Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

©The Straits Times, Singapore (Used by permission)
by Sue-Ann Chia, Senior Political Correspondent

Rich or poor, no worthy scholarship applicant will be turned away by the Public Service Commission. But should family income matter when deciding who is more deserving? New PSC chairman Eddie Teo gives his take on the issue

MR EDDIE Teo makes no apologies for giving government scholarships to youngsters from rich families, including the Prime Minister's son. Why not, was his retort to critics who questioned the decision.

'If PSC scholarships are to bring in people who are suitable for public service, why should we discriminate against the Prime Minister's son?' he reasons.

PM Lee Hsien Loong's third child, Li Hongyi, received a Public Service Commission (PSC) Overseas Merit Scholarship in 2006. He is now studying economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the United States.

Mr Teo cites this example to refute suggestions that scholarship candidates from poorer families should be given priority over their richer peers.

The deciding factor is merit rather than money, he stresses, as PSC scholarships are not bursaries for the poor but a manpower management tool to bring bright people into the civil service.

But will it lead to more PSC scholarship holders coming from richer families in future?

He believes it does not matter.

'Whether in five, 10 years' time, we're going to get more people from bungalows than from HDB flats, is it something that we should really be very concerned about?' he says, his warm smile disappearing.

For Mr Teo, 61, who has witnessed Singapore's rags-to-riches story, more scholarship recipients from well-off families would simply be a reflection of a more affluent society.

On the rich having an edge over the poor, he counters: 'The poor who are brilliant and top students...haven't got a problem getting help somewhere else if they don't get a PSC scholarship.'

Scholarship saga

THE debate over family backgrounds was sparked by former Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) chief Philip Yeo in July.

All things being equal, scholarship applicants from poorer families should be given preference, he said at a forum.

The PSC, which was then chaired by Dr Andrew Chew, rebutted him swiftly. It placed no quota on scholarship numbers each year, so deserving candidates are not denied any opportunities, it said.

It also disclosed that 47 per cent of this year's recipients lived in HDB flats, and 53 per cent in private property.

While housing type is a rough, but not always accurate, gauge for wealth, the figures are still revealing. There are almost equal numbers from private and public housing, but the proportion is markedly different from the national situation where 80 per cent live in HDB flats.

The tilt towards scholarship recipients from richer families gave rise to concerns that candidates from poorer families are being squeezed out.

It was observed that the academically successful tend to come from more privileged backgrounds, as wealthier parents can afford to send children to private kindergartens, tuition and enrichment classes that less well-off ones cannot afford.

Should scholarships therefore tilt a little more in favour of the poor so that they have a chance of levelling up?

At issue was whether Singapore's pursuit of meritocracy - where everyone has an equal chance of success - had been compromised.

Asked for his views, Mr Teo, who took over as PSC chairman in August, says simply: Singapore's system works. So do not tweak the system when it is not broken.

It is not as if he has no empathy for the poor. 'We should all worry about the widening income gap and how to help the poor,' he concurs.

But the straight-shooting former civil servant, who went from being spy chief to encouraging Singaporeans to have babies at various points in his career, does not mince his words.

'To criticise PSC scholarships as hampering social mobility in Singapore is really barking up the wrong tree.

'PSC scholarships are based on merit; we want to choose the best and most deserving candidates for the public service regardless of race, gender or wealth.

'If PSC starts discriminating against the well-off...and gives scholarships only to the poor, we will deprive ourselves of a segment (of talent)...without necessarily advancing the cause of social mobility.'

The dilemma

STILL, those from poor families have not lost out.

'If there are two equally deserving candidates - one poor and one well-off - we will choose both,' he maintains.

But what if there is a quota? It is unlikely, but he indulges the question.

'Say, the recession continues for another five years, then we decide we got to budget,' he muses.

The PSC spends about $400,000 to send a scholarship recipient overseas.

The dilemma, he says, comes about only when there are two equally qualified candidates vying for the last spot.

'We may decide that since there's nothing to distinguish between the two, we will give it to the poorer one,' he concedes. But he was quick to add: 'If one candidate has, say, better leadership qualities, and although he or she is well-off, we may choose him or her instead.'

PSC scholarships, he reiterates, are given to only the very top students, who, rich or poor, are spoilt for choice when it comes to scholarships.

'I've seen quite a few candidates appearing before the PSC with a string of other scholarship applications, up to about 10,' he says, his usually placid voice booming.

Leading US universities also give top-calibre foreign students full grants.

'I had dinner with nine non-scholars in Boston recently. This was what they told me, 'I came, I got a grant from Harvard which includes even free tickets to the theatre',' he recounts with a chuckle.

Those who worry about social mobility should address other areas and not 'harp on continuously' about PSC scholarships, he says.

For example: Schools and charities should step in and do their bit by offering subsidies to needy students, say for overseas trips. He cites the Howe Yoon Chong scholarship fund, set up by PSA Corp in honour of its late former chairman, which gives bond-free scholarships to poor, but not necessarily top, students.

'If everybody chases after top students, you're helping only the top poor students,' he says.

'Those who truly worry about social mobility should also try to help all needy students to achieve their best potential.'

Certain aspects will change

MR TEO does, however, plan to improve the selection process to ensure it is as 'fair and objective' as possible.

'One way...is to enhance diversity in the PSC board membership so that I can receive a variety of views before arriving at a decision,' he says.

By diversity, he means adding women and younger members to the PSC board, which currently has eight other members - all men and above the age of 50. They are professionals or company chiefs.

The PSC Constitution allows for the appointment of up to 14 members by the President. Mr Teo can offer names.

If all goes well, he says, there will be three new members next year. He will not reveal who they are, but two are women.

'I think women have instincts which men don't have,' he says.

He also intends to update the psychometric tests that scholarship applicants have to undergo, to ensure they stay relevant and provide more accurate findings.

Currently, candidates go through a series of written tests to gauge their intelligence quotient, personality, scholastic aptitude, general management ability and state of mental health. Their scores are interpreted by a psychologist.

Some candidates also have to go through interviews with psychologists.

Assessing 18-year-olds

BUT while candidates go through a battery of other tests, it is really the interview that seals the deal.

What does he look for in a candidate?

'There's really no mystery involved,' he says, listing qualities such as academic excellence, leadership and community involvement.

Beyond that, PSC is looking for someone 'original, different and refreshing'.

'It's all right to express views that are different from...government positions or policies. There's no need for candidates to be politically correct,' he says.

Asked if he sets out to intimidate interviewees, Mr Teo, who was wearing a navy blue tie dotted with tiny blue and pink mice, smiles and says: 'No, no.' But some board members are tougher than others, he adds.

Candidates who want to stand out should be well-read, have a quick mind and offer sensible, well-conceived views.

They should also be sincere in wanting to serve the public service and Singapore, and have 'strength of character' - qualities he admits are tough to ascertain.

He remembers some particularly outstanding candidates. There was one who showed compassion by volunteering in a school which did not produce the brightest students.

'There was another guy who knew so much about the world that even the PSC members couldn't ask as many questions as he could give answers to,' he recalls.

Girls tend to do better than boys during the interview sessions. 'They are much more mature, confident and articulate, for some reason. Don't ask me why,' he says. As for the boys, some turn up in their national service uniforms and with a dazed demeanour, having just come out of training.

The number of scholarships given to males and females is about even. That could change. 'When I have women on the board, the interesting thing to see is, does that improve the ratio for women, or make it worse?' he says with a grin.

There are two types of candidates whom Mr Teo enjoys interviewing.

One, the exceptionally bright. 'You can throw all sorts of questions at them and they can come back with an answer,' he says.

Two, those from dysfunctional families. 'It's quite remarkable that somebody with that kind of background can still excel in school,' he says.

'These are the ones that we try as best as we can, if they deserve it, if they qualify, to give them a scholarship.'

His empathy towards them could stem from his family background. His father died when he was eight, leaving the family financially stranded. His mother stayed home, while his sister left school to work as a clerk, supporting the family for some years until he entered the civil service.

He would not have been able to pursue a degree, if not for the PSC, which awarded him the President's Scholarship in 1967. He studied at Oxford University in Britain.

Returning to Singapore, his civil service career spanned 35 years, 24 in intelligence. He later helmed the Defence Ministry and Prime Minister's Office before retiring in 2005.

It is his own story, and that of other pioneer civil servants who made it despite the odds, that, perhaps, entrenches his belief in meritocracy.

He speaks of Mr Lim Siong Guan, the son of a taxi driver, who clinched the President's Scholarship and rose through the ranks to become head of the civil service. 'In a meritocratic society...if you reach the top, there's no assumption that you got there because you had connections or you schemed or lied or cheated,' he says.

It is unlike some Western societies, he notes, where there is resentment towards those at the top. In Australia, where he was Singapore's High Commissioner from 2006 to earlier this year, there was a phenomenon called the 'tall poppy syndrome'.

'If you stick up above the rest, people want to...pull you down,' he says.

'We don't want to go down that road. I think we'd better stay with meritocracy, so that people can see that those at the top deserve to be there.'

As to a question on whether children of taxi drivers still have the same chances now, as before, to rise to the top, Mr Teo replies with the same indignation as he had to the question on PM Lee's son - 'Why not?'

'I still keep seeing taxi drivers' children in PSC interviews. They haven't disappeared from the interview process,' he says.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed