Mdm Speaker, I support the motion of thanks for the President's Address. I fully agree with the five key priorities of the Government as outlined by the President. The devil, of course, is in the details.

Madam, the world confronting us and those who come after us will be different. Our society is ageing rapidly. Every job task that can be replicated can be replaced by a machine. Citizens who cannot add value enough are at risk of being left behind. Income gaps widen between those whose skills are in demand and those who cannot catch up. In the words of Albert Einstein, "The significant problems we face today cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when the problems were first created."

Madam, let me first share a simple poem that shows the different levels that we can view and address the challenges we face in life.

This poem by a Ms Portia Nelson is entitled "Autobiography in 5 Short Chapters".

Chapter I

I walk down the street.

There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.

I fall in.

I am lost ... I am helpless.

Is it my fault?

It takes me forever to find a way out.

Chapter II

I walk down the same street.

There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.

I pretend I don't see it.

I fall in again.

I can't believe I am in the same place.

But it isn't my fault.

It still takes a long time to get out.

Chapter III

I walk down the same street.

There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.

I see it is there.

I still fall in ... it's a habit.

My eyes are open.

I know where I am.

It is my fault.

I get out immediately.

Chapter IV

I walk down the same street.

There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.

I walk around it.

Chapter V

I walk down another street.

Madam, the new world is full of deep holes. Sometimes, we patch up the holes. Often, when it involves entrenched mindsets and structures, it will take more than patching up or just walking around them. We may have to walk down another street or make U-turns.

Let me share some observations and suggestions on two areas that I think will require more than patching. First, in the space of Learning; next, in Caring and Doing.

On Learning. The future of learning will be far from the teacher-directed, traditional classroom settings we are used to. In the future, learning can take place anytime, anywhere − not constrained by time or the physical dimensions of a school. We can choose from a quiver of tools, devices and learning solutions that can be face to face, online or blended. If SkillsFuture were to succeed, then learners will come in all ages with all backgrounds. They will have to be self-driven lifelong learners – a habit that is not yet pervasive today.

Many positive changes have taken place in the education landscape in Singapore in the last decades – learning support; online learning resources; special education; teacher recruitment and compensation; and, most recently, to me, a brilliant move of having MOE actively take on the SkillsFuture portfolio in continual education and training for adult learners.

As a GPC member for Education for the last 10 years, I have met many authentic, diligent and professional educators who want the best for our young.

However, Madam, our education system is one that is pimpled by three unhealthy "Ps": one, Pre-occupation with academic scores; two, Parentocracy; and three, Physical Segregation of our students.

One, on our pre-occupation. Our pre-occupation with academic scores is an outcome of years of conditioning, a choice borne out of a perceived lack of other better avenues of social mobility.

Academic rigour is a good thing but it becomes an impairment, when even academically stronger students start seeking extra help through tuition. It is an impairment when the posting criteria to popular schools is based on cut-off points of high-stake examinations at the age of 12. It is an impairment when teachers teach to the test and parents feed the $1-bilion tuition industry in order to ace examinations and increase one's options.

It is hard to cultivate or inculcate a love for learning when all that matters to the majority is THE score from a series of high-stake exams. When the curiosity and love for learning is snuffed out when one is young, it will be hard to re-ignite it after one's formal school years when he leaves the school gate.

On Parentocracy. The second unhealthy "P" of our education landscape is Parentocracy. It is commonly described as a phenomena in which a child's education is shaped according to the wishes and opportunities that can be afforded by his parents. As the stakes of academic scores become higher, Parentocracy will further rear its ugly head. Parentocracy restricts social mobility and can unfairly deprive those with lesser resources and networks, undermining the development of their potential.

In the case of the Direct School Admissions programme, for example, it is an open secret that children from more affluent backgrounds stand a higher chance of benefitting from it since they could be nurtured from young in the arts or even sports. In the case of overseas exchange programmes or internships, the more affluent parents will be better able to put their children through. We need to level the playing field as much as possible.

The third "P", Physical Segregation. Physical Segregation of our young during their school years especially. Madam, we have acquired the habit of feeding the sacred-cow practice of physically segregating students into different geographic settings whenever they are assessed to be different or they learn differently.

We tend to promote a system where those who excel in academics are placed in the top academic schools; those who excel in Arts in School for Arts; those good at sports to the Sports School; and so on. A very efficient system that sorts and places our students in geographically different location, meeting occasionally at school-driven projects or events.

But, Madam, one of the most effective ways of keeping our country safe, secure and empathic is to forge relationships of acceptance and trust amongst citizens of different abilities, faiths, and socio-economic status; during one's growing-up years, in natural settings. Trust and empathy cannot be built deeply when Singaporeans are physically segregated from young. Madam, this is a sacred cow that ought to be examined closely and slaughtered if need be.

Suggestions on Learning. I would like to make four suggestions today, to address the unhealthy 3 "Ps" − Pre-occupation with Academic Scores for High-Stake Examinations; the risk of Parentocracy and Physical Segregation.

At times, it would take walking another path or making a U-turn, when tweaking and patching will not work.

Suggestion One: Create an Open Architecture and Invest in E-Learning Developers and Curators to accelerate the sharing of best learning materials including lectures, self-driven learning modules. This is especially urgent across some 400 Primary, Secondary and special schools in order to level the playing field and empower more teachers, students and families.

Invest at national level, Learning Management Systems like Canvas or the like. Make templates on these platforms available for easy development and sharing. Reward those who share materials and pedagogy of good standard, lesson plans as well. Create 21st century jobs of Curators and Coaches who can help sieve through the submissions and advise on usage. Take reference from the smartphone apps platform where both developers and users can interact actively and put the power of learning content development into the hands of those beyond the Ministry as well.

Suggestion Two: Remove the PSLE without Compromising Academic Rigour and pilot a 10-year through-train school model. This is not the first time that I and other Members of the House have raised this.

Seriously walk another path − remove one high-stake examination, the PSLE! Even educators, I understand, call for this. At the age of 12, it is too early to sort. Tweaking the assessment grading system will not remove the deeply entrenched mindsets of chasing the scores. The problem is unlikely to disappear even if we replace PSLE T-scores with Banding – students will start scoring 4As, 5As and so forth. We are back to square one.

Suggestion Three: Re-dream and Slay the sacred cow of physically segregating people who learn differently.

Re-think the concept of Arts School; Sports School; Normal (Technical) School; SAP Schools; Special Schools.

Think Programmes, yes, even programmes for the gifted, and make these programmes available across more physical school campuses – so that students of different abilities and talents can grow up together under one roof.

Suggestion Four: Pilot Inclusive Education Villages across Singapore to house students of different abilities and backgrounds. There is no better way to learn inclusion except to play, eat, interact and learn with others who are unlike yourself. Let those who are academically stronger learn via subject-banded classes; but design school campuses that allow diversity and vibrant social interactions for all groups.

Better still, make full use of these Education Villages to allow SkillsFuture learnings for adults to take place there too. There is no better time to consider taking another path in this aspect especially when enrolments are falling and some physical capacity can be found.

Next, on Caring and Doing. Madam, there will be those who are at risk of being left behind in the new economy we are heading towards. I am most concerned with the elderly, especially those who are lower skilled and those with special needs and disabilities.

Building a caring society is an aspiration expressed not only in the President's Address; it is the desire of many Singaporeans who participated in the "Our Singapore Conversations" led by Minister Heng Swee Keat.

The Government has made some excellent moves in ensuring the essentials of healthcare, housing and transport for the vulnerable amongst us. It is time for us to consider taking bolder steps to entrench this value of Care into our system.

Can the Government exercise the moral authority to commit schools and corporations, including Government agencies to adopt, on a regular and longer term basis, vulnerable groups, especially the low-skilled elderly and those with special needs and/or disabilities?

Do we have the courage to legislate the protection of their rights and welfare into our way of life? We should.

The women have the Women's Charter; abandoned parents have the Maintenance of Parents Act; those who are mentally incapacitated have the Mental Capacity Act; even the animals have the Animals and Birds Act to protect their welfare. We should do the same for the education, employment and care support for the elderly and the disabled.

Should we aim for a way by which Civil Society and Government can work more collaboratively to achieve their mission and shared values? We should.

In this matter, I beg to differ from the Workers' Party's desire to have Government out of the way as much as possible. At times, getting Government out of the way may not work when it is in the interest of the target community or the cause to have more of Government engagement and involvement.

Two experiences come to mind.

One is my journey as an advocate for the special needs community and the second, that of Member of Parliament Mr Louis Ng, an animal rights advocate. We were both not Members of this House when we first began our work in the two causes. Separately, we decided at some stage, that the confrontational "name and shame" way of advocacy could only go that far. We learnt that if we truly have the interest of the communities we care for at heart, then we need to be part of the solution, to persuade, to coax, to explain and dirty our hands, where necessary, and to engage those, including Government, who can help us as partners.

We do not all need to end up as parliamentarians, but we can lead, sponsor and/or run initiatives that can advance those whom we care for. Sweep and clean up the school compound or the animal habitat, if necessary. We learnt that we need to move beyond criticising and initiate or join others and get involved in Care Projects ourselves.

That is the purpose of the next series of citizen engagement in the form of the SG50 discussions, and the mission of agencies such as the Community Development Councils or the CDCs. There is still much more to be done for the vulnerable in our midst but they will not get any better unless we collaborate with, instead of simply naming and shaming or pushing away those who could make a difference with us.

In conclusion, Madam, I believe the "Future of Us" is only as strong as our humility and boldness in taking another path or making the U-turn when we confront the deep holes or even craters in our pathways. The "Future of Us" is only as strong as our determination to stick our necks out for what we instinctively know is right and humane. The "Future of Us" is only as strong as our willingness to be part of the solution and dirty our hands if we need to, and our ability to genuinely collaborate – giving credit when credit is due; refraining from naming, shaming and posturing to score points for oneself or for one's political party.

Someone once said in a political satire that politicians will lose votes when they advocate something controversial; but they will lose an election if they choose to be too bold or courageous.

But for the deep holes that confront our nation, I urge us all to be bold and walk another path if need be; for not doing so, may not only cost us an election but cost us our beloved country. Madam, I support the motion.