DAP proposes two-stage amendments to the 1961 Education Act: firstly, repeal Section 21(2) in June meeting of Parliament and secondly, after giving public six months to debate all other amendments to Education Act

Speech by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP secretary general and MP for Tanjung, Lim Kit Siang, when declaring open the Seminar on the Amendments to the 1961 Education Act organised by the DAP Education and Cultural Bureau held at Penang Chinese Town Hall on Friday, 20th April 1990 at 8 pm

DAP proposes two-stage amendments to the 1961 Education Act: firstly, repeal Section 21(2) in June meeting of Parliament and secondly, after giving public six months to debate all other amendments to Education Act

I am highly suspicious of the motive and purpose for the establishment of the Cabinet Committee on the amendments to the Education Act announced by the Deputy Prime Minister, Ghafar Baba, yesterday.

The Deputy Prime Minister has not been able to give any satisfactory reason why such a Cabinet Committee, headed by Education Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, and comprising top mic, MCA Gerakan and SUPP leaders like Datuk Samy Bellu, Datuk Ng Cheng Kiat, Datuk Dr. Lim Keng Yak and Datuk Amar Stephen Yong, needs to be set up at this late stage in the amendments to the 1961 Education Act.

On 12th September 1989, the Deputy Education Minister, Datuk Woon See Chin, announced that the Education Ministry would be tabling the amendment to the Education Act in Parliamentary next month, i.e. October 1989.

Even as late on 13th November 1989, in replying to my supplementary question during question time, Datuk Woon told the Dewan Rakyat that the Ministry was “making efforts to expedite the drafting of the Education Bill to try and table it in the current meeting of Parliament”.

On 23rd November, the Education Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, announced that he would brief the Cabinet soon on the changes to the Education Act 1961, and disclosed that he was holding talks with Barisan Nasional component party leaders on the changes to the Education Act.

Draft on amendments to the Education Act given to Barisan Nasional component party leaders in November last year

On 27th November, Anwar Ibrahim said a draft of the amendments to the Education Act had been sent to leaders of the Barisan Nasional component parties and that he was waiting for their responses.

On 22nd December, 1989, Datuk Woon See Chin said the leaders of the Barisan Nasional component parties would meet the Education Ministers in two weeks’ time to express their views on the proposed amendments to the Education Act.

Suddenly, on 12th February, 1990, Anwar Ibrahim said that the new Education Bill would be tabbed in the October sitting of Parliament this year.

The Education Minister reiterated on 19th February 1990 that the draft of the new Education Act had been sent to all Barisan Nasional component parties. He said: “Leaders of the MCA, the Gerakan, the MIC and all Mentris Besar and Chief Ministers were given the draft recently.”

On 14th April 1990, MCA President, Datuk Dr. Ling Liong Sik, said that the MCA will study carefully the final draft of the amendments to the Education Act, which would be tabled in the October sitting of Parliament.

But four days later, the Cabinet set up a Cabinet Committee on the amendments to the Education Act, with talk of presenting the amendments in the June meeting of Parliament! Ghafar said that the Government is ‘pressed for time’ on the amendments to the Education Act.

What is the need for a Cabinet Committee when the Barisan Nasional component party leaders had the draft on amendments for five months

The public have a right to ask what game the Education Minister, the Deputy Education Minister and the various leaders f the Barisan Nasional component parties are up to the important question of the amendments to the Education Act, as they seem to be twisting and turning every other day on the progress of the amendments.

As all the Barisan Nasional component party leaders, including Datuk Samy Vellu, Datuk Ng Cheng Kiat, Datuk Lim Keng Yaik and Datuk Amar Stephen Yong, had the draft on the amendments to the Education Act for five months, and should have given their responses and views, what is the need for them to constitute a Cabinet Committee to duplicate what they should have done before?

DAP warns that there is no need for MCA and Gerakan to field candidates in next general elections if Section 21(2) of the Education Act is not repealed

The question that comes to mind is whether the Barisan Nasional is again creating excuses to further delay the honouring of its 1986 general elections promise to repeal Section 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act.

I must remind the Barisan Nasional Government that it made a solemn promise to repeal Section 21(2) in the first meeting of Parliament after the 1986 general elections. But ten Parliamentary meetings have come and gone since the 1986 general elections, and Section 21(2) of the Education Act is not repealed.

I must warn the MCA and Gerakan that there is no need for them to field candidates in the next general elections, if Section 21(2) of the Education Act is not repealed.

The people cannot accept any excuses to explain the failure of the government to honour its solemn election pledge, which was to be honoured by the end of 1986.

The excuse that the government cannot purely amend Section 21(2) without the other amendments to the Education Act is unacceptable.

Two distinct and separate package of amendments to the Education Act

This is because these are clearly distinct and separate package of amendments to the 1961 Education Act. The first package is the repeal of Section 21(2) which was the subject of a solemn election promise of the Barisan Nasional in the 1986 general elections. The second package was the other amendments to the Education Act.

As the second package was not part of the 1986 elections promise, it should not hold up the repeal of Section 21(2).

For this reason, the DAP proposes a two-stage amendment to the Education Act. Firstly, Section 21(2) of the Education Act should be repealed in the June meeting of Parliament.

Secondly, all the other amendments to the Education Act should be tabled in Parliament for first reading, and six months given to the public to study, discuss and debate the proposed amendments before they are presented to Parliament for second and third reading.

When the DAP questioned him in Parliament last month, Anwar Ibrahim promised that the public and all Opposition parties would be given ample time to study the amendments to the Education Act. If the amendments to the Education Act {apart from the repeal of Section 21(2) are rushed through Parliament in June, then Anwar would be breaking his undertaking given in Parliament.

Call on MCA and Gerakan leaders to confirm that the reason the draft on amendments to Education Act having ‘labour pains’ is because affect the future of mother-tongue education in Malaysia

I want here to ask MCA and Gerakan leaders to confirm that the reason why the draft on amendments to the Education Act is having such ‘labour pains’ is because they affect the future of mother-tongue education in Malaysia.

The Deputy Prime Minister, Ghafar Baba, the Education Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, as well as other Barisan Nasional leaders have over the past mmonths claimed that the draft on amendments to the Education Act would not affect the status, position and future of mother-tongue education.

But those who are close to MCA and Gerakan national leadership are aware of the great nervousness of the MCA and Gerakan leaders about the draft on amendments to the Education Act.

I want to ask the MCA and Gerakan Ministers and leaders to be frank with the people, and state whether it is true that several proposals in the draft on amendments to the Education Act would seriously affect the character or both Chinese primary schools and Chinese independent secondary schools, even through Section 21(2) is repealed.

If the draft on amendments to the Education Act leaves the position and character of Chinese and Tamil primary schools and Chinese Independent Secondary Schools intact, there would be no need for such great secrecy over the draft on amendments to the Education Act.