SPEECH BY ER DR LEE BEE WAH, MP FOR NEE SOON GRC, AT THE SECOND READING OF THE EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT CENTRES BILL IN PARLIAMENT ON 28 FEB 2017
Madam Speaker,
1. Early childhood education takes place during the formative years, a time when a child is most receptive to learning. It is crucial to their development and sets the cornerstone of their adult years. It is good that the government is constantly reviewing the needs of this sector. I support this Bill which I feel will help to improve the learning experience and development of the children in their pre-school years.
Maintaining / Enhancing Quality of Childcare services
2. I am pleased to note that relevant authorities are now empowered with more investigation powers. It also should be a requirement across the board that a robust system be in place to screen all staff who work at the centres. Background records must be accessible and up to date. Certainly, anyone with a history of hurting children or have pedophilic tendencies must be weeded out. I hope the Ministry will share the measures taken to do this.
Transition and Flexibility
3. I’d like to raise some potential issues with these rules. As with all changes, transition is often a matter of concern. Especially for the smaller centres where they could be facing manpower and resource constraints to cope with the change. Can the Minister share with the House how this transition period can be best managed, such that the provision of childcare and education will not be disrupted in any centre? We are already facing childcare shortages, especially in BTO areas. This bill should not make the shortages worse.
4. Under this bill, for a centre to engage a third-party education provider, it is mandatory to apply to the Chief Licensing Officer (CLO).
I propose that third-party education providers should also be licensed, and the centres can then take their pick from a list of the licensed providers at any given time. This would be more efficient when a centre needs to engage providers on an ad-hoc basis. Under the same proposed rule, centres cannot give guest speakers, performers and the like any rewards without a license. Can we make this rule more flexible, as not all talents can afford to be generous with their time?
6. In light of the current staff shortage in the industry, those who are undergoing training should be allowed to function as relief teachers or teaching assistants. This will give them valuable hands-on exposure, while helping to ease the manpower crunch. Of course, a longer-term solution to the manpower crunch is to review the salaries of childcare teachers, especially the disparity with MOE teachers.
Centres that are not covered
7. I note with concern that some centres are exempted from this bill. They include MOE pre-schools and kindergartens. But why? Is this double standards? Is it that they are unable to meet the KPI? I think there should be more uniformity across schools catering to the same type of education level. This means subjecting MOE pre-school and kindergartens to the same act, or else, subjecting the private pre-schools and kindergartens to the same requirements as the MOE ones. In fact, I think it’s good to subject MOE pre-schools and kindergartens to the same rules. This can ensure that whatever requested by ECDA is practical and can be done. If there is something that’s not practical, something that needs to be fine- tuned, MOE can then whisper to ECDA.
8. Enrichment centres, therapy services, standalone playgroups, children gyms and student care services are also exempted. These are common places where children are sent to for learning and to be cared for. There must be adequate regulations to protect their wellbeing, health and safety.
I request that while they do not need to comply with all the rules in this bill, government should look into a simpler set of rules for them, for example their staff should also be registered.
Please let me summarise in Chinese.
家长和幼教中心都担心，担心这些法规开始实行的时候，他们会不会受到影响？例如较小的幼教中心没有及时申请到准证，是否能帮助他们，确保学生不受到影响？
此外， 有些中心并不受这个法案管辖，包括教育部的幼儿园。为什么？这是否是双重标准？我理解，这些幼儿园已经有一套严谨的标准，但是消费者会不会觉得政府的标准不一，还是有些幼儿园比其它的好？我觉得，教育同样岁数孩子的中心，应该有同样一套标准。其实，教育部属下的学前教育中心应该以身作则，确保幼儿培育署的要求是实际的、合理的。
而其他类型的幼教，如幼儿体操室、深广课程等等，也不在这些规定的范围内。当局是否能定制较简单的一套规则. 让幼儿在这些地方也能受到保障？
Madam Speaker, I support the bill.