reasonable for them to do so."

expected every learn year that it to Sir, if it is not fair for them now, how can you say it is fair for the Chinese medium school children?

What is not fair to one, cannot be fair to the other?

If we can care for the English medium schools, why cannot we care for the Chinese and Tamil schools?
If we can be fair and reasonable to the English medium pupils, cannot we be fair and reasonable the Chinese medium pupils?

Afterall, it was not the fault of the Chinese or the Tamil secondary schools.

The fault was due to the care- lessness, or the purposeful manipulation of some people.

Therefore, Sir, we of the Socialist Front oppose this Bill, to is unnecessary, and, because it our mind, favours, superfluous.

strengthens and promotes English at the expense of the national language.
In fact, Sir, in one word, I would say It 1951 19 OCTOBER 1961 1952 it destroys the goodwill and this: the harmony Razak Report and the 1957 Ordinance.

that was built up by in Sir, intended Speaker, the present Enche' Too Joon Hing (Telok Anson): Mr. the Honourable Minister last evening told us that this Bill makes no fundamental changes education policy, which is based on the Razak Report.

It was to correct some of the ambiguities and to tidy up in the Razak Report.
the confusion However, having gone the Bill, I have a lot of misgivings as to what he said.
Sir, I now request that this Bill for the implementation of the Report of the Education Committee 1960 be suspended and that another Committee of this House comprising be representatives appointed the Razak Report, that is, the Report of the Education Committee, 1956. parties all to review once again through of from Sir, ever since the Report of the Review Committee 1960 was of in this House on August approved 12th 1960, much against the opposition of Members the Opposition Parties, there has been, in one way or another, constant expressions of general strong criticisms dissatisfaction and from the members of the public.
Sir, the Alliance 1960 Review Committee the 1956 Report had in reviewing established different a altogether education policy which has deviated entirely from the fundamental principles the Razak Report and which is of completely contrary the Alliance 1955 Election Manifesto.

The Report of the Razak Committee was based mainly on the Review this.
Sir, Committee established another different policy in the Report of 1960, which during the recent elections earlier this year had been rejected and proved unacceptable this country as a whole.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, it had once been expressed this House that "Education has become a controversial matter in this country, taken against the background of its complex plural society."
These were the words former colleague Dato' (now Tun) Abdul Razak, the then Minister of Education, spoken by my the people of to to in when he moved the motion for the adoption of the 1956 Report on May 16th 1956.

He had also taken pains to give us a clear picture of the history of education in this country and the state of turmoil in which education was then existing.
Sir, today with the adoption of the 1960 Report, now so well-known as the Rahman Talib Report, by the majority of the Alliance vote in this House on August 12th 1960, the turmoil which the Alliance once tried to calm down, has once again loomed up in the clear horizon like the destructive mushroom from the explosion of an atomic or hydrogen bomb.
in review the people the Razak Report Mr. Speaker, Sir, with due respect to the Alliance Government, and in the interests of the welfare and harmony of this country, and indeed, Sir, in all sincerity and good intentions, T beg the Honourable Minister to withdraw this Bill and set up without delay another Committee the Razak Report once to again.

Sir, Honourable Members might ask me, why then had I supported and signed in 1956?
And even to-day I have been severely accused and attacked in one way or another by members of the Alliance for attacking the present Alliance Education Policy.

Well, Sir, I have always declared my support of the Razak Report and even now when I stand here before all of you in this House I would declare again that I support the Razak Report—only, and only if the true spirit and the real intention of the Razak Report were faithfully honestly implemented.
But T will not hesitate, and 1 think and I know the people will not hesitate too, and nothing will in the future stop me or the people from attacking or the Talib Report which is so discriminatory, so obstructive, and even more, so destruc- tive to the cultures of the other people living in this country.

interpreted criticising and Sir, the fact that I am able to stand here and address the House to-day is very clear and obvious.
I have been returned to this House with a clear and the distinct mandate not only from 1953 19 OCTOBER 1961 1954 the Federation people of Telok Anson but from the to people all over demand from the Alliance Government for legitimate rights and equal treat- ment in the education of the different races living in this country.
True, the issue in the by-election of Telok Anson had been fought solely and mainly the Alliance over the present education policy; and people, overwhelming their the Alliance a majority, had given definite answer in the defeat of their candidate over this problem.

That the present Alliance education policy is not acceptable to the people of this country as a whole.
the question of by in to that the report of Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have said in the the education policy beginning recommended the Education Review Committee, 1960 is completely contrary the Alliance education pledges contained in the 1955 election manifesto.

The Review Com- mittee of 1960 had deviated entirely the fundamental principles laid from down in the Razak Report.
Now, Sir, I will bring forth some of the proofs to support my allegations by quoting the Alliance education pledges con- that the manifesto, tained Honourable Members in this House may know the true facts of the Alliance education pledges which formed one of the most important factors which led to the Alliance's overwhelming victory in 1955.

Sir, I have got here so in Enche' Tajudin bin Ali (Larut Utara): On a point of order.

Standing Order 35 (b)—"A Member shall not read".


As I see it, the ex-Minister is reading every word.

Mr. Speaker: As long as it is on the table it is quite all right.

Enche' Too Joon Hing: Sir, I have got here a manifesto of the Alliance of 1955.

Sir, 1 (e): — under education—paragraph their allow vernacular "To encourage i.e.

normal rather schools, destroy languages or cultures of the people living in this country."
schools to the expansion, than Then in paragraph 3: — is convinced "The Alliance the features introduction of national school in into vernacular schools as envisaged the Council Paper No.

67 of 1954 is not acceptable to the people."

Federation Legislative that Then, again, in paragraph 5: — that Text-books considers text-books the "The Alliance is most standardization of important.

in substance with Malayan outlook should be produced in all languages used in the country, i.e.
English, Malay, Chinese and Tamil.

Our children should be taught to think as Malayans."

similar Sir, then the last, but not the least, is paragraph 12: — above, "In view of to accord equal lined every effort to all aided schools within so of given opportunities will children to education."
the Alliance policy out- the Alliance will make treatment limits the that more to all receive finances be federal school age the of the Sir, these were fundamental pledges of the Alliance on education and these pledges had been accepted by all the people in the Federation, and that resulted in the overwhelming victory of the Alliance in 1955—having captured 51 seats out of 52, with the exception of only one opposition in the last Legislative Council.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Razak in Report the 15-man committee did adhere to the Alliance election pledges by declaring in their Report the follow- ing recommendations—in paragraphs 17, 71, 72 and 119.

Sir, I will not dwell too long on them.

I will only give the important points on these paragraphs in order to save time.
Paragraph 17—National Type Pri- mary Schools: — "Its primary function is to foster and encourage the cultures and languages of the Malayan community, to establish one the type final pupils work examination."

school where towards a common national of Then paragraph 71 states very clearly that Malay and English shall be learning compulsory.
The object of the national Malay to make is it 1955 19 OCTOBER 1961 1956 learning English the country, and the language of is also reason for stated there—for students who wish to go for higher studies and employment, and so forth.

Sir, paragraph 72, which I think the previous speaker had already dwelt on, "We can see no reason says: for altering in Chinese practice Secondary Schools the use of Kuo-Yu as the general medium and there is no than one reason why language cannot be used in a school".
that more the Then in paragraph 119 which is the III.

schools Middle are These maintained and generally aided by Government with annual grants-in-aid.

At the end of Junior Middle III and Senior Middle students III participated in Government conducted examinations held in the medium of instruction.

These examinations helped the qualifications of a to decide student for promotion and entry to higher studies and for seeking employ- the ment outside.
These have been normal practices, or the normal system of the Chinese schools in the Federation for many, many years, the over-emphasise more important—it says: — cannot that our "We conviction introduction of a syllabus common to all schools in the Federatin is the crucial requirement of an educational policy in Malaya.

It is an essential element in the development of a united Malayan nation.
It is the unlock key which will gates hitherto locked and barred standing against the establishment of an educa- tional system acceptable to the people of Malaya as a whole, a common syllabus."
the And it says here: — "Once all schools are working to a common content syllabus irrespective of the language medium of instruction, we consider the country will have taken the most the establishment of a national system of education which will satisfy the needs of the people and promote the cultural, social, economic and political develop- ment of a nation."
important towards step Sir, these are the important things that we find in the Razak Report, and these are the fundamental principles the Alliance election contained pledges which meet the hopes and aspirations of all the races living in this country.

in Now, Sir, what are the normal practices, or the normal system of the Chinese schools in those days in 1955 at the time when the Alliance promised the people what they would give during the elections?
The normal system of Chinese secondary schools consists of two periods of three years each.

The first period of is from Junior Middle I to Junior Middle III, and the second period of three years to Senior is from Senior Middle I three years to by the and also Now, Sir, the present Chinese that the Ministry the Talib I come Report.
The Review Committee has in paragraph 187 (a) recommended that schools system of Junior Middle I to III and to III should be Senior Middle I discontinued as from 1961 in assisted schools and also that partial assistance should be discontinued; and in (b) it the has recommended of organisation examinations in Chinese, that is the Junior Middle III Examinations, the Chinese Secondary Schools Promotion Examination Chinese Secondary Schools Leaving Certificate should be discontinued and that all students should in future participate in the public examinations—that is the Lower Certificate of Education and the Federation of Malaya Certificate of Education—which the official these are things that are recommended by the Review Committee; and in paragraph the Committee has clearly set 175 out the for making the recommendation.
It also states that, "For the sake of national unity, the objective must eliminate communal secondary schools from the national system of assisted schools and to ensure that pupils of all races shall attend both National and National-type secondary schools.

An essential require- that public ment of level examinations should be conducted only the country's official languages."

this policy at languages.


Now, secondary reasons are set be in to in is Therefore, Sir, we can see very the the differences between clearly 1957 19 OCTOBER 1961 1958 the differences which Razak Report and the Talib Report the and also Alliance has made, or the differences which are contained the Talib Report from those election pledges in 1955. in Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would now like to take the opportunity to say a few words these in Malay concerning points.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-sini saya suka mengambil peluang ini dan masa sadikit untok berchakap dalam bahasa kebangsaan.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sunggoh pun saya punya bahasa kebangsaan bukan bijak atau tinggi, tetapi saya suka menchuba hari ini berchakap dalam bahasa kebangsaan supaya Ahli2 Yang Berhormat yang ada di-sini yang belum belajar bahasa Inggeris boleh-lah dapat di-terangkan perkara2 yang mustahak yang saya telah beruchap tadi.
Tuan Yang Pelajaran di-Pertua, saya menentang Rang Undang2 Pelajaran ini dan juga saya minta Yang Ber- hormat Menteri untok di-tolak undang2 ini, sebab Penyata Jawatan-Kuasa Menyemak Dasar Pelajaran tahun 1960 tidak-lah dapat di-terima oleh orang2 di-negeri ini.

Kenapa penyata ia-itu Penyata Rahman tidak dapat di-terima oleh ra'ayat negeri ini ia-lah perkara yang pertama chadangan2 penyata itu tidak mengikut chadangan2 pelajaran yang telah di-janjikan oleh Perikatan dalam tahun 1955.
Perkara yang kedua ia-lah Jawatan-Kuasa Penyata Rahman Talib yang telah mengubah di-adakan oleh Penyata Razak tahun 1956. chadangan2 ini Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-sini saya suka memberi kapada Ahli2 Yang Berhormat apa-kah chadangan2 tentang pelajaran dalam manifesto tahun 1955?

telah mengaku pendudok2 Perikatan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu apabila dalam Perikatan pilehan raya Persekutuan tahun 1955.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-tangan saya ada-lah sa-buah buku ia-itu manifesto tahun 1955.
Sekarang saya suka mem- bacha kapada Ahli2 Yang Berhormat berlawan telah yang mustahak chadangan2 dan penting tentang pelajaran.

Muka 14 ia-itu perenggan 1 (g) ia-itu "meluaskan perkembangan sekolah2 anak negeri.

Perkara (h) membenarkan pembukaan sekolah2, bahasa2 dan kebudayaan tiap2 bangsa dalam negeri ini.
Pereng- gan 3—Perikatan yakin bahawa chara memindahkan bentok sekolah kebang- saan kapada sekolah bahasa anak negeri saperti yang terkandong dalam Kertas Puteh tentang pelajaran Majlis Meshuarat Undangan Federal No.

67 tahun 54 ada-lah tidak dapat di-terima oleh ra'ayat negeri ini.

ini itu chara kapada sekolah2 Perenggan 5—Perikatan berpendapat bahawa satu perkara yang mustahak dalam soal ia-lah menyamakan atau menyatukan jenis buku2 sekolah.
Sekolah yang berchorak Malaya harus- nya di-terbitkan dalam bahasa2 yang di-pakai dalam negeri ini ia-itu dalam bahasa2 Inggeris, China dan Tamil.

Dengan chara ini, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, kanak2 kita dapat di-arahkan fikiran-nya berfikir ra'ayat negeri ini.

Perenggan 12—Per- ikatan akan berusaha memberi layanan kapada yang mendapat bantuan Kerajaan sa-lama ini tetapi bantuan berdasarkan ada-lah dengan keadaan, bagi membolehkan kanak2 mendapat pergi belajar.
Ini-lah, perjanjian2 oleh Per- ikatan kapada pendudok2 negeri ini.

Perenggan 70—Ia-lah mengekal dan menggalakkan kebudayaan dan bahasa2 orang Tanah Melayu.

Oleh itu kami chadangkan di- bahawa adakan suatu jenis sekolah menengah kebangsaan.

Di-dalam-nya murid2 belajar kerana hendak tammat suatu peperekasaan akhir yang sama bagi semua sekolah2 jenis itu jika atoran boleh di-kendorkan pelajaran bagi sekolah2 jenis itu.
Maka hendak-lah di-benarkan sekolah2 itu atau sa-bahagian2 daripada-nya me- ngambil berat untok mengajar bahasa2 dan kebudayaan.

elok-lah peluang sadikit tetapi Perenggan 71 ia-itu bahasa Melayu dan Inggeris wajib di-ajar dan pereng- gan 72 bahasa pengantar.

Kami tidak nampak sa-suatu sebab bagi mengubah 1959 19 OCTOBER 1961 1960 bagi saperti yang di-buat di- peratoran sekolah2 menengah China ia-itu menggunakan bahasa China sa-bagai bahasa pengantar.
Kami tidak nampak satu sebab yang patut di-tegah murid2 tiga bahasa dalam sekolah2 belajar lebeh menengah atau menggunakan daripada satu bahasa dalam sekolah itu sa-bagai bahasa pengantar, dan ini-lah satu perkara perenggan 119 yang mustahak kemajuan kebangsaan Tanah Melayu yang satu.

Ini-lah anak kunchi-nya yang akan membuka pintu yang ini tertutup yang menghalang sentiasa langkah hendak menubohkan akan yang dapat chara pelajaran satu di-terima oleh semua pendudok Tanah Melayu.
Sa-telah tiba masa-nya apabila sekolah2 bergerak menepati semua satu sama sukatan pelajaran yang tiada-lah di-kirakan walau apa pun rasa bahasa negeri langkah yang teramat penting ka-arah maksud menubohkan pelajaran kebangsaan yang akan memuaskan kemahuan orang2, serta memajukan kebudavaan masharakat, ekonomik dan politik sa-bagai satu bangsa.

pengantar-nya.
pengantar-nya.

Kami telah mengambil sa-lama chara satu ini ingat Ini ia-lah chadangan2 dalam penyata tahun 1956 dan lagi di-tangan saya sini Penyata Jawatan-Kuasa Menvemak Dasar Pelajaran tahun dahulu.

Di-sini saya ta' guna saya bachakan perenggan 187 tetapi saya tahu tiap2 Ahli2 Yang Berhormat yang ada di- sini telah nampak penyata ini tahun ia-lah di- dahulu.
Perenggan sekolah2 menengah berhenti China dan di-berhenti oleh bantuan sekolah2 China dan pepereksaan untok sekolah2 menengah pun di-berhentikan juga, sekolah menengah mesti-lah masok pepereksa- ia-itu sijil Lower Certificate of an Education dan Sijil Pelajaran Perse- kutuan Tanah Melayu.

Pepereksaan ini ia-lah dalam bahasa rasmi.
dan murid2 system dari 187 telah ada di-ubahkan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, untok ini oleh ia-lah Perikatan dan dengan di-berhentikan system sekolah2 menengah China ada- lah menyempang Penyata Razak perenggan 72 dan chadangan manifesto tahun 1956 perenggan 1 (g) dan (h) de- ngan di-berhentikan bantuan sa-paroh ada-lah sekolah menengah China menyempang chadangan manifesto 1955 perenggan 12 dengan persediaan murid2 sekolah menengah China masok pepereksaan Sijil Rendah Pelajaran dan Sijil Pelajaran Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dalam bahasa rasmi sahaja ada-lah menyempang Penyata Razak perenggan 70, 71 dan juga chadangan manifesto tahun 1955, perenggan 1 (ft), Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-sini Ahli2 Yang Berhormat boleh-lah nampak Penyata Rahman Talib tidak mengikut chadangan2 manifesto dan Jawatan- Kuasa itu pun ada-lah di-ubahkan chadangan2 Penyata Razak tahun 1956.
Oleh itu, saya minta Ahli2 Yang Ber- hormat untok di-tendang undang2 ini dan juga saya minta dari Menteri Pelajaran untok di-tolak undang2 ini.

Ini-lah uchapan saya dalam bahasa kebangsaan dan saya minta ampun dan maaf, sebab saya akan lagi berchakap dalam bahasa Tnggeris.

Terima kaseh.

juga Mr. Speaker, Sir, have mentioned, these recommendations in the Talib Report are entirely contrary to the 1955 election pledges.

as I Mr. Speaker: I think it would be "Rahman Talib to call it better Report."
to failed Enche' Too Joon Hing: Rahman Talib Report.

Thank you, Sir.

As I have already stated just now, by dis- continuing the Junior Middle III and the Senior Middle III systems and the respective examinations, the Alliance their responsibilities of have evaded sustaining vernacular education and have their election fulfil pledges of allowing vernacular schools their normal expansion.
The Alliance have also gone against paragraph 72 of the Razak Report by altering the practice of Chinese secondary schools.

By discontinuing partial assistance, the Alliance have discouraged and hindered the expansion of Chinese secondary schools and have turned back on their promise set out in the 1955 election manifesto of according equal treatment to all the students of National-type Secondary schools.
By enforcing 1961 19 OCTOBER 1961 1962 in Schools envisaged in the Razak Report to participate in the L.C.E.
and the Federation of Malaya Certificate of Education official examinations languages, the Alliance had discouraged the development of the languages of the other races living in this country, fundamental and deviated from recommendations the in Razak Report under paragraphs 71, 72 and 119. the laid down the reasons language of Sir, in paragraph 175 of the Talib the Review Committee had Report, boldly for declared eliminating communal schools from the national system of assisted schools for the sake of unity.
But in paragraph 119 of the Razak Report the fifteen men Committee had already emphasised thier conviction that the production of a common content syllabus irrespective of the crucial requirement of an educational policy in Malaya and was the essential element in the development of a united Malaya.

It is the key to the establish- ment of an education system acceptable to the people as a whole.
Yet the Review Committee saw fit to disregard and deviate from these vital and crucial in doing so, recommendations, and thev had again failed the to fulfil pledges stated in paragraph 5 of the Manifesto which says— instruction was of considers "The Alliance the is most standardization important.

Textbooks sub- in stance with a Malayan utlook shall be produced this country."
textbooks similar languages that all in in Sir, we all know, and fact and Canada is a it that in well-known universal Switzerland different languages are being spoken and also used as the meduium of instruction in their schools; yet the people in those countries are as united and loyal as in any other nation in the world.
This the 15-man again strongly supports Committee recommendation the that content common adoption syllabus irrespective of the medium of instruction is the only factor which can establish a national system of education acceptable to the people as a whole and to permanent and which can lead of a in the people lasting unity of this country.
This does not mean, Sir, that Malay will not achieve its objective of becoming the national language as laid down in the terms of reference; this can be done by making Malay a in all schools.

compulsory Malay can and the national language of this country.

shall become subject Now, Sir, I will comment on the actual Bill itself.
In the preamble it is stated— further provision "and whereas is required for securing the effective execu- including tion of in said policy, the the progressive particular provision for development of an educational system in which the national language is the main medium of instruction:" the the national is political and terms of reference of Sir, the Alliance Education Manifesto the and Razak Report were to establish a national system of education acceptable to the people, having regard to making or adopting Malay as the national the country.
To make language of language of Malay to make Malay the country and instruction the main medium of are entirely two different things—the the latter is former educational.

This controversial issue of making Malay the main medium of instruction had always been argued and referred to by Honourable Members in in last Legislative Council and the the present Parliament.
The Alliance had always maintained that it was laid down in the Razak Report, Chapter II, under the heading of The Committee's Task, in paragraph 12.

Sir, paragraph 12 merely expressed its task, or was meant to consider the possibility of adopting such a policy.
The 15-man Committee, of which I happened to be one member, and so was the present Minister, after having considered all the aspects of this question and taken into consideration the various un- favourable comments and criticisms from the general public and even from certain the Alliance members, had not found fit to adopt this recommendation.

Hence it was never embodied in the draft copy of the 1957 Education Ordinance.

Sir, sections of 1963 19 OCTOBER 1961 1964 for provisions in Malaya.
The the Federation, because the Alliance Manifesto had clearly and boldly stated that the national school features as envisaged in Federal Council Paper No.

67/54 was not acceptable to the people of this country.
This education White Paper was to imple- ment the 1952 Education Ordinance, which at that time formed the most objectionable and most controversial policy the Colonial Government had the history of ever produced in 1952 education Education Ordinance was objection- able and unacceptable to the people of laid it down introducing national school features into vernacular schools, that is, replacing vernacular schools by national schools using as the main medium of instruction the official the Federation, i.e., English and Malay.
Now, Sir, the preamble dis- paragraph 3 of tinctly requires legislation of provi- sions to secure the effective execution of educational system the national language is the main medium of instruction and Section 21 of the Bill provides the power to direct by order any national- type primary school to be converted into national primary school using the national language as the main medium of to define these schools so that Houourable Members may know whether there are any differences between these two types of schools.
Section 18 of the 1952 Ordinance says— instruction.
Sir, I would the Minister with languages of in which like "For the purpose of fulfilling the duties in the appropriate as moneys purpose this Ordinance and the provisions of (the far imposed under accordance with Federation Agreement authority) so voted or permit— in provided the for (i) x x x x (ii) may continue to maintain and extend or establish and main- tain Government vernacular and English schools until, in the case of primary schools, they can be replaced by national schools;" a races children of for six-year all course of free primary education with a Malayan orientation and appropriate for the ages of six and children between this the main for twelve and using in the languages of purpose the official for facilities Federation and providing in instruction and Tamil this accordance with section."
the provisions of in Kuo Yu That is school" under Now Section 21 of the Bill reads— the definition of "national the 1952 Ordinance.

that time the Minister "Where at any a national-type is satisfied primary school may suitably be converted into a national primary school he may by order direct that school shall become a national primary school."

is Now what the national primary school?
It is in page 4, where it is stated— the definition of " 'national primary school', or means fully a kebangsaan, primary school— sekolah assisted a course (a) providing of six-year primary education appropriate for the ages of six children between and eleven years; (b) using the national main medium of language as instruction; the (c) in which the English language is a instruction; compulsory subject of and {d) in which facilities for the teaching of the Chinese or Tamil language shall, it and practicable so to do, be made fifteen available if the parents of children in the school so request;" reasonable is if I cannot find any.
Now, what difference do we find between Section 21 of this Bill and the 1952 Education Section 18 of I Ordinance?

honestly cannot find any difference and yet, to-day, we are asked by the Alliance Government to approve and adopt this Bill which is the same as the one which the Alliance them- declared rejected selves had unacceptable this to country election in manifesto.

and the people of 1955 their Now the definition of "national school" is given at Section 21 of the 1952 Ordinance.
It says here— "For the purposes of this Ordinance a 'national school' is any school providing Mr. Speaker, Sir, with the inclusion of the third paragraph in the preamble and Section 21 embodied in the Bill, the Alliance has brought back to the people of this country an educational 1965 19 OCTOBER 1961 1966 is Sir, these schools schools schools.

this Bill policy which actually revives the spirit of the 1952 Education Ordinance.
There is an old Chinese proverb which says, borrow the corpse to revive the the spirit; but, I say, in this case Alliance Review Commitee has borrowed the corpse to revive the devil by introducing this Bill to-day.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, in section 21 the Minister may convert, by order, any national- to National type Primary nowadays Primary primary schools are mostly National- type Primary schools.
With this power given to the Minister, what guarantee is there that he will not use his power into to convert all National Primary schools.

None at all.

I cannot see any.

There is not even a paragraph or a section in which the manager of a school can make an appeal against this conversion.

Sir, to approve and adopt to request us to betray the confidence of the people given to us.
Sir, speaking on page 5—I think an Honourable Member has spoken and I will not speak very this page— long on 4'National-type Secondary School using the English the main language as medium of instruction", this is a clear and distinct deviation from the policy laid down in the Razak Report under the same heading of paragraphs 71 and 72 concerning Chinese Secondary Schools the medium of instruction is clearly stated as Kuo-Yu, whilst Malay and English languages are compulsory subjects.
Sir, this Bill has totally changed or altered the features schools by secondary of Chinese making English as the main medium of instruction.
The 1957 Education Ordinance has clearly laid down in its interpretation National-type that Secondary School means a secondary school providing a five-year course of the secondary education National English Language, language, the Chinese language or the Tamil language, or any two of such languages are used as the media of instruction, where such languages are not used as the media of instruction.

Sir, this is a clear and vital change in the National-type Secondary School.
in which in which the I to or committed they had Sir, coming to the cancellation of the registration of teachers, Section 85 (a) says a teacher's registration can be cancelled if he is found "promoting or fostering or is or has been concerned with the promoting or fostering of some unlawful purpose or any purpose incompatible with prejudicial peace, welfare or good order of the country".
Sir, when a teacher or a manager promotes or fosters unlawful purpose, prejudicial to the peace of this country, the teacher's registration should be cancelled.

think no reasonable man would object to it; but, Sir, in the past many teachers had been deprived of their registration not an because infringement of the provisions under Section 85, but because they criticised the Government's education policy.
Sir, I had the opportunity of serving the as an Assistant Minister under Alliance Government for two years and in that two years I came across many cases, one of which the teacher concerned was known to the Deputy Prime Minister.

His registration as a teacher was cancelled not because of committing an the provisions under Section 85, but because he criticised the 1952 Educa- tion Ordinance.

Sir, he was classified as a security risk, a communist and so many other things.
Sir, cancellation of a registration under such circumstances is misusing of authority to to suppress intimidate the public from voicing their opinion.

Such action would not help to solve the problem but only to aggravate the situation.

Take, for instance, the recent cancellation of the registration of Mr. Lim Lian Geok the opposition and infringement of teacher's Mr. Speaker: That is sub judice, I think, because the matter is still under review.

Enche' Tao Joon Hing: I am just mentioning it, Sir.
Mr. Speaker: No, you cannot.

Do not refer to that case which is now pending.

Now, I come the subject of to grant-in-aid—Clause 104 of the Bill.

Sir, it is stated that grant-in-aid could 1967 19 OCTOBER 1961 1968 treatment limitations as prescribed conditions only be paid subject to such conditions and by are regulations.

These clearly laid down in paragraph 187 of the Rahman Talib Report.

Here, the Alliance has gone back on the promise of according equal to all the Prime schools.
The Honourable Minister had failed to fulfil the promise of giving $2,000,000 to Chinese schools which he made at a conference of MCA members, teachers' representa- in and UMNO members tives Malacca on the 12th January, 1955, at the house of the late Tun Cheng Lock Tan.
Sir, it is very nice to tell the people the Alliance has doubled the Chinese education expendi- ture to about $40,000,000 as stated in this Digest, but I would add only on laid such conditions and down by these the conditions never existed under normal conditions of Chinese schools in 1955 and before.
the Minister—and limitations that assistance Sir, to-day, the Alliance has not only not fulfilled the promise of $2,000,000 made by the Honourable the Prime Minister, but it has decided that the meagre partial inherited from the colonial Government will be the if discontinued from next year, Chinese secondary schools refuse to conform to fully assisted schools.
Sir, I asked on the first day of the meeting whether the Honourable Minister would give assistance to independent schools for the purpose of teaching and learning the national language only, a require- laid ment which down 18, paragraph (d).

The answer which we all heard was in the negative.

Does the Minister realise that by doing so he has deliberately gone against the intention of making Malay the national language?
If so, I would like to refer him to paragraphs 17 and 18 of the Razak Report which reads: the Ministry has this Digest—page in declared is it of "17.

As the the reference, Government to make Malay the national language of the country.

terms intention of our in 18.

It must be recommend the to and from that Malay follows in all schools, and we learnt that the teaching of Malay learning of Malay by all this pupils shall be a condition of Government assistance in all schools."
In other words, whether it be assisted schools, conforming schools, or what- ever schools, so long as there is the learning and in schools, Government must those provide them with assistance.

teaching of Malay in regard Now, I come to Clause 120 of the Bill in to examinations respect of the Lower Certificate of is the most Education.
This matter important and the most controversial issue in the whole of the Razak Report and which had caused students' riots, the crisis in the MCA, the resignation of MCA leaders in 1959—to-day you see three of them here—and last, but not the least, the loss of confidence of the people in the Alliance resulting in a greater number of Opposition members sitting here in this House to-day and in heavy defeats of the Alliance and Town Council elections.
The Alliance has always maintained these examinations are official and public examinations and, therefore, must be conducted in the official languages as explained in the Digest—and this is also laid down in the Rahman Talib Report.
Sir, I find something very interesting in Chapter 8, page 12, where it is stated: recent Municipal that in it ever said "Nowhere in that Report"—that is the that Razak Report—"was these examinations would be conducted in any other language except that it was stated literature papers in any language including Chinese would be the and language concerned."
answered language that and set in That is true, Sir; but it is also equally true that nowhere in the Report was there these examinations are to be conducted only in the official languages.
ever mentioned that Sir, I have as a Member of the last Federal Legislative Council and in this very House brought this to the notice of the past Minister, and I am bringing it now again the present Minister—that is that para- graphs 70 and 71 has clearly stated that the official languages (the Malay and English languages) are compulsory the notice of to 1969 19 OCTOBER 1961 1970 subjects in secondary schools: it is never stated that these should be the media of examinations.
concerning Mr. Speaker, Sir, in another para- graph of the Digest—page 12—it tries to dispel the doubt of the people by referring to the Ministers' speeches in the last Legislative Council meeting.

Sir, what the previous Ministers had stated the medium of instructions were entirely opinions of their own, but if these opinions were unanimously upheld by every member of the fifteen men Committee, then there should be no cause for argument and dispute and everyone would be to happy—and we do not have to-day.
But circulate this Digest unfortunately that Committee have one way or anoher in the previous Legislative Council, and in the medium of the Press, criticised examination and expressed opinions the entirely different Ministers.

Therefore, their opinions on this could be challenged— the Ministers' opinions.
four members of those of think from I Sir, taking into consideration the references which I have quoted from the Razak Report and the Alliance Manifesto, I am sure I have brought to the notice of this House sufficient evidence showing the misinterpretation in the implementation of the Razak Report, deliberate evasion of the Review Committee and the failure of the Alliance in fulfilling the election pledges.
from Mr. Speaker, Sir, I will now quote the the criticisms some of members of the fifteen men Committee in the last Federal Legislative Council.

When the late Mr. Goh Chee Yan had some misgivings as to the spirit of imple- mentation of the Razak Report.
He said: the Bill was introduced concerned "However, there is one thing I wish to emphasise and the is unless that the authorities out recommendations of the Report sincerely and conscientiously, that though we may repeal and unanimously condemn the Ordinance of 1952, it will be a repeal only on paper, but not in fact."

I am afraid carry That, Sir, is one of the warnings by the late Mr. Goh Chee Yan.
Again, Mr. Lee Thean Hin on the the imple- 12th December, 1957, criticised interpretation and method of mentation: he said— "One of important the outstanding problems is the question of certificates of examina- "I do suggest that this is far tion—" more the question of superannuation than " I am sorry, Sir, this is not the correct quotation: this is a quotation of a speech by Dr. Lim Chong Eu on the same date: — that than "I do suggest this the question of important annuation of school children, and one of the outstanding problems lies ahead in the peaceful Chinese schools in our school system is far more super- it is that integration of " Sir, again the late Mr. Goh Chee Yan stated on the 7th March, 1957: — "I would like to ask for enlightenment language on one point, that is in what their will boys and girls, who received education of the medium instruction in Chinese, be examined when they the Lower Certificate for examination."
through sit to all in regard I have brought out all that needed mention here the various points which I mentioned just now to show the Minister the intention of the fifteen men Committee on the medium of instruction for the Lower Certificate of Education the National Certificate of Education.

and to and insist unless Further, on the 11th December, 1958, Mr. Lee Thean Hin said, on the question of examinations, as follows: — "My second subject is the question of the 'Examinations'.
Until pupils in non-Malay schools are provided with qualified teachers, as I have said, is it not unfair and unjust that the medium of examination should be held in a medium different from that in which the children have been taught?

I would not like to advance my arguments further beyond quoting a common Latin 'Verbum sat sapienti' ".

saying : On the same date, I also brought up the same issue of examinations.
There were also members of the past Federal Legislative Council who criticised the medium of examination and I would like in this.

connection to quote two- persons.


1971 19 OCTOBER 1961 1972 One is Mr. S. M. Yong who said on the 12th December, 1957: — "In my speech a few days ago, I pointed out how unfair and absurd it is to ask a student to answer his question papers in English on subjects such as history or geography which he has been taught and which he has learned in the Chinese language and all the textbooks are in the Chinese language."

" In fact, some answers were given which were rather evasive."
Then, also on the same date Mr. Lee Thean Hin, I am sorry, Sir, Mr. Devaser said on the same date Mr. Speaker: You must quote correctly, as this is going on record in the Hansard.

Enche' Too Joon Hing: Yes, Sir.

Mr. K. L. Devaser said on the 11th December, 1958: — "I support my Honourable friend Mr. Too Joon Hing when he says that the language to be used in the examinations should be the language of instruction.
That, I thought, is commonsense—what language you are taught in, you must be examined language.

If I were taught in Tamil, I could only sit for the examination in Tamil;" in that These are quotations of criticisms from the various members.

schools, I have Sir, coming back to the question of independent some comments to make on the conditions set for these independent schools.
The Minister had already imposed by law that these independent schools must have English and Malay as compulsory subjects, but yet no assistance is being provided for the teaching of Malay though I have pointed out that in the Razak Report one of the conditions to encourage Malay the national language is to provide assist- ance to all schools.
By so doing I think he has not taken this into consideration and I, therefore, ask him to reconsider this point again—that the learning and teaching of Malay should be provided with assistance in respect of all schools irrespective of the fact whether they are conforming or non-conforming, private or independent schools, or whatever schools.
to become Sir, I can only say that to-day the Malayan Chinese and Malayan Indians support Malay as the national language, but they also want their languages to be encouraged, sustained and retained in all schools, and I think the Razak the Report had clearly stated common content syllabus is the only crucial and vital element that would lead us to unity in this country.
There- fore, Sir, in conclusion, once again I request that the Minister whether he would be good enough to withdraw this Bill and set up another Committee to review the Rahman Talib Report.

Thank you.

that Sitting suspended at 12.40 p.m.

Sitting resumed at 4.30 p.m. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) THE EDUCATION BILL Second Reading Debate resumed.

(Seremban Enche' Chin See Yin Timor): Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Bill before the House when it is adopted becomes the new law on education.
This Bill as we all know is introduced to implement the Report of the Educa- tion Review Committee, 1960, but, Sir, I must add that this Report of the Education Review Committee cannot be said to be one acceptable, in regard to the policy recommended, by the people as a whole.

Why do I say so?

First of all, if you go about the town and read the newspapers, you will observe that constant appeals have been made asking the Government to review the Report and asking for a new Com- mittee to be set up.
That being the case, I say that the policy recommended by the Committee is not acceptable to the people as a whole.
Now, Sir, I would like to refer to the Preamble of this Bill—in particular I would like to draw attention to para- graph 2, which says: "And Whereas it is considered desirable that regard shall be had, so far as is compatible with the provision of efficient instruction and with the avoidance of unreasonable public that policy, with 1973 19 OCTOBER 1961 1974 expenditure, to the general principle that pupils are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents:" I would like to know, Sir, who are these parents—and I presume that these parents are the people living in the Federation.
If they are people in the Federation, then I say these are the people who have not accepted the policy recommended in that Report.
Sir, before we consider this Bill and before we pass it, we must ask our- selves whether it is in conformity with the 1956 Report, and whether it is in conformity with Article 152 of the Constitution which reads: "The national language shall be the Malay language and shall be in such script as Parliament may by law pro- vide : — Then, Sir, let us look at page 5 of Provided that— the Bill: paragraph (d) reads: if "in which facilities for the teaching of the Chinese or Tamil language shall, if it is reasonable and practicable so to do, be made available the parents of fifteen children in the school so request;" In this case, Sir, I would say that it is against the 1956 Education Report.
If you refer to that Report you will find that it is suggested in that Report that in if all languages are taught—and accordance with the syllabus and time tables given by the Education Depart- ment—it will be in order.
In this case, I would refer to paragraph 119 which reads: the needs of to the people of "Once all schools are working to a common content syllabus, irrespective of the language medium of instruction, we consider the country will have taken the most important step towards establishing a national system of education which will satisfy the people and promote their cultural, social, economic and political development as a nation."
Now, also in this connection, if we read paragraph 9 of the 1956 Report, it will be appreciated that it is stated therein that the educational policy must be acceptable the Federation as a whole.

That, Sir, is the sole intention as contained in the 1956 Report, and a Committee was appoint- ed to review this Report to see that those which had not been carried out be put down in writing and imple- mentation be made forthwith.
In this case, the Review Committee was told the to put up a plan the Review building, but Committee drew up a plan for the construction of a new building, which is totally different from the existing one.

This is exactly what is happening to-day.

Therefore, I say that this new plan is not acceptable to the people as a whole.
to renovate instead (a) no person shall be prohibited or prevented from using (otherwise than for official purposes), or from teaching or learning, any other language; and (b) nothing in this clause shall pre- judice the right of the Federal Government or of any State Government to preserve and sustain the use and study of the language of any other community in the Federation."
In this Article the words "use and study" are so prominent, or so clearly stated, that no one can deny the clear intention; and if you were to read this in conjunction with the Alliance 1959 Parliamentary Election Manifesto, you will appreciate that a pledge had been made to the people at that time.

What is it say?
What is it say?

Here it is, Sir: "to review the present education policy light of experience gained since its implementa- tion bearing the declared in mind objective of making Malay the national time language, while at encourage and sustain the growth of languages and cultures of other races."

this pledge—what does the same the in Now, Sir, in this paragraph the word "encourage" is used—that is a promise to encourage and use and to study the languages of the other races in this country.
We say that we are going to encourage the study and the use of languages in this country other than making these languages official; if so, then we must not hesitate to allow in to continue education them the Chinese Indian the the primary language, further school level.

If we allow a promise to be broken, and if we do not follow the Constitution that requires us to do certain things, then I say we have done something terribly wrong.
And how language, in than 1975 19 OCTOBER 1961 1976 from take away something can you expect to build a happy united Malayan nation, when you are going to the people that is very dear to their minds, to their hearts?

That is a matter that we must give very careful consideration.

If you want a strong nation, then we must give is provided for them—everything, and not take away something that they love so much.
thing them that the Now, Sir, another point which I to would like to make is in regard Clause 136 of the Bill which reads: "The Minister shall cease to maintain any existing secondary school which was, immediately before the appointed date, in receipt of partial grant-in-aid under the Schools (Financial) Assistance) Regula- tions, 1958."

to that to refer this refers I am sure the partially assisted schools; but if we are going to partially assisted schools, then I say, Sir, we are moving ahead of time.
I say so, because under the Razak Report it was suggested that a period of ten years be given to find out the actual result of the practice in respect of that policy, or the imple- mentation of that policy contained in the Razak Report.

Therefore, I say it is going too far—in fact, not only I but also the President of the MCA, Johore Branch, who did make a suggestion, and this was reported in the newspapers some time last week or the week previous to that.
Sir, these partially assisted schools are conforming with the requirements of the Education Ordinance.

They do exactly everything that is required of them and they are not asking Govern- ment to give them the money for the total requirements in the maintenance of their schools.

They only ask for partial aid—that is to say, Government gives them partial aid and the other half is made up by way of donations or collections from members of the public.
The result of this is that we are going to get pupils coming out from these schools who will also render service to the country, because they have that knowledge and that wisdom; arid they will qualify to go into Govern- further ment Service or to go for academic studies after which they will come back qualified to render service to the country.

That being the case, I would suggest that it is wrong for us so quickly to put an end to giving aid to these assisted secondary schools.
The Chinese schools in particular have done a great deal for the country.

If there is trouble, it has involved only a handful of children and this is found anywhere, even in Government fully aided schools they have troubles.

to in cent Now, Sir, the 1960 I come Report.

Paragraph 89 of the Report— and this Bill contains clauses to carry out that recommendation—deals with primary schools and promotions.
It this Report has been suggested that only 30 per can go to secondary schools, the remaining 70 per cent will find places in what the "Remove" school or is called continuation school for another two years.

I understand that the number of pupils at the moment in these primary schools is 1.1 million.

If you are going to allow only 30 per cent to go to secondary schools, what is going to happen to the 70 per cent?

Can you accommodate all the 70 per cent in what you call continuation schools?
I doubt you can find places for all of them.

Now, assuming you can find places, after two years what are you going to do with them?

If we are going to follow the system that is practised in England, I would say that in England they have also failed and, in fact, they are trying to find another system; this is despite the fact that in England they have so many industries, so many factories, which can provide employ- ment to these pupils who leave school.
In this country, the position cannot even be compared with Hong Kong where there are 1,300 to 1,400 factories employing like 300,000 people.

We are not able to do so just now.

Therefore, in regard to this practice, I would say that in England they have failed—so why are we still pursuing with such a policy?

something Then comes the question of finance in this Bill.
In this Bill it is suggested that after the passing of this Bill, when it becomes law, the State Governments 1977 19 OCTOBER 1961 1978 or the local authorities will be asked the to collect money to supplement funds required to provide education to the children.

Now, Sir, the Honourable Minister of Finance said something on the question of finance when we debated the 1960 Report and before I go further on this question, I wish to recapitulate what he said then.
He said that it was painfully clear that the foreseen increases in expenditure could not be financed on existing levels of taxation.

By 1962 the net recurrent cost of education would be $615 million which is more than 3 1/2 times the present figure which represents 69 per cent of the total expenditure in 1960.

It was equally obvious that this sort of money could not be sought in loans, because Malaya would never be able to repay them.
Furthermore, no country would be willing to grant loans for such purposes.

He went on to say that the Government did not undertake to recommendations within the years indicated in the Report because of the huge financial implica- tions.
So, even the Honourable Minister of Finance said that the question of getting the money to implement the recommendations contained in the 1960 Report was going to be very difficult and he thought at that time that it would take a few more years, and yet we are going to do it in 1962.
We are going to make the State Governments to be responsible for part of this money and I know—we all know—that in most cases the State Governments very often borrow money from the Federal Government, and you still ask them to the dig further people in each State to pay for this.

This is something to which we must give very careful consideration.
into the pockets of implement the Sir, looking at it as a whole, there is no doubt that the intention is to make Malay the official language and to make full use of the language for administration, with a view to building up a Malayan nation.
Now, coming to the building up of a Malayan nation, yesterday the Honourable Minister of the Interior said: "For the benefit of the PMIP, the culture of Greater Malaysia would this very House in contain be based on Malay culture, enriched by the cultures of the other races."

It is very true in what he said.

We know what it all boils down to.


But, Sir, in this case I would suggest that the Chinese language and the English plenty of language may material and I would take the oppor- tunity to refer to the Fenn-Wu Report of 1951.

Now, these two gentlemen, Doctors Fenn and Wu, were sent here at the request of the British Govern- ment the United Nations Organisation.
They are experts on education and this is what they wrote in paragraphs 3 and 13 of their Report, and if I may, I will read it to direct the attention of this House to this Report— from rather can be differences relationship co-operative stressed.

There turning Malaya "What can be hoped for is a peaceful and among diverse elements, in which community of are interest than no naturally justification of into a cockpit for aggressive cultures.
By virtue of its composite population it should be a land where the developing culture draws its validity from acceptance of the high values of other cultures.

The people of Malaya will have to learn to understand and appreciate their cultural differences.

They should be proud of their spirit of mutual tolerance."

" we must remember Its beauty and is that Chinese languages of the is one of the greatest the world's great world, key to one of richness are cultures.

to be gained unquestioned.


Nothing the by trying to deprive any section of a knowledge of population of what as many Chinese has Europeans study Latin, other in Malaya might well profit from a study of Chinese.

However, because of its difficulty and the time involved in master- ing it, the study of Chinese is likely to be undertaken largely by Chinese to give.

races Just " applies This also language; the Indian back to many thousands of years.
Indian language goes the to Sir, it would then be a pity if these two languages should be left out and left behind because it is our intention to create a Malay nation, to create a Malayan culture, as it was so clearly suggested by the Honourable Minister yesterday.

I think we should not forget the things he said and should try to find ways and means to work it.
1979 19 OCTOBER 1961 1980 Now, Sir, you have heard these observations of mine concerning this Bill, and I think for the public interest, for the good of this country, it may well be a very good thing if the Honourable Minister of Education will kindly con- sider the appeal of not only me, but by and large the public in this country, the people, for this Bill to be put aside for the time being and a new Com- mittee appointed to review the whole situation and submit a new report.
I am in full agreement with the previous speaker on this subject matter, on the question of appointing a new Com- mittee to go into this education issue.
Tuan Haji Hasan Adli bin Haji Arshad (Kuala Trengganu Utara): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sakali2 dan pada masa2-nya kami melihat pehak anggota Kerajaan terletak dalam keadaan yang serba salah oleh perchubaan hendak mengkechiwakan Kerajaan daripada gulongan2 yang kami anggap tidak suka hendak melihat terchipta-nya satu dasar pelajaran yang tunggal dalam negeri ini.

Di-hadapan kita sekarang ini ada satu masaalah ia-itu Undang2 Pelajar- an.
Maka PAS menyokong dan bersetuju dengan sa-bahagian besar daripada Rang Undang2 ini walau pun tidak kesemua-nya—(An HONOURABLE MEMBER: Hear, hear)—Dalam pada itu, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tentu-lah tegoran2 daripada kami, ada yang mana kami harapkan bahawa tegoran2 itu akan dapat-lah di-sifatkan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Pela- jaran sa-bagai tegoran yang membena.
juga dapat Tuan Yang di-Pertua, oleh kerana Rang Undang2 ini boleh di-sokong pada dasar-nya, maka kami berharap bahawa Rang Undang2 yang sangat besar pengaroh dan guna-nya bagi zaman yang akan datang dan bagi keturunan kita pada masa yang akan dengan datang, semangat oleh Kerajaan, oleh ra'ayat negeri ini dan oleh pegawai yang bertanggong-jawab.
semangat Kami maksudkan dengan yang satu itu ia-lah semangat hendak bahasa memperlihatkan kebangsaan bahasa kebangsaan di-negeri ini dengan kuat- kuasa Undang2 yang ada di-hadapan kedaulatan pelajaran di-jalankan yang satu, baik dan ini dan dan kebangsaan kita ini.

Chita2 yang suchi di-sabalek menggubal Rang Undang2 tidak akan dapat di-hasilkan kalau sa-kira- tidak akan di- nya pelaksanaan-nya sertai oleh semangat dan tanggong- jawab yang saya sebutkan itu.
Kami ini memberi daripada anggota PAS jaminan bahawa kami akan memberi kerjasama kapada Kerajaan atas chita2 ini ia-itu chita2 hendak mendaulatkan pelajaran bahasa di-luar di-dalam kebangsaan Dewan ini (Tepok).

Kami akan sedia terhadap menerima apa dasar yang kami pertahankan ini.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kami terpaksa- lah menegaskan bagitu, ia itu-lah satu ketegasan yang maseh lunak, oleh kerana pada pandangan kami sekarang ini telah timbul gejala yang tidak baik yang boleh mengancham, bukan sahaja mengancham, tetapi menghanchorkan- chita2 kita hendak mewujudkan satu dasar pelajaran kebangsaan yang tung- gal dalam Persekutuan Tanah Melayu ini untok keturunan pada masa yang akan datang.
juga akibat tafsiran-nya Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sekarang suka-lah saya menarek perhatian Yang Berhormat Menteri, pertama sa-kali kapada muka surat 13, bahagian 4, itu pada ia-itu fasal 40.

Fasal 40 pandangan saya, jika-lah undang2 ini membolehkan bahawa tidak ada galangan di-sebutkan dalam kandongan ini untok menubohkan sa- buah University asing dengan ber- bahasa asing dalam negeri ini, maka tentu-lah ada nanti sa-suatu badan atau untok menubohkan University asing dalam negeri kita ini.
Kechuali-lah, kalau silap pada fahaman saya, oleh sebab tafsiran kalimah daripada muka 3, Institute tidak me- nyebutkan dan menerangkan dengan jelas-nya tentang sa-suatu badan atau kumpulan dalam negeri ini hendak menubohkan University asing.
itu nampak-nya kumpulan berusaha Saya membangkitkan hal ini, dalam perkara ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, oleh kerana tersiar-nya khabar2 bahawa ada suatu badan atau kumpulan dalam negeri kita ini akan menubohkan sa- buah University China di-Perak dan di-Pulau Pinang sama juga kedudokan- 1981 19 OCTOBER 1961 1982 nya saperti Nanyang University, di- Singapura.
Menurut khabar ini bahawa chita2 menubohkan sa-buah University saperti itu sedang di-dalam proses-nya di-dorong oleh beberapa kalangan siasah yang tertentu dalam negeri ini.

Kami, tidak-lah memusohi orang2 China sa-bagaimana sudah di-terang- kan oleh wakil2 PAS dalam Dewan ini.
Tetapi walau bagaimana pun kami ada-lah sa-barang terus menentang perusahaan walau siapa pun dalam negeri ini hendak menubohkan sa- barang University asing dengan bahasa asing sama ada bahasa China atau pun bahasa Russia dalam negeri ini, oleh kerana pada pandangan saya, bukan-lah akan mempunyai kuman sahaja bahkan ada-lah menjadi wabak yang besar dalam negeri ini.

Chukup- lah saya katakan sa-bagai menjadi wabak yang besar kapada negeri ini.
Oleh sebab itu-lah, kami suka menarek perhatian kapada Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran supaya dapat-lah menjelaskan kapada kami kelak sama ada di-dalam fasal 40 ini mensharatkan juga penubohan sa-barang University itu dengan kebenaran2 yang saperti tertentu atau sa-bagai-nya.

Kami ber- harap bahawa sharat2 yang tertentu dapat di-adakan dan tafsiran di-atas kalimah Institute itu dapat di-perluas- kan lagi.
ini Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sekarang baik- lah pula saya arahkan kapada fasal 116, ia-itu berkenaan dengan peratoran2 yang akan di-keluarkan oleh Menteri Pelajaran dari masa ka-samasa.

Di- dalam fasal ini apa yang saya hendak dzahirkan dalam Dewan ia-itu supaya Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran dapat-lah melaksanakan peratoran-nya berkenaan dengan me- jawatan2 Guru Besar di- menohi Sekolah Kebangsaan.
Kami berharap dan meminta supaya jawatan2 Guru Besar di-Sekolah2 Kebangsaan itu apabila kosong pada masa ini atau masa akan datang hendak-lah di- iiankan dan di-adakan pemilehan atau pepereksaan atas kelayakan dan pengetahuan dan lain2 kepandaian yang khas yang ada pada ini ada-lah itu.

Dengan sa-saorang memberikan peluang kapada guru2 atau di-interview yang muda yang ada mempunyai pengetahuan dan kepandaian yang khas untok memegang jawatan Guru Besar di-Sekolah Kebangsaan itu.
Ini ada-lah untok menjaga taraf dan mutu Sekolah Kebangsaan itu bertambah2 lagi elok dari masa ka-samasa.

Tetapi, tidak-lah kami bermaksud bahawa guru2 tua itu kurang pelajaran atau sa-bagai-nya.
Kalau memileh Guru2 Besar itu di- dasarkan kapada guru2 yang sudah tua sudah dekat hendak bersara maka mereka pun tidak ada semangat hendak bekerja kerana mereka menantikan masa untok bersara sahaja, atau pun sa-telah beberapa bulan memegang itu sudah sampai masa-nya jawatan untok bersara, maka keadaan pentad- biran Sekolah2 Kebangsaan itu tentu- lah tidak betul dan terator.
tegas dan di-kampong2 tidak pernah di-chuba Saya perchaya, peratoran2 itu harus- lah jalankan oleh pehak Kerajaan, tetapi kita ber- ini dapat di-jalankan harap perkara dengan akan memberi fa'edah yang banyak dan memuaskan.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-atas perkara lain suka-lah saya hendak mengemuka- kan kapada Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran ia-itu suatu perkara lantekan Ahli2 Lembaga Pengurus Sekolah2 Kebangsaan.
Pada pengetahuan saya, terutama-nya bahawa lantekan2 bagi Ahli2 Lembaga Pengurus itu di-buat oleh Guru2 Besar itu sahaja.

Saya rasa elok-lah di-keluarkan satu arahan atau directive supaya pembento- kan Ahli2 Lembaga Pengurus itu tidak-lah berchorak politik.

Maksud saya ia-lah supaya sentimen politik atau kepartaian yang ada pada Guru2 terbawa2 dalam Besar masa memileh Ahli2 Jema'ah Pengurus itu.
Sekolah Kebangsaan Sebab mungkin timbul oleh kerana Guru Besar itu menjadi Ahli Pati A atau B, mithal-nya, mereka memileh wakil2 Ahli Lembaga Pe- ngurus itu daripada orang2 pati-nya.

Kami tidak takut sa-barang pati dalam di-Pertua negeri (Ketawa).
Tetapi sa-barang perchubaan baik langsong atau tidak langsong di- bawa2 dalam memileh Ahli Lembaga Pengurus Sekolah Kebangsaan ini, mengkechiwakan boleh nyata-lah ini, Tuan Yang telah pernah tidak-lah itu 1983 19 OCTOBER 1961 1984 ranchangan2 kemajuan Sekolah Ke- bangsaan itu.
Sa-lain daripada itu, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, saya rasa elok-lah juga Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran, jika boleh membuat satu arahan kapada Pegawai2 Pelajaran Negeri masing2 supaya di-adakan peluang memberikan kursus atau penerangan berkenaan dengan Undang2 Pelajaran dan per- atoran2 yang bersangkut dengan dasar kapada Ahli2 Lembaga pelajaran Pengurus Sekolah2 Kebangsaan itu.
saya Kursus2 itu boleh-lah di-berikan oleh Pegawai2 di-Pejabat Pelajaran dan guru2 yang faham akan dasar dan Undang2 berkaitan atau peratoran dengan pelajaran itu.

Saya shorkan guru2 yang faham akan dasar2 dan peratoran2 ini oleh kerana sa-panjang tahu kadang2 yang tidak-lah semua guru2 itu benar2 faham akan dasar Undang2 serta peratoran2 yang di-keluarkan oleh Kementerian Pelajar- an ini.
Sebab dengan chara ini boleh- lah menjadi jaminan2 kapada Anggota2 Jema'ah itu terutama di-kampong2 boleh bekerja memajukan sekolah2 itu dari satu masa ka-satu masa.

Sekolah Kebangsaan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, fasal 20 di- dalam Undang2 in (b) ia-itu "national- type primary schools".

Oleh kerana dasar kami hanya berkehendakkan satu Sekolah Rendah sahaja maka kami menuntut dari fasal itu di-hapuskan.
Fasal 23 (d) "national-type secondary schools", oleh kerana dasar kami juga bahawa kami menghendaki satu jenis Sekolah Kebangsaan itu sahaja maka kami menuntut fasal itu di-hapuskan.

itu dan Walau bagaimana pun kami me- nyambut baik-lah fasal 44 sa-hingga 58 ia-itu berkaitan dengan pendaftaran sekolah.

Kami menyambut baik akan fasal2 ini ada-lah sa-bagai menasabah bagi mengawal sekolah2 itu daripada menaborkan ajaran2 yang boleh dasar pendidekan kebangsaan di-negeri ini.
Chuma kami berharap bahawa pehak Kerajaan hendak-lah ingat bahawa ajaran2 yang berlawanan de- ngan kepentingan kebangsaan negeri berlawanan sentiasa dengan sa-mata2 dapat di- ini bukan-lah tabor menerusi buku atau sukatan2 pelajaran.

Penguasa2 sekolah itu boleh- lah di-tunjokkan buku2 yang betul dan sukatan2 yang betul kapada Pemereksa2 yang datang ka-sekolah2 itu.
Tetapi bahawa tidak-lah dapat di-nafikan gulongan2 bertanggong-jawab yang di-dalam sekolah itu sentiasa akan dapat menaborkan risalah2 yang boleh memesongkan faham kanak2 itu dari juga satu masa ka-satu masa dan mengajar sukatan sa-suatu di-luar pelajaran yang boleh mengajar nyanyi2 untok mendewa2kan Dr. San Yat Sen sa-bagai-nya.

Kita memang dan Sen menghormati Dr. tidak-lah penganjor besar tetapi kita boleh mendewa2kan sa-bagai me- nasabah sa-saorang itu di-ajar di-mana2 juga sekolah dalam negeri ini.
Jadi, chara menjalankan kami berharap kawalan chara menjalankan pemereksaan di-atas berdasarkan fasal 44 sampai 58 ini hendak-lah di-jalan- kan dengan ketat-nya daripada satu masa ka-satu masa.
San Yat dan sa-penoh-nya dengan mengadakan Penyemak shor2 Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Saaid (Seberang Utara): Tuan Yang di- Pertua, saya bangun hendak menyo- supaya kong dengan Rang Undang2 Pelajaran ini di-lulus- kan. Ada pun sebab Rang Undang2 ini di-bentangkan ia-lah supaya dapat di- persetujukan daripada Dewan Yang Berhormat ini oleh kerana Kerajaan Perikatan dahulu telah berjanji supaya Penyata Pelajaran yang lama itu di- semak maka kita telah tunaikan janji sa-buah itu dalam Jawatan-Kuasa tahun daripada beberapa gulongan yang ingin hendak telah pun me- memberikan Jawatan-Kuasa ngemukakan kapada ini.
Jawatan-Kuasa ini telah membuat satu Penyata yang di-namakan Penyata Jawatan-Kuasa Penyemak Dasar Pela- jaran tahun 1960 dan Penyata ini telah pun di-bentangkan dalam Dewan Yang Berhormat ini, supaya dapat persetuju- an dan di-terima Penyata ini.

Sekarang terpulang-lah kapada Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran membuat satu Rang Undang2 untok di-laksanakan dasar2 yang mengandongi di-dalam Penyata 1960.
Dan fikiran 1985 19 OCTOBER 1961 1986 Pelajaran itu supaya dapat di-beri tugas kapada pehak2 yang menjalankan urusan pelajaran dan persekolahan, menyempurnakan kehendak2 yang ter- kandong dalam Penyata ini.

Saya berasa hairan manakala saya dengar Yang Berhormat wakil Seberang Selatan dan juga Yang Berhormat daripada Telok Anson termasok juga Yang Berhormat wakil Seremban Timor menolak Rang Undang2 ini daripada di-persetujukan.
Sa-kira-nya Rang Undang2 ini di-tolak, bagaimana- kah chara-nya dapat di-laksanakan segala recommendation atau pun shor2 yang terkandong dalam Penyata Pela- jaran ini.

Ini ada-lah satu perkara yang sangat ganjil jika di-tolak Rang Un- dang2 ini maka terpaksa di-pakai Rang Undang2 yang lama.

Rang Undang2 ini mengikut Penyata Pelajaran tahun 1956 tidak sesuai.

Maka oleh itu saya bersetuju dengan penoh-nya supaya Rang Undang2 ini di-luluskan.
tentu-lah sa-kali Bagaimana yang di-tegaskan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran tadi bahawa dasar yang besar yang terkandong dalam Penyata Pelajaran tahun 1956 terkeluar dan tidak-lah semua-nya termasok di-dalam Penyata Pelajaran tahun 1960 chuma dalam masa pelaksanaan Penyata Pelajaran tahun 1956 itu di-dapati beberapa per- kara yang di-fikirkan tidak sesuai dan menasabah.

Maka oleh yang demikian di-datangkan beberapa pindaan di-atas chara pentadbiran dan chara2 yang lain.
Mithal-nya kita telah mengeshor- kan dan telah berjanji supaya had umor bagi murid2 Sekolah Rendah itu di-lanjutkan sa-hingga 15 tahun sa- lepas lulus di-Sekolah Rendah.

Dan yang kedua-nya berkenaan dengan Lembaga Pelajaran Negeri yang pada tidak sesuai pendapat kerana selalu lambat chara mentadbir- kan-nya.
Apa perentah yang di-datang- kan daripada Menteri Pelajaran kena- lah melalui Lembaga Pelajaran Negeri Negeri dan menurunkan kuasa kapada ketua2 pelajaran bagi negeri2 dan turunkan lagi kuasa-nya kapada Jawatan-Kuasa Tempatan, dengan lambat pe- laksanaan-nya dan tugas2 Lembaga itu saya sendiri Lembaga Pelajaran ini di-atas terpaksa di-gantongkan dan di-ganti- Jawatan-Kuasa kan dengan sa-buah Penasehat bagi peringkat kebangsaan dan peringkat negeri.
Yang ketiga-nya sa-paroh kapada Sekolah2 bantuan Jenis Kebangsaan itu di-berhentikan dan di-gantikan dengan bantuan penoh kapada Sekolah2 Rendah Jenis Kebang- saan.

Juga ada beberapa sebab rasa tidak puas hati dari kalangan guru2, oleh itu di-tubohkan sa-mula sa-buah Majlis Kebangsaan bagi menguruskan hal-ehwal guru2, dan dengan ada-nya majlis ini dapat-lah berunding dengan hal-ehwal pehak Kerajaan perkhidmatan guru2 sakalian.
Dan lagi Kerajaan dalam peratoran dan perjalanan yang laksanakan dahulu yang telah kita tidak bagitu sa-suai.

Lagi di-dapati satu dalam penyata satu perubahan, pada masa dahulu kita ada jawatan inspectorate bagi Persekutuan.

Seka- rang tidak di-adakan, chuma di-adakan satu Juma'ah Nazir Tempatan.

Maka dengan ini dapat-lah Juma'ah Nazir itu menjalankan kerja-nya memerhati- perjalanan kan sekolah dan memperbaiki tatatertib yang tidak se-suai dan berlawanan dengan perentah di-atas.
inspectorate atau pun akan mengemaskan hal-ehwal ini ada segala Jadi jikalau sudah di-ikut sa-bagai- mana kehendak tiga orang wakil tadi supaya Rang Undang2 ini di-tolak saya maka, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, berasa dukachita kerana kita telah hendak memberi menchadangkan ia-itu pelajaran perchuma kejayaan sekolah2 kapada murid2 di-seluroh rendah pada tahun 1962.

Jika di- tolak maka harus ta' dapat di-laksana- kan tujuan kita hendak memberi pela- jaran rendah kapada semua sekolah2.
Jadi dengan ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Ahli2 Yang Berhormat yang mendengar penerangan daripada wakil2 tadi dapat- lah pendirian mereka dan mereka ini sengaja hendak melambatkan terlaksana-nya pemberian pelajaran tahun hadapan.
Yang sa-benar-nya patut-lah di-tolak penyata dahulu kemudian baharu-lah Rang Undang2 itu saya tahu bagaimana-kah ini, tetapi waktu perchuma di-tolak untok dapat 1987 19 OCTOBER 1961 1988 dapati pehak Socialist Front manakala di-minta persetujuan pada penyata itu, mereka kechuali daripada mengundi berma'ana yang mereka bersetuju di- atas penyata tidak-lah patut di-tolak Rang Undang2 untok melaksanakan penyata ini.

itu.
itu.

Sekarang bahasa Mengikut system pelajaran yang ada sekarang ini saya terdengar Ahli Yang Berhormat wakil daripada Seremban Timor mengatakan ia-itu dia membacha Perlembagaan dalam article 152.

Jadi kata-nya dengan ada-nya Rang Undang2 yang sa-macham ini ta' puas hati.

Banyak orang konon-nya ta' puas hati kerana tidak memberi sa-penoh-nya atau bantuan atau gala- sekolah2 yang bukan kan kapada daripada Ini kebangsaan.
barangkali Ahli Yang Berhormat itu ta' kaji dengan halus system pelajaran yang terkandong dalam penyata dan terkandong dalam Rang Undang2 ini tentang sekolah rendah yang bahasa kebangsaan-nya ia-lah bahasa Melayu dan bahasa Inggeris mesti di-ajar.
Erti-nya orang2 yang bukan daripada bangsa Melayu jika ada lebeh daripada 15 orang murid dan warith-nya jika bersetuju supaya di-ajar bahasa Tamil maka Kerajaan adakan guru2 mengajar sa-terus-nya daripada sekolah rendah sa-hingga ka-University, juga di-beri peluang belajar bahasa China dengan perchuma dan di-adakan pepereksaan dalam bahasa China.

Dengan chara ini konon-nya Kerajaan tidak 'adil.

Saya pun hairan.

Kerajaan yang macham mana di-katakan 'adil?


Saya pun ta' tahu, segi pemerentah di-mana2 juga dalam dunia ini di-beri bantuan kapada sekolah2 ia-lah yang bahasa bahasa Jadi Kerajaan kita ini chukup 'adil lebeh lebeh daripada daripada patut di-beri bantuan penoh kapada sekolah2 ra'ayat dengan di-beri peluang belajar lain daripada bahasa kebang- saan Ini di-katakan tidak 'adil.

Ini satu perkara yang saya hairan.


Chuba mereka itu tinjau dasar pelajaran negara tetangga kita baharu-Iah mereka sedar siapa yang 'adil dan siapa yang ta' 'adil dari segi pelajaran.

pengantar-nya sahaja.

sa-hingga mendapat tetapi kalau kebangsaan ikut dari 'adil dan sijil.
Jadi pada had ini, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, orang2 yang menentang supaya jangan di-bawa Rang Undang2 ini tidak lain dan tidak bukan hanya sa-nya hendak menegakkan apa yang mereka itu pada masa pilehan raya dahulu menggunakan propaganda yang falsu untok memusingkan dan memutar- belitkan Mr. Speaker: Jaga sadikit perkataan itu.

Ada kalimah yang di-keluarkan ta' boleh di-gunakan dalam yang Parlimen lan- ini—unparliamentary guage, Kalau awak buat nanti, saya suroh tarek balek.
Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Saaid: Terima kaseh, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, jadi pada masa pilehan raya ada di-antara orang2 yang konon-nya mengatakan mereka itu berjuang kerana bahasa kebangsaan tetapi telah pun memusing- kan apa yang sa-benar-nya di-dalam Rang Undang2 atau pun penyata pelajaran ini.
Maka di-antara warith kanak2 dan di-antara Juma'ah Pengurus daripada beberapa buah sekolah China Indian dan beberapa buah sekolah telah menerima bantuan ini yang dahulu-nya telah menolak, tetapi pada masa sekarang, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-tempat saya sendiri bertalu2 orang2 yang dahulu-nya telah pun di-pengaroh dengan supaya salah-nya meminta di-beri bantuan.
Jadi saya berharap kapada Ahli2 Yang Berhormat yang lain jangan-lah gunakan dasar pelajar- an ini untok kepentingan parti atau untok kepentingan diri atau untok kepentingan kerusi dalam Parlimen ini.

Cheritakan yang sa-benar-nya dalam penyata pelajaran ini, dan dengan ini anak2 kita tidak teraniaya dalam keadaan-nya yang mengharapkan bantuan ini dari segi pelajaran dalam persekolahan-nya.
hendak dapat Satu perkara, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya ingin menarek perhatian Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran manakala di-laksanakan Rang Undang2 ini, tolong-lah ambil perhatian mengenai pelajaran ugama di-sekolah2 yang di- kuasai oleh pada masa sekarang dan di-laksanakan atau di-uruskan oleh puak2 yang berugama lain.

Nampak- nya mereka ini ta' setuju sangat tentang 1989 19 OCTOBER 1961 1990 pelajaran ugama ini di-ajar di-sekolah2 itu.
Saya harap Menteri Yang Ber- hormat mengambil perhatian supaya anak2 kita orang2 Islam di-ajar ugama Islam di-sekolah2 Kerajaan dan lain2.

Jadi sa-takat ini-lah, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, terima kaseh.

sa-rupa-lah Enche' Abdul Ghani bin Ishak (Malacca Utara): Tuan Yang di- ini Pertua, saya bangun pada sa'at menyokong supaya Dewan ini me- nerima Rang Undang2 Pelajaran yang di-bentangkan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran itu.
Sa-bagaimana yang kita sama2 ma'alum bahawa kalau saya membalek2kan keterangan atau menguchapkan sa-mula apa yang telah di-uchapkan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran saya memanjangkan masa dengan perkara yang kurang menafa'at-nya.
Tetapi apa yang saya hendak lagi pada hari ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ia-itu satu sa-telah kita menerima Dasar Pelajaran pada tahun 1960 yang lalu, dan apabila kita mengemukakan dalam Dewan ini kita dapati pada sa'at ini dan pada masa saya berchakap ini telah dapat di-terima lebeh ramai lagi daripada Dewan ini.
Ini menanda- sa-lain kan dengan sa-sunggoh-nya, daripada ia-itu kami parti ini boleh-lah Perikatan, maka hari saya menguchapkan tahniah kapada wakil yang dudok di-bangku pembang- kang ia-itu PAS hari ini telah mengalu2- kan bahawa Undang2 Pelajaran ini hendak-lah kita laksanakan.
tambah ahli akan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-bagaimana yang kita telah dengar sama daripada pagi tadi maseh lagi sa-bahagian dari- pada ahli yang berchakap, terutama sa-kali sahabat saya Yang Berhormat tidak dari Seberang Selatan yang nampak kemajuan langsong pelajaran yang sedang berjalan dan yang dari sekarang hingga pada masa akan datang.
Beliau maseh lagi bertanya kapada kita atau maseh lagi beliau, barangkali tidak mahu memerhatikan perkara yang benar terjadi dalam tanah ayer kita ini berhubong dengan perkembangan pelajaran, kerana ia maseh lagi mengatakan yang Kerajaan ini maseh lagi mem- kita sekarang laksanakan akan kita jenis berchorak banyakkan atau melebehkan sekolah kebangsaan yang Inggeris daripada sekolah yang ber- chorak kebangsaan.
Tetapi patut-lah kita sedar kapada perkara yang sa- benar, dan pada masa ini telah banyak perubahan kapada sekolah kebangsaan itu ia-itu daripada chara persekolahan, chara bangunan dan kemudahan2 yang telah di-sampaikan oleh Kerajaan itu untok menjadikan bahawa sekolah itu-lah yang akan kita kebangsaan sama2 mempertinggikan untok me- ngambil tempat yang istimewa dalam negara kita ini.

Ahli Yang Berhormat dari Seberang Selatan itu tidak mahu sadikit pun mengakui akan kebenaran ini.
yang parti, perkara2 Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya juga mendengar perchakapan Ahli Yang Berhormat dari Telok Anson pada pagi tadi mengatakan bahawa Perikatan telah lari daripada manifesto-nya tahun 1955.
Sa-bagai sa-orang ahli UMNO lunchat-melunchat yang tidak pernah ka-mana2 pula tambahan mengamalkan di- perbuat atau yang di-semboyankan oleh parti kami, maka saya tidak nampak bahawa Dasar Pelajaran atau pun apa yang di-katakan ia-itu Penyata Pelajaran Rahman Talib ini lari dari- pada apa yang telah di-sampaikan pada tahun 1955 dengan yang ada sekarang ini.
Kerana bagaimana-kah chara, mithal-nya, Yang Berhormat dari Telok Anson itu nampak untok membentok satu rupa warga-negara yang sama, yang bersatu kalau beliau maseh lagi mengagong2kan perjuangan-nya untok hendak menuntut sekolah jenis China atau lain2 di-dalam uchapan2-nya yang di-keluarkan dalam Dewan ini?
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-bagai negara yang mempunyai berbagai2 kaum yang kita akui, yang kita mahu berbaik2, mahu faham-memahami di-antara satu de- ngan lain, maka sa-patut-nya itu-lah ini mengadakan satu kita sekarang undang2 untok mendzahirkan satu tujuan, keturunan kita dengan satu tidak bukan hanya tidak menerusi dan bahasa kebangsaan.
Maka boleh-kah bahasa itu menjalar kapada tiap2 ra'ayat dalam tanah ayer sekolah kebangsaan kebangsaan lain dan 1991 19 OCTOBER 1961 1992 kita ini kalau tidak di-salorkan kapada sekolah2 yang menuju kapada tujuan itu?
Dan lagi saya berasa sedeh terhadap sahabat saya dari Seremban Timor, sa-bagaimana yang di-nyatakan oleh ia maseh sahabat saya tadi, kerana lagi mengatakan bahasa China patut di-pelajari, bahasa India patut di- pelajari sa-bagai pelajaran yang mesti, ia membandingkan kapada keadaan ini manusia yang ada dalam dunia ia-itu orang China ramai, orang India ramai dan sa-bagai-nya.

Saya susah memikirkan kenapa-kah tidak mahu menumpukan sa-genap tenaga, fikiran dan semangat kapada tanah ayer kita ini?
Kerana tujuan itu-lah saya katakan sedeh memikirkan ia-itu kita hendak mengarah atau membena satu kebang- saan dalam Tanah Melayu ini dengan mempunyai, barangkali ta'at setia yang tulin kapada negeri ini, tetapi maseh lagi orang yang mengkait2kan ada kapada atau keadaan2 yang lain.

Parti Perikatan bahawa pernah mengatakan tidak perkara2 bangsa lain itu tidak di-akui.
Tetapi saya suka menyeru pada sa'at ini bersedia kita patut-lah daripada hari ini ka-hadapan untok keturunan kita bersama menuju kapada satu arah membena satu warga-negara yang ta'at setia-nya tidak berbelah-bagi.

Dalam Undang2 Pelajaran ini tidak ada pula di-sebutkan untok menghapus atau menchekek bahasa2 yang di- laong2kan itu.

sa-dunia keadaan ia-itu Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-bagaimana keterangan yang telah di-beri oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran itu ada-lah menjadi satu da'awaan yang sa-benar-nya.
Bukan-lah sa-bagaimana yang telah di-uchapkan oleh sahabat saya dari Seremban Timor ia-itu kalau kita berjalan ka-pasar, ka-pekan, kita dapati banyak orang mengadu lagi supaya di-adakan satu jawatan-kuasa untok mengkaji sa-mula Dasar Pelajar- an lihat ini.

Tetapi apa yang kita sekarang ini daripada kenyataan yang di-beri oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran kita bahawa jumlah penuntut sekolah menengah yang sudah pun mengubah mahu menerima Dasar rasa kalau di- Pelajaran ini.
Saya kalau bandingkan dengan angka itu pun maka kita sudah sedap hati, barangkali kapada orang yang tidak faham itu kalau kita fahamkan lagi, mereka akan menerima 100 peratus bantuan penoh benar2 daripada Kerajaan, mereka itu mahu hidup dan mati dalam Persekutuan Tanah Melayu ini.
Kerana sa-bagaimana yang saya katakan tadi daripada lebeh kurang—saya tidak dapat menyebutkan angka yang tepat—31 Sekolah2 Menengah China telah menerima bantuan penoh, jumlah murid-nya telah meningkat 48,000 orang; di-bandingkan dengan yang belum menerima walau pun angka hanya sekolah-nya mempunyai murid 27,576. banyak jumlah tetapi tujuan-nya sendiri.

Oleh ingin menjadikan Apa-kah da'awaan yang mengatakan jika kita berjalan maseh ada orang bersorak kerana tidak bersetuju dengan dasar pelajaran ini?
Pada pandangan saya sendiri mereka yang tidak ber- setuju itu ia-lah orang2 yang berchakap kerana itu ra'ayat kalau kita dalam tanah ayer kita ini sa-bagaimana yang terkandong dalam dasar pelajaran ia-itu hendak menchipta satu warga- negara yang bersatu, yang berpadu dan tulin mempunyai kapada Tanah Melayu ini, maka patut sangat-lah kita hari ini menerima dengan sa-bulat suara Rang Undang2 yang di-bentangkan oleh Yang Ber- dalam hormat Menteri Dewan ini.

Terima kaseh.
Terima kaseh.

setia yang Pelajaran ta'at Enche' Zulkiflee bin Muhammad (Bachok): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tidak- lah saya sangka bahawa perbahathan pada hari ini lebeh banyak berkenaan dengan dasar pelajaran daripada Rang Undang2 ini.

Tetapi oleh kerana nampak-nya aliran perbahathan lebeh jauh, dan lebeh suka membahathkan dasar pelajaran yang sudah di-bahath- kan dan di-luluskan dalam Dewan ini maka tidak dapat-lah saya melarikan diri di-dalam perkara ini.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, waktu kita meluluskan dasar pelajaran dahulu, telah di-luluskan dengan menimbang soal2 yang ada dalam musharakat kita ini.

Sa-tahu saya, belum-lah berubah musharakat itu di- ini sa-telah dasar pelajaran luluskan.

Sa-orang Ahli Yang Ber- 1993 19 OCTOBER 1961 1994 hormat dari Telok Anson, mengatakan dia dapat mandat baharu, bukan sahaja daripada kawan-nya bahkan daripada ra'ayat Persekutuan hari ini yang membolehkan membawa chita2 baharu yang dahulu sudah bersharah dalam Dewan ini.
Tentang kehendak2 orang yang memberi mandat kapada- nya itu tidak tersebut dan saya dari 13 kawasan yang saya ini menyatakan mandat juga.

(Ketawa).

tersebut tidak itu dapat negeri telah mungkir Tuan Yang di-Pertua, yang me- nyusahkan saya bagi orang2 yang tidak mahu menjadikan dasar pelajaran kebangsaan ini ada-lah mereka meng- gunakan modal bahawa kebudayaan China, kebudayaan India, tidak di- pelihara, di-kembangkan lagi apa dengan dasar pelajaran yang ada ini.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kata mereka, pati Perikatan janji dalam hal ini.

Banyak-lah sharat2 dan nas2 yang telah di-berikan.

Walau pun pati Perikatan mungkir janji dalam ini maka saya orang yang perkara sangat janji suka dengan mungkir saperti itu.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tidak akan ini di-dalam mewujudkan sa-buah musharakat yang terpelajar, melainkan menerusi saloran yang satu dengan kuat-nya.

Sa-waktu membahath yang di- bahathkan di-sini saloran ini-lah yang menjadikan fikiran kita sendiri.
Di- ini, Tuan Yang di- hadapan saya Pertua, entah benar atau tidak, tidak- lah saya ketahui, boleh jadi da'ayah, boleh ini masaalah kechil yang sengaja di-ambil kesempatan oleh Menteri Yang Ber- hormat menyatakan rasa Kerajaan kapada kebudayaan China, bahasa China, kesusasteraan China dan apa sahaja yang bersangkut dalam negeri ini.
Sa-hinggakan ada gambar2 yang menggelikan hati saya, guru2 Sekolah China yang tidak mahu mengambil pertolongan terus lagi dan bermacham2 lagi, guru2 yang mengambil bantuan Kerajaan, dudok di-atas kerusi senang hati sahaja.

jadi benar.

Sa-benar-nya sahaja apa Tuan Yang di-Pertua, boleh-lah saya sebutkan bahawa Kerajaan Perikatan itu terlalu banyak memberi kelebehan kapada orang2-nya sa-hinggakan Men- ini pun teri Yang Berhormat pula sa-bahagian besar daripada uchapan-nya untok hati orang2 China.
menyenangkan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kalau ini pun tidak chukup tidak lagi, memuaskan lagi, apa-kah yang di- kehendaki lagi orang itu, Tuan Yang di-Pertua.

(Ketawa).

Ada-kah mereka itu memikirkan bahawa sudah patut itu mempunya'i satu Tanah Melayu kebangsaan, bahasa di-namakan China?

Saya susah, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, saya di-dalam memberikan sokongan kapada Kerajaan, mera- beritahu kapada dua pehak, pehak yang pertama, pehak Kerajaan, chuba-lah itu dengan berani.
jalankan dasar Pehak yang kedua yang menentang dasar ini, sila-lah memenangi Pilehan supaya dapat-lah mudah2an Raya mengubah dasar jika di-izinkan oleh keadaan.

itu Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tidak-lah akan dapat di-ujudkan apa yang di-sebut di-sini: "And whereas it is considered desirable that regard shall be had, so far as is compatible with the provision of efficient instruction and with the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure".
that policy, with di-luar sendiri tuntutan Itu pun, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tidak- lah sanggup Kerajaan hendak menang- gong semua bebanan supaya semua masaalah2 dasar pelajaran itu boleh di-jawab.

Kita ketahui bahawa hendak memelihara kebudayaan lain ada-lah hak yang patut di-berikan dengan orang yang menjadi sa-bahagian anggota mushara- kat.

United Nation ada menetakpan dalam Piagam-nya bahawa dalam memelihara hak majority kebudayaan mesti-lah di-pelihara.
Tetapi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, hak itu tuntutan biar-lah orang kebangsaan.

Kita Melayu yang memandang bahawa sudah terlalu banyak memberikan kapada orang lain hak2 kita masa yang sudah2 dan masa-nya sudah sampai kapada orang2 lain untok menerima dasar2 pelajaran ini.
Tuan Yang di- Pertua, apabila hendak mengekalkan kebudayaan2 dan bahasa2 yang bukan bahasa kebangsaan maka akan han- chor-lah persatuan Kebangsaan Melayu daripada dengan se-suai 1995 19 OCTOBER 1961 1996 dalam negeri ini, dan pada ketika itu tarek menarek-lah kita antara akan satu sama lain.
saya, dasar Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-takat itu saya champor tangan dalam per- bahathan dasar pelajaran ini, sebab ini sudah di- sa-tahu bahathkan dan sudah di-luluskan maka tidak-lah ada fasal maka kita hendak bahathkan dalam perkara ini.

Jadi, tidak-lah kena kalau hendak me- nentang Rang Undang2 dan serahkan-lah kapada Select Committee saperti pernah di-sebutkan oleh Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada semua pati, pati PAS menolak Select Committee saperti itu.
ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, isi2 yang ada di-dalam Undang2 ini ada-lah con- solidation—memajukan Undang2 yang bersangkutan dengan pelajaran.

Saya perchaya beberapa perkara yang ada di-dalam Rang Undang2 ini ada-lah perkara baharu telah di-sebutkan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran.

saperti yang saya Fasal 17 telah mengatakan, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, penubohan sa-buah badan yang di-namakan National Edu- tahu cation Advisory Board.

Saya apabila di-sebutkan "Advisory Board" maka perkataan itu "nasehat".
Dalam sharahan Digest on the Education Policy Federation of Malaya yang ada ini menyatakan di-hadapan bahawa National Education Advisory Board ini terdiri daripada orang2 yang ahli di-dalam pelajaran dan taknik.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, oleh kerana ini bukan-lah orang2 politik orang2 dan saya berharap lantekan orang2 ini di-jauhkan daripada sa-barang yang merupakan politik maka saya meman- dang bahawa fasal 14 daripada Rang Undang2 ini patut-lah di-kemaskan lebeh banyak lagi.
Sebab "the Minister may refer to the National Education Advisory Board for their advice".

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, "may refer", ada- lah membolehkan sa-saorang Menteri itu merujokkan perkara itu atau tidak merujokkan menurut fikiran-nya.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, amat-lah benar bahawa kuasa2 patut di-berikan kapada sa-orang Menteri sebab dia Menteri, dia ada-lah bertanggong-jawab kapada Dewan ini sadikit sa-banyak bahkan banyak di-dalam perjalanan pentadbiran pelajaran di-dalam negeri ini.
Tetapi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kalau terlalu banyak kuasa hingga ada pula perkara2 yang berupa teknik yang sa-patut-nya di-rujokkan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri itu kapada ini National Education Board tetapi tidak di-tunjokkan maka ini akan menyebabkan pertimbangan2 di-dalam pelajaran kita tidak berasas.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kita tentu-lah mengatakan bahawa tentu-lah waktu di-bentok dan di-gubalkan Undang2 ini tujuan-nya yang besar hendak menggunakan Lembaga Penasehat ini, kalau tidak hendak di-gantikan masa- kan dia itu di-tubohkan.

Tetapi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kalau hendak di- gunakan maka tentu-lah di-kemaskan perkataan2 supaya menjamin peng- gunaan2 yang lazim yang di-lakukan oleh Menteri.

Merujokkan sa-suatu perkara ini amat-lah besar ma'ana-nya.
Oleh sebab, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-dalam dengan section Pelajaran Undang2 yang ada ini, kita telah tidak ada lagi suatu badan yang boleh memberikan fikiran dan pendapat dan nasehat kapada Menteri Yang Ber- hormat, Menteri Pelajaran melainkan badan ini.

Tetapi kalau badan ini di- longgarkan maka saya perchaya akan jadi kerja2 yang me- berjaya-lah mustahakkan pemikiran yang halus dalam soal ini.
Saya memikirkan patut- lah Menteri Yang Berhormat gunakan perkataan di-tukarkan kapada "shall" atau perkataan "ad- visory" itu di-tukarkan dengan "recom- mendation".

"may" itu Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-dalam fasal 25 kuasa Menteri bagi menuboh- pertubohan2 kan pelajaran di-nyatakan di-bahagian (2) daripada fasal 25 ini menyatakan: dan memelihara "The Minister may pay grant-in-aid to schools, not established by him, falling within paragraphs (a) to (e) of the fore- going sub-section".
"Schools not established by him", yang ada-lah dengan sa-chara di-tubohkan tenaga yang lain daripada pengawalan sekolah2 dan berma'ana 1997 19 OCTOBER 1961 1998 itu itu, dan pentadbiran Kementerian Pelajar- an.

Saya memikirkan bahawa satu pengawalan yang ketat patut di-lakukan anasir2 berhubong dengan ada-nya di-negeri ini yang ingin merosakkan perjalanan aliran pelajaran kebangsaan di-dalam negeri ini.

Saya tidak berkata, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Menteri kita ini menjadi anasir2 Yang Berhormat saperti tidak.
Tetapi di-dalam membuat Undang2 tidak-lah boleh kita agakkan, "saya memerentah ini, saya membuat ini ta'kan-lah saya hendak tidak boleh buat-nya pulak", menjadi asas kapada Undang2 ini.
Undang2 ini hendak-lah di-kemaskan, saya memikirkan di-dalam Undang2 bahagian ini patut-lah di-fikirkan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri satu pengetat ia-itu dengan mengatakan sa-lama ia-itu tidak berlawanan dengan Dasar Pelajaran Kebangsaan di-dalam negeri tidak boleh Menteri ini, memberi bantuan kapada sa-barang sekolah yang bukan di-tubohkan; sa- lama kita tahu melainkan kita tahu sekolah2 ini ada-lah chara sa-jajar dan sa-laras dengan dasar pelajaran negeri ini.
Pelajaran Kebangsaan negeri ini amat-lah penting di-kaitkan dan di- majukan sa-lama itu tidak berlawanan dengan dasar kebangsaan di-dalam pelajaran di-negeri ini.

Ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, akan membolehkan Menteri Pelajaran mengawal diri-nya atau siapa pun yang akan menjadi Menteri Pelajaran tidak akan di-benarkan oleh Undang2 ini memberi bantuan sa-kira- nya itu di-dapati berlawanan dengan dasar pelajaran.
erti-nya Tuan Yang di-Pertua, fasal 35 saya tidak hendak berchakap berkenaan dengan fasal ini tetapi pada tujuan-nya fasal 35 ini akan memberi kelulusan kapada Menteri di-mana di-fikirkan dan apabila di-fikirkan murid2 tidak dapat pelajaran melainkan di-adakan tempat2 pelajaran saperti Asrama atau sa-bagai-nya, dan di-ketika itu di- bolehkan Menteri membuat susunan2 bagi kepentingan sekolah2.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-sini-lah modal yang besar anak2 bagi Melayu.
Sa-sudah saya menengok per- kapada belanjaan yang di-berikan sekolah2 China, belanja yang di- pelajaran2 kemajuan berikan kapada guru2 dan sa-bagai-nya yang di-sharahkan oleh Menteri Yang tidak di-sharahkan Berhormat yang tetapi di-tuliskan di-sini, saya terasa menjadi kewajipan-lah kapada Menteri Pelajaran ini dan kapada sa-barang Menteri Pelajaran supaya memberikan layanan lebeh banyak kapada anak2 Melayu di-kampong2 yang tidak dapat tempat di-bandar kerana kemiskinan mereka "the ini hendak-lah di- Minister may", ketatkan hingga mengatakan bahawa hendak-lah membuat Menteri susunan2 supaya anak2 yang tidak dapat tempat bagi orang Melayu di- kampong2 mendapat bantuan dengan di-adakan Asrama di-bandar2.
Jadi, perkataan itu.

itu Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tiap2 puak dalam negeri ini hendak menjaga hak- nya sendiri dan elok-lah saya bagi pehak PAS di-sini mengatakan dengan tegas-nya bahawa menjadi kewajipan- lah kapada Kerajaan menjaga orang2 Melayu dalam soal pelajaran, sebab akan jahanam-lah orang2 Melayu sa- tidak di-beri peluang2 bagi kira-nya membolehkan mereka itu mendapat pelajaran yang baik dan sempurna dalam negeri ini.
Sa-kira-nya orang telah banyak kami berkata bahawa beri kapada orang Melayu, maka saya berkata lebeh banyak hak-nya yang telah hilang daripada apa yang telah di-beri kapada orang Melayu pada hari ini.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, fasal 36 ini ia-lah berkenaan dengan pelajaran Islam.
Dahulu telah saya sampaikan waktu membahathkan dasar pelajaran bahawa apabila Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu mengambil bebanan memberi pelajaran ugama di-sekolah2 kebangsaan bagi murid2 Islam maka hendak-lah di-lakukan dengan sunggoh2 dan saya dapati bahawa bahagian (2) dari fasal 36 ini hendak-lah di-betul- kan two hours" di-tukarkan dengan perkataan sa-kurang2-nya "at least 4 hours", sebab, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dua jam satu minggu belajar ugama harus-lah kita tahu ta' sempat dia mengenal siapa yang patut ia sembah.
Tuan Yang di- Pertua, menambah dua jam lagi tidak- lah amat berat bagi Kementerian dalam ia-itu perkataan least '"at 1999 19 OCTOBER 1961 2000 itu ia-lah dalam itu, maka itu di-kenakan soal ugama dan soal-nya besar pula dalam negeri ini.
Satu daripada soal yang timbul daripada pengajaran yang hendak di-beri kapada penuntut2 Islam atau murid2 Islam di-sekolah2 kebang- saan ketentuan perbelanjaan-nya bagi memberi pe- ngajaran ugama menurut apa yang telah terator dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dalam senarai Negeri dan senarai Persekutuan.

jelas-nya Kita mengetahui dengan bahawa pelajaran ugama atau urusan ugama ada-lah termasok dalam urusan Negeri.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, benar- lah pelajaran di-masokkan ugama dalam urusan negeri dan oleh kerana yang demikian fasal 37 menyebutkan bahawa duit bagi pela- jaran ugama juga daripada duit2 atau wang2 yang di- luluskan oleh "Legislature of the State in which the school is situate".

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, State banyak dalam negeri ini.
Saya fikir kalau Kerajaan Persekutuan benar2 hendak menjalan- kan dasar ini saperti yang telah saya sebutkan dahulu ia-itu memang boleh di-lakukan di-antara Kerajaan Per- sekutuan dengan Kerajaan Negeri.
Dan katakan-lah saperti asal yang di-sebut- kan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Pelajaran ringgit dengan tujoh ringgit ia-itu empat belas ringgit bagi pelajaran ugama—tujoh di-tanggong oleh Kerajaan ringgit lagi di- ringgit Negeri dan tanggoh oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu "capitation grant" saperti yang terkandong dalam bahagian itu.
Tetapi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, oleh kerana Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu telah chuba masokkan medan ini dengan jalan apa2 pun dan oleh kerana kita waktu membuat satu dasar hendak pelajaran menjalankan dasar pelajaran ini supaya berlaku dengan baik-nya.
Maka saya di-mana negeri2 yang mengatakan tidak sumbangan kewangan-nya yang sempurna maka jangan-lah itu menjadi aleh, menjadi dalil dan menjadi helah melambatkan Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu bagi dari memikul kapada memberi pelajaran bebanan-nya ugama sanggup memberi ia-itu asas (2) dalam fasal 37 bertujuan sa-bagai tujoh tujoh yang Islam mereka ini.

Pelajaran ugama kapada anak2 amat-lah mustahak.


Jangan-lah lupa, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-dalam-nya ini kita telah beri hak orang lain dengan banyak walau pun sa-kali ini, sa-kali ini.

Apah-lah lagi yang kita fikirkan, apa-kah lagi yang kita hendak menjalankan tugas kita bagi memberi pelajaran ugama kapada anak2 kita.

daripada nantikan saya apabila ini bukan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sunggoh pun sa-tengah perkara ugama menurut ini fahaman orang, perkara ugama hendak-lah orang—itu mengawal sahaja.
Apa untong-nya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua?

Tetapi dengan memberi pelajaran ugama, katakan-lah bagi lima tahun, atau enam tahun dalam sekolah rendah, maka akan terbentok- lah dalam negeri sahaja manusia yang sembahayang, menunai- kan puasa dan haji, tetapi manusia yang tahukan Tuhan, dan dengan demikian akan menjadi anggota masharakat yang baik.

Apa-kah lagi yang hendak kita tunggu dalam hidup kita sa-lain dari- pada menjadikan anak chuchu kita orang yang berguna dalam negeri ini.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, jangan-lah di- fahamkan berchakap berkenaan dengan kebaikan anggota2 masharakat, orang berkata "ah bahawa ia hendak menjaga orang2 Melayu sahaja.

sahaja".

Itu-lah modal-nya Saya ta' ingin orang bukan Melayu itu menjadi jahat.
Dahulu dalam uchapan saya sa-waktu memberi ulasan pelajar- an, saya telah menyebutkan bahawa patut-lah Kerajaan memberi perhatian kapada pelajaran2 moral kapada orang bukan Islam, sebab kita tidak mahu, kita sahaja yang baik dalam dunia ini, kita sahaja baik sedangkan orang lain yang menchuri barang kita, membunoh Jadi, kita dengan ingin kapada Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tidak-lah masharakat baik daripada menghadkan kita anak2 memberi kapada tetapi Islam, tidak-lah boleh wang ini walau satu sen pun di- negeri belanjakan bagi kepentingan ugama yang lain, malah kita boleh beri bantuan moral kapada mereka itu.
yang diri pelajaran tidak berfasal2.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, fasal 49 berkenaan dengan pendaftaran sekolah.

2001 19 OCTOBER 1961 2002 suka yang tidak berapa di-tarek Dalam mendaftarkan sekolah, banyak sharat makroh di-buat.

Banyak-lah perkara yang di-buat.


Saya hanya hendak kemukakan satu sahaja dan dalam perkara ini selalu-lah saya akan bergadoh dengan Menteri Pelajaran ini, sebab Menteri Pelajaran nampak- nya hendak mendaftarkan sekolah2 ra'ayat, kerana kata-nya kita mahu-lah buat sekolah Kerajaan dengan sempurna.
Pada fikiran saya daripada menunggu sekolah Kerajaan datang daripada tahun 1969 lebeh baik-lah kita pakai sekolah ra'ayat yang ada pada hari ini, sebab banyak sekolah ra'ayat yang meminta pendaftaran-nya tetapi lambat di-daftarkan, kerana kita hendak sekolah yang sempurna—anak chuchu kita yang sudah berumor 12 tahun mana hendak di-masokkan?
Jadi pada fikiran saya dalam fasal 49 daripada undang2 ini patut-lah di- fikirkan satu dasar yang prektek bagi membolehkan anak kita mempelajari- nya—orang Melayu ia-lah dengan sekolah Melayu yang di-tubohkan oleh itu.

Maka dengan ada-nya mereka di-tubohkan yang sekolah sadikit demi sadikit mengikut kuasa- nya yang ada pada Menteri dan Pendaftar Sekolah2 dalam undang2 ini sadikit demi sadikit kita ikhtiarkan bagi membetulkan tandas dan sa-bagai- nya.
Jadi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, boleh- lah anak2 kita di-tempat yang jauh belajar di-sekolah ra'ayat.

ra'ayat Ada beberapa sempurna.

Maka tempat yang saya ketahui di-kawasan saya pun sudah dua tahun untok hendak mendaftarkan sekolah yang sudah ada.

Tolong daftar- kan!

Ta' boleh di-daftarkan.


Jadi kerana apa, kerana hendakkan sekolah itu berdo'a-lah kita kapada Tuhan sa-hingga dua tahun sa-kurang2-nya sekolah itu tidak sempurna saya harap Menteri Yang Berhormat ini memikir- kan pendaftar an sekolah ra'ayat itu supaya di-Ionggarkan, sebab kita dalam masa peralehan membolehkan ra'ayat belajar lebeh banyak.

lagi.

Maka 116 ia-lah Bahagian berkenaan dengan peratoran2 yang di-buat, yang di-beri kuat-kuasa kapada Menteri Pelajaran.
Peratoran itu, Tuan Yang in Saya tahun schools banyak.

di-Pertua, hendak menarek perhatian Menteri Pelajaran berkenaan dengan peratoran kewangan ia-itu bahagian kechil (w) the keeping of books of account and the audit of accounts and assisted assisted educational institutions.

Kita tahu, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, alhamdulil- lah 1958 kelmarin banyak meminta kewangan yang tidak dapat kita merasa puas hati.
Sa-bahagian daripada sekolah2 itu saperti yang di- nyatakan oleh Pemereksa Kira2 Negara dalam penyata yang di-kemukakan dalam Dewan ini ia-lah oleh kerana sekolah tahu menyusun kewangan-nya.

Saya berharap supaya soal2 susunan itu di-atorkan dengan baik supaya wang2 yang di-beri bagi ini benar2 di- kepentingan pelajaran gunakan bagi kepentingan pelajaran dan dengan chara yang terator supaya boleh-lah kita menjaga wang ra'ayat yang tidak di-gunakan dengan chara yang tidak tentu hala.
tidak itu di-sini jangan-lah itu, bahawa Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya sa-sudah perkara2 saya menyebutkan menyatakan dasar pelajaran yang sudah kita luluskan itu sudah patut-lah di-jalankan.

Dan dalam lupa menjalankan-nya bahawa kalau kita hendak menyuka- kan hati orang2 yang bukan Melayu dengan membuat satu "kertas" yang saperti terang ini—di-buat dengan pula.

Apa-kah yang telah di-buat oleh kelas2 Kerajaan sekolah bahasa Melayu, menengah Melayu bahasa kebangsaan?
Chuba tunjokkan pula, berbanding dengan sekolah orang Puteh, berbanding dengan sekolah sampai kalah hak China.

bahasa kebangsaan itu, dan menang yang ini, kerana mereka ini membantah kita dalam Parlimen, maka kita ambil berat.

Dan oleh kerana orang kita diam, maka kita biarkan.

Terima kaseh.

kelas2 dalam itu bagi menegakkan Jangan Enche' D. R. Seenivasagam (Ipoh): Mr. Speaker, Sir, the PMIP supports the Government on this Education Bill.
It is no surprise to us, and I am sure no surprise to the Government side, because in all matters where differences of opinion arise as between the various 2003 19 OCTOBER 1961 2004 races that live in this country, it has the UMNO, always been clear that MCA and MIC think alike with the PMIP.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have con- sidered very carefully the suggestion or advice given by the Honourable Member from Bachok that persons like the Honourable Member for Telok Anson and others, who are like-minded and who always speak and ask for educational for Chinese and Indians, should not do so.
After very careful consideration, I feel I must reject that advice, because that advice comes from a Party which won the confidence of the people in two States and within such a short time is unable to keep that confidence and, therefore, there must be something wrong with that Party and its policies.

For that reason, we must reject the advice given to us by the PMIP.
rights that policy Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that certain members of the MCA had to leave the Alliance Party due to this question of education.

But before I deal with that, there are one or two preliminary matters which I wish to mention.
This morning the Honourable Member from Seberang Selatan was speaking, and he said that an education policy should be one which will give education sufficient for those who are educated under to earn their bread and butter, their rice and curry, and somebody shouted dosai as well (Laughter).

Mr. Speaker, Sir, that remark by itself means nothing, but that remark passed in the manner in which it was passed, in the circum- stances in which it was passed, tends, and to show a contempt for those who eat dosais.
Mr. Speaker, if that is the attitude of Government backbenchers, then I say to that education must be sufficient eat blachan sambal as well; otherwise, that is no education.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, if we are going to lose the decorum of this House, if one side does it, then the other side will jolly well do it; and I do hope that in the course of this debate, the calm of this House, which has been maintained for some time, will remain maintained.
Yester- think my good I day tends very clearly, somebody, friend—if I may refer to him as such— the Honourable Member from Johore somewhere, said that if I get the angin then my opinion may be different; what he meant was, I suppose, that if I get annoyed, then my opinions are somewhat different.
Frankly, I don't change my opinion, but if unnecessary remarks are made which tend to create a feeling of dissatisfaction and distrust, a feeling of hostility, then the same thing must be expected from the other members sitting on this side of the House.

The promise of free education has been given.

That promise is a humbug; there is no free education in 1962, and I will tell you why.
I am reading, Mr. Speaker, Sir, from the speech by the Honourable Minister of Educa- tion—last evening just before the House was adjourned the Honourable Minister spoke about the mounting cost of education and he said this— "The mounting cost of education makes it essential that these local contributions should be raised."

That is, contributions by imposing an education rate on local authorities, or, in other words, collection of money for the Federation.

Education Plan through States at State level.


"So far the amounts raised by way of Education rates have been negligible in relation to the total cost of education, never yet exceeding about $3 million in one year, or the recurrent cost of education.

In some areas the Federation, for instance, in Johore and Kelantan, no Education rates what- " soever have yet been raised.
It has than 2% of less I am leaving part of it—as I may be accused of reading half and leaving the rest, I better read it through— to "Under Section 105 the Minister has rating require State power authorities, or both, to make a contribu- tion towards the cost of education and may recover such contributions as debts to the Federation.

or It has so far been an unsatisfactory feature of the system of local contribu- tions that some areas have got away with making no such contribution.
This is unfair on other States who have collected substantial sums by way of education rates.

In future all areas of the Federation will be in the same boat in 2005 19 OCTOBER 1961 2006 this respect and the Federal Government intends contributions reasonable shall be made by all areas."
that to-day last year Mr. Speaker, Sir, no contributions were called for and no contributions were made towards education rates, at least as far as the State of Perak is concerned, because I know about the State of Perak; and I made enquiries and I understand that nowhere in the country were education rates levied.

Now, for years and years, areas in this country have not been called upon to pay an education rate.

The Government says, "We are going to give you free primary education."
I recall the words of the Honourable Minister of Finance that "nothing in this world the is free", but Governments says—"We are going to give you free education.

What are you crying so much for?

Free in Chinese, free free in Tamil—we give you primary education."

All over we hear emphasis on the word "free".

When we say, "Give us free education", what does the Government say?

"You get nothing in this world free."

I say we are not getting free education 1962.


I say that that statement is to pull wool over the eyes of the people.

Children may not have to pay their school fees, but the people will be asked to pay an education rate—every house owner, every person who pays an assessment may be asked by a local authority to pay an education rate.

It has been in the last, more or less, the practice that where education rate was imposed, it was 2 per cent.
There is no statement by the Honourable Minister of Educa- tion whether, if an education rate is imposed—there is no assurance—that it will not exceed the standardised 2 per cent; or is it the intention of the Minister of Education to increase that almost standardised figure of 2 per cent?

That is an interesting question.

Is it intended that local authorities will be asked to impose a rate of, say, 5 per cent or 6 per cent?
Has the Minister any statistics, any idea as to how much more would be required, what would be a reasonable figure on percentages that these education rates should be based on?

Surely the nation wants to know.


And I think it would be a good thing, if the nation knows now that by "free education" means that you pay an education rate; and I think that the nation should know when they receive their bills next year from local authorities, for example, the the Ipoh Ipoh Town Council, Town Council is not putting on any education rate, but that the Federation Government wants that 2 per cent from the people.
If they know that, then they will realise what a sham, and if I may use the word, what a humbug this promise of free education is.

that Mr. Speaker, Sir, now I move to the question of registration of teachers dealt with in the ordinance itself,, i.e., clauses 77 and 78.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, past experience on the question of registration of teachers has brought to light one very crystal clear fact and that is this that absolute power is given to any person, say, in this case, given to the Registrar-General of Schools, or the Registrar-General of Teachers.

It is clear rare cases will he before exercising his discretion investigate the case properly, because he has not got the time; he would not do it, it is not practicable to do it.
giving Therefore, the danger absolute power that absolute power can be misused; and wherever power should never be given into the hands of any individual.

is a danger in very absolute possible that in there Now, if we look at clause 77, it deals with the Registrar of Teachers— it says, "he may refuse to register a if he is person under this Chapter satisfied that that person " then it goes on to give a number of grounds on which he may refuse registration.

Now, I fully appreciate that.


In this is a Registration of country Teachers Ordinance.

I fully appreciate that it is put into this Ordinance for simplicity and unification of education law, but there is one matter of great importance.
If we look at (d), for example—sub-clause 1 (d), clause 77— it says, "The Registrar of Teachers may refuse to register a person if he suffers from physical or mental defect or disease rendering him in the opinion of 2007 19 OCTOBER 1961 2008 the Registrar of Teachers"—in the opinion of the Registrar of Teachers— "unsuitable to be a teacher".

Is it not a medical matter?

Is it not proper that it should be in the opinion of a medical officer or a Government doctor or whatever you may like to call him?
Why is it that the Registrar of Teachers should be the person to decide whether the person suffering from disease is, in his opinion, unfit to be a teacher?

I do not know how he is going to do that.

If a man coughs ten times, he may say "you are medically unfit, you cannot be a teacher".

Surely in fairness to somebody who wants to be a teacher, it should be the opinion of a man versed in medicine.

I know what the answer is going to be from the Minister.
He will say, "The Registrar is not a fool, he will send him to a doctor and he will get a doctor's opinion".

But do not forget the Ordinance says that, "in his opinion" he can do it without looking at any doctor in this country.

You may get the same case as the took a cow for a policeman who murder case to the hospital.
Those are the dangers of arbitrary powers and, in fairness to those who want to be teach- ers, there must either be an amendment or an assurance from this House that whoever is the Registrar of Teachers he will be given a directive that in matters of illness and diseases he must get an opinion from a medical man.

It is no use saying, "He is not going to be a fool; he is not going to do it.

That will not satisfy the House.

Then, if we look at paragraph (e)— what do we get?


in "The Registrar register a person of Teachers may if he has refuse to been convicted, the Federation or elsewhere, of an offence and sentenced to a term of imprisonment, or has been convicted of an offence against this Act, or law relating to the registration of teachers or schools, or under any similar in Singapore."
previous written under any law the Honourable Minister, in Now, moving this motion, said: "there is very little difference between the 1957 Ordinance and this".
But the very little important difference difference as far as I am concerned the most is this policy of and, here, I quote the Honourable Minister's own words: "the first point which I want to make perfectly clear to the House and to the nation is that neither the 1960 Report nor this Bill makes any fundamental changes to the country education which was established by the Razak Report in the 1957 legislation.
The Bill modifies certain national and necessary development of the 1956 policy which the House had already agreed to in principle and it also contains clarifica- tion which experience has shown to be desirable".

Now, let us compare with one clause of importance which I will read out, "a person who has been the Federation for an convicted in offence and sentenced to a term of imprisonment".
The Registration of Teachers Ordinance, a clause which deals or gives power to the Registrar to refuse registration to persons who want to be teachers, and if you refer to that, Mr. Speaker, Sir, you will find that the wording of the new clauses (d) and (e) is entirely different from the old one.
1957 has Section 6 (1) of the old Ordinance says: — "The Registrar may refuse a is satisfied teacher teacher— if he to register such that (i) has not made application manner prescribed; or in the (ii) is under the age of eighteen years; or (iii) has no a be qualification in teacher or qualifications which the opinion of the Registrar are inadequate for such a purpose; or to false or misleading (iv) has made a statement in a material particular in the prescribed form of applica- tion; or (v) suffers from some physical or mental defect or disease rendering him in the opinion of the Registrar unsuitable to be a teacher; or in jurisdiction elsewhere of (vi) has been convicted by a court of the competent an Federation or imprison- offence punishable with ment or of an offence under this Ordinance or under the Education any Ordinance, 1952, or under relating written the to registration of teachers or under any similar law in the Colony."
law 2009 19 OCTOBER 1961 2010 Mr. Speaker, Sir, the words "convicted by a court" have been left out.

In the normal course of event, a convic- tion must be by a court.

Can the Minister tell us why the words "by a court" have been dropped from the wording of Clause 77 {e)?

Was it acci- dental, was it deliberate?

If it was deliberate, what is the reason?

If you change the law, there must be a reason for changing.
If you remove the words "by a court", is it possible that convic- tion can ensue from any other body?

I do not know what the intention is, and I do ask for a very strong explanation when the Minister replies.

But I disagree with the clause itself.

I disagree with Section 7 of the previous Ordinance is arbitrary itself.

This power given to an individual.


Now, arbitrary powers given to individuals must be such that the wording must be very specific; it cannot be vague because if it is vague, then he will not know how to enforce such a clause from time to time.

Mr. Speaker: The time is up.

ADJOURNMENT The Deputy Prime Minister: Sir, I the House be to move that beg adjourned.

Dato' Dr. Ismail: Sir, I beg to second the motion.


ADJOURNMENT SPEECH ROYAL FEDERATION OF MALAYA POLICE (MARINE) Enche' Ng Ann Teck (Batu): Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is with great regret and a heavy heart that I stand here to-day to make comparison of condi- tions before Merdeka with those after.

During pre-Merdeka days, the Marine Police used to be of great service and help to our fishermen.

They used to escort our fishermen on their trips, and they gave advice on weather and storm conditions.
Further, when our fisher- men were sick, or in need of medical supplies, the Marine Police used to be on hand to render aid; but the greatest service that they shall be remembered for was that they used to protect our from pirates and other fishermen that around sneaking dangers, and especially to remind our fishermen territorial to be within waters, thereby not giving any chance at all for other authorities to arrest our fishermen.

Unfortunately, today our Marine Police are doing nothing of that sort.
They seem to have forgotten all the previous good deeds and the fact that they were once the guardians of the fishermen.

To-day our Marine Police are no more the angels that our fisher- men used to like; instead they have become the very persons the fishermen try to avoid.

Why is there such a change?

In the British days we had 18 patrol boats and to-day we have the same number of patrol boats patrolling the same area, but what are our Marine Police doing to-day?
Our Marine Police to-day are specialists in the art of summoning.

Very rarely have our fishermen seen the Marine Police boats in deep waters.

All they do is to patrol the coastal areas, and especially Pulau Besar and Tanjong Tuan islands, so as carry those boats to harass worshippers, etc.

to these islands.

I am not saying that we should condone unseaworthy boats plying the seas, but to a certain extent our Police have thereby been over-zealous forgetting the more important task of being protectors.
For example, many boats have been summoned because both side-lights had not been lit.

But do the Police realise that when boats are sailing windward, there is every likelihood of the lights facing that way being extinguished by the wind?

A set of battery lights costs about $220 which their means beyond is definitely considering incur when apprehended by the Indonesian Police, or raided by pirates.
The most ridiculous state of affairs is shown when they are summoned for being found lacking in certain requirements, when they are coming back after fishing.

In most of the cases, they had their equip- ment removed by Indonesian patrol boats, but when our Police were told of it, they just turned a deaf ear.

What does our Police expect these unfortunate fishermen to do?

Buy their equipment in the middle of the sea?


For example, on the 14th September, losses this, they the in 2011 19 OCTOBER 1961 2012 summon people—I 1961, case No.

1893/61 was heard in the Malacca Magistrate's Court, where a fisherman was fined $20.00 for not being in possession of a fire extinguisher when his boat came home on the 6th August, 1961—this was in spite of the fact that he had his fire extinguisher removed by the Indonesian Police on his return voyage home.
This goes to show how over-anxious our Police are to to prove that they are doing their work.

this convinces no one.

This Surely, utter and co-operation on the part of our Police is beyond comprehension and only denotes that either the Police have not been properly supervised, or that they to patrol only have been instructed the prove areas—and that they are doing their work they summon start indiscriminately people.
understanding suppose coastal lack of to to for for the Straits of Malacca given the fishermen the right of usage of the purpose of fishing, according to inter- national law.

However, the peaceful pursuit of fishing by Malayan fishermen has been greatly disturbed during the past few years, on many occasions, by pirates and on some occasions by the alleged Indonesian authorities Indonesian entrance territorial into waters.
As a result, our Malayan fishermen suffer great hardships, for on many occasions the fish catches of our Malayan fishermen were robbed by the pirates, and on some occasions their boats were confiscated by the Indonesian authorities.

I have facts if necessary.

these, to substantiate Therefore, I urge the Malayan Govern- ment to take this matter into serious consideration and to take immediate steps the plight of our fishermen.
to relieve the pirates and Sir, further, this form of action only serves to frustrate our fishermen more, as though the menacing actions they the are facing from Indonesian Police are not enough.

I hope the Honourable Minister shall instruct the Marine Police to go out to help our fishermen as they used to do in pre-Merdeka days.

This is the only way that can effectively upkeep their slogan of "Operation Service" and not turn it into a mockery as it is now known to be.
By so doing they not only render great service to our fisher- men but also the economy of our country, as this action will lead to more fishermen going out to sea to bring in large catches.

indirectly help MALAYAN FISHERMEN FISHING IN THE STRAITS OF MALACCA Enche' Liu Yoong Peng (Rawang): Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am bringing to the attention of this House, and hence the Government, a matter of grave concern to Malayan fishermen fishing in the is known, Straits of Malacca.
As Malayan fishermen have been fishing in the Straits of Malacca for generations and have been enjoying comparative peace since the advent of modern civilisation.
This, in my opinion, has the should fishing consider in order three miles of is merely making As I see it, three steps which the Government are: (1) the Malayan Government should provide adequate Marine Police for the protection of our fleet by equipping the Marine Police with more and faster boats, to hunt down the pirates; (2) at present the Government a territorial claim of waters, whereas Indonesian Government has claimed 12 miles— and unless the Indonesian Government is prepared to come to an agreement with our Government on a common fishing ground the Straits of Malacca, then our Govern- ment should consider the imposition of territorial waters— more mileage of may be 12 miles—according the circumstances and also to provide the means such a claim; (3) our Government should negotiate at once with the Indonesian Govern- fishing for ment for the Straits of Malacca, fishing in interests and whereby, I hope, two of friendly countries and the people can best be in this connection I wish maintained: Indonesian to point out Government already has a fishing agreement with the Singapore Govern- in the whole of relationship to enforce agreement that our the the to 2013 19 OCTOBER 1961 2014 merit and this can act as a guide for an agreement between Indonesia and Malaya.
Batu The Minister of Internal Security (Dato' Dr. Ismail): Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am sure that if the Honour- knew for able Member more about the work of the Marine Police, he would not have criticised this Branch and done it a great dis- service.

The Honourable Member has suggested that the patrol boats of the Marine Police do not give the assistance to fishermen in the Malacca Straits that they used to give in pre-Merdeka days.
It is indeed true that the Marine Police patrols do not now have quite the same responsibilities for patrolling on the high seas that they used to discharge while the Royal Malayan Navy was building up its strength.

In those days, the Marine Police patrols carried out extra duties on the high seas which our Navy, which is responsible for the protection of our vessels on the high seas, now perform.
But I think, Sir, if I will inform you of some of the works of the Marine Police, works which they have already done and which are problems to the Police, you will be able to view the their criticisms you have heard proper perspective.

in is over one First, I need not remind you that our coastline thousand miles in length and much of the small in our waters.

All islands abound these waters have to be patrolled by our Police boats.
They are manned by Policemen whose duty it is to enforce the law in regard to marine shipping, immigration and Customs fisheries, Ordinance and to prevent the breaches thereof.

They have to patrol not only territorial waters but also to land par- ties on the islands and on the isolated coastal villages as well as to visit and check fish kelongs.

They have also a duty readily give assistance to the vessels as well as to the maritime communities or indi- viduals in distress.
It is a sad human failing to pick out for criticisms isolated instances when all has not gone well and to forget the good that has been done unobtrusively without a break to do and will acts piratical throughout the year.

I would here like to pay a tribute to the work of our Marine Police who, with less resources than we would like them to have, are on arduous duty patrolling our coastal waters in small crafts for the larger part of each month.
is a fact that what might be It called been have committed against our fishing fleets.

Pursuing their calling, so far as we know, legitimately and innocently both in territorial waters and on the high seas, our patrols have in some cases arrived intervened successfully.

But, Sir, seas are vast and our Marine Police patrols have, as I have already informed you, many tasks to perform.

Even on the land, the Police cannot always prevent crimes being committed.
It is one of the duties of the Marine Police, and it is an important duty, to protect our fishing fleets in our waters, but they cannot be shepherding fishing vessels all the time.

You can, however, be sure that our patrols give protection and have checked wrong doers on many occasions.
time and in and the hard-working I am very sorry that the Honourable Member had thought fit to suggest hard- that pressed Branch of the Police Force, of whom we have every right to be proud, concentrated their attention on summoning poor fishermen to Court irregularities.

The Marine for petty Police are, of course, bound, when they detect offences, to enforce the law.

I have not received any complaints against the way in which the Marine Police have carried out their duties in enforcing the law.
So far as I know, the Marine Police prosecute fishing vessels when they contravene the rules made under the Marine Shipping Ordinance in regard to the carrying out of the right type of life-saving equip- ment and sea-worthiness of the vessels themselves.

These rules are made in the interests of the fishermen themselves their and are designed lives and their families.

Vessels that have no licences, or vessels that are used in contravention of their terms of to prosecution.
licences, are to safeguard liable 2015 19 OCTOBER 1961 2016 such But I have not received complaints that the Marine Police have exercised their powers or carried out their duties in an arbitrary, discourteous or un- If I am given sympathetic fashion.

details of any instances of discourtesy and of any irregularity by the Police, I can assure the House that to I will be very glad, maintain the Marine Police, to investigate them and to rectify any fault that there may be in our system of patrols.
I can assure the House that "Operation Service" is carried out not only on land but also on the sea and that the Marine Police will do all they can to protect those who derive their livelihood from our seas.

the good name of in order the in our fishermen islands of Now, Sir, it is also my pleasure to reply to the adjournment speech of the Honourable Member for Rawang.

The difficulties fishing between Malacca and Sumatra have caused us great concern and received our attention as long ago as 1957.
This was due to the Indonesian claim to the territorial waters, which extend to 12 miles measured from the base lines connecting the outermost points the Republic.

of Unfortunately, however, if their claim was entertained, then our fishermen would have no place in which to fish.

However, interests of good relations between the two countries we decided to talk the matter over.
We therefore asked to the await the United Nations which was then sitting in con- ference at Geneva to decide on the extent of the meantime we also advise our fishermen to refrain from fishing in waters in which they are not certain whether it comes under Malayan jurisdiction or Indonesian.

territorial waters.
territorial waters.

In the decision of Indonesians the in In April 1959 when Dr. Djuanda, the First Minister of Indonesia, came here one of the subjects which this Government took up with him was on the question of territorial waters and the rights of our fishermen to fish in our traditional fishing ground, which Indonesia now claims as hers.
Dr. the Prime Minister Djuanda assured that there should be no difficulty in settling this issue, but that we should take the matter up on diplomatic level and that we could settle this matter with the help of experts from both countries.

It was suggested that a joint committee be appointed to go into this matter and the suggestion was agreed to.
reported On the 21st of August, 1959, our that he met Ambassador the Head of the Asia and Pacific Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia and other officials, including a repre- sentative from the Navy, to discuss the incidents affecting Indonesian gun boat activities and interference with Malayan fishermen.
On our side the various Ministries consisting of External Affairs, Agri- and culture, Defence, Commerce the Attorney-General Industry and met and made a recommendation to the Government as to what they should do in the matter.

On the 26th of April, 1961, the Cabinet approved the the Ministry of Paper prepared by External Affairs on the subject of fishing in the Straits of Malacca.

It was recommended that the two Govern- the ments should meet subject.
As a result of the decision of the Cabinet, the Ministry of External took up the matter with the Affairs Indonesian Government and is now waiting for a decision.

to discuss Adjourned at 7.00 p.m.