|
 Community
Issues
 Scholarship Bond-Breakers Debate
In recent weeks, since The Sunday Times broke news of some scholarship
holders planning to break their bonds, the local media as well as the
general community have sought to air their views on the matter.
We bring you some of the arguments presented, as well as the official
views of the government.
Our task is not to comment on the issue, but to put information collected
from various sources here and let you form your own opinion.
DPM Lee's
statements in Parliament in response to questions on government
scholarships.
E-mails received by Government Feedback Unit
The Government's Feedback
Unit received a record 801 e-mail postings in July 2000. July's
hottest topic was killer-litter, and the debate if culprits should be
evicted from their HDB flats. The issue brought 251 responses by e-mail
alone. 68% of contributors disagreed with the Housing Board's decision
to repossess the flats of convicted killer-litter culprits. They felt it
would penalise innocent family members. The breaking of scholarship
bonds was hotly debated as well, with 49 e-mail responses. More than
nine out of ten contributors felt government scholarship holders should
serve out at least part of their bond.
Education Minister Teo Chee Hean on bond-breaking
It is wrong to break a
bond, said Education Minister Teo Chee Hean, adding that if he met someone
who intends to do so at the point of signing his scholarship agreement, he
would "tell him off directly to his face". The minister, a
former President's and SAF scholar, said this in response to questions on
bond-breaking at a dialogue during his visit to Nee Soon Central
constituency on 30 Jul 2000.
Excerpt of a letter to the Forum, The Straits Times dated 26 Jul 2000
"The paper is being criticised for first reporting their views
'sympathetically' and then lambasting these 11 as ' worse than immoral, in
fact ... beyond saving' in a 'blistering editorial'. I see no
contradiction or hypocrisy. The 11 were given full play for their views.
The editorial is free to comment on their views. The latter does not have
to agree with all the views expressed, just because they were reported in
the same paper. The 11 should be held fully responsible for their own
views. The press is only a medium for their expression. It has an
unenviable task determining how much weight to assign to issues to avoid
being accused of playing to the galley or practising 'crusading
journalism'. Lim Boon Hee
DPM Lee Hsien Loong: Government scholarships are here to stay
Government scholarships are
here to stay. The fundamental reasons for which they were set up in the
1960s and 1970s are still valid today, Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien
Loong said on 21 Jul 2000 when he presented the Public Service Commission
(PSC)
scholarships at the Mandarin Hotel. He dismissed suggestions that loans
or grants be given instead, or that scholarships be given on the basis
of need. The award, he said, should reflect the meritocratic values
underpinning Singapore. The awards are a great "equaliser", he
said, rewarding students for their hard work and ability, no matter what
their family background. Because they will be studying at taxpayers'
expense, they therefore have a moral obligation to serve out their
bonds. So, it is wrong for students to plan to break their bonds even
before starting on their studies, as 11 students had said they would.
Excerpts of letters to Forum, The Straits Times of 20 Jul 2000
"It is not a free ticket to the high-salaried career of your choice
at society's expense. If a person wishes to attend an expensive university
in the United States or Britain, and serve the private sector, then let
him do so. However, let the private sector pay for the education it will
benefit from."... "Bear in mind that the Government is a
representative of the public, and, when giving 'government support', is
actually spending taxpayers' money. Also, nobody is forcing students to
serve in jobs that they have no interest in; they do so completely of
their own volition. The main bone of contention is the abuse of the
public's money and, therefore, trust, by these students and their
nonchalance about it." Ian Street
"If bond-breakers are given a chance to utilise their potential
fully, advance their ambitions and fulfil their dreams elsewhere, we
should give them our blessings and wish them the best of luck for, one
day, they may come back and be much more useful to our country. If they
are depriving other deserving students of scholarships, why not issue more
scholarships? So long as a student is eligible for a scholarship, grant
it. Our government can afford to invest in their future, which will,
eventually, be ours, too." Choo Chin Fie
"Bond-breakers should take heed of the late US President John
Kennedy's saying, 'Ask not what the nation can do for you, but what you
can do for the nation', before they turn themselves into 'activists',
'heretics' and 'revolutionists'. Chan Kwee Sung
Excerpt of a letter to the Forum, The Straits Times dated 15 Jul 2000
"I
agree bond-breaking is tantamount to breaking a promise. Also, it deprives
others of the opportunity to pursue an overseas education. However, what
is most disturbing is the fact that those interviewed take up scholarships
with the intention of breaking the accompanying bonds, and are rational
and guilt-free about such behaviour. No doubt, one can still serve the
nation by being in the private sector. However, in the list of reasons
given by those interviewed, not one of them saw it in this light,
preferring instead to give reasons, such as a scholarship looking good on
a resume and it being a trophy...Our academic system and society are
unforgiving towards those who fail. It is no surprise that those who make
it are hard-nosed and cynical. The young, like everyone else, want to do
well and be recognised for their efforts. And, as the scholarship holders
saw it, they had arrived! These bright young students are experts at
cost-analysis. and have self-interests at heart. Our education system has,
so far, rewarded them for such behaviour... But, the Government and we as
a society cannot absolve ourselves totally of responsibility for this. Soon
Sher Rene
"I
am 19 years old and will be starting university soon. But, I am facing the
gloomy prospect of withdrawing from Brown University, a premier Ivy League
college in the United States, due to a lack of funds. It is extremely
disappointing for me to see that my peers who have been awarded
scholarships do not value the opportunities given to them. A scholarship
should not be viewed as a trophy or a line in one's resume. And, if a
person is able to support himself through college comfortably, I do not
see the need to get a scholarship. If the scholarship holder truly wants
to embark on a particular career with an organisation, would it not be
possible for him to apply for a job or be headhunted for that position
after graduation? Many who aspire to study abroad are unable to pursue
their dreams simply because there isn't any funding left... How reliable
are a string of interviews, essays and one-day selection processes at
judging a person's character? The experienced panel was unable to pick up
the "basic character flaw". Yew Zhong Ming
On Scholarship holders breaking bonds
The Public Service
Commission (PSC), Public Service Division and 20 statutory boards, in a
joint statement to The Straits Times on 20 Jul 2000, urged the 11
scholarship holders who intend to break their bonds to come out in the
open and identify themselves. The statement said that by choosing to
remain anonymous, "these 11 persons have cast an unjust cloud over
the integrity of many other scholars".
Wrong for students to accept scholarship if they wanted to break bond
Statutory boards and
government-linked companies should re-look their scholarship schemes and
find a solution to the recent controversy over scholarship bond-breakers,
Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan said on 19 Jul 2000 in a student symposium
organised by the Singapore International Foundation. A student asked Dr
Tan if he thought the system of awarding scholarships with bonds should be
reviewed. Noting that he had expected the question, Dr Tan said it was
wrong for students to accept a scholarship if they intended to break their
bonds. It was Dr Tan who last year suggested replacing government
scholarships with tuition loans. The matter was laid to rest when Prime
Minister Goh Chok Tong later told Parliament that he did not favour this
idea and said government scholarships were here to stay.
PSC's response to Scholarship holders breaking bonds
Scholarship holders
planning to break their bonds should do the right thing and give up their
scholarships now, before going to university "under false
pretenses". The Public Service Commission, Public Service Division
and 20 statutory boards sent a joint statement to The Straits Times on 11
Jul 2000 in response to a report in The Sunday Times headlined "We'll
break bonds, say 11 scholarship holders".
|
All rights reserved
