The past three weeks, one of the busier periods annually for Singapore's Parliament, saw Members of Parliament (MPs) debate on issues pertinent to the lives of Singaporeans.

However, the controversy surrounding the inclusion of the Israel-Hamas conflict as a topic in the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum for Singapore's schools, which was revealed sometime before or after the announcement of the 2024 Budget Statement, was on the minds of parliamentarians.

To be exact, seven MPs filed parliamentary questions (PQs), which were scheduled to be answered on Mar. 7.

Noting that the scheduled time on Mar. 7 was only 30 minutes, Education Minister Chan Chun Sing took some time during the Committee of Supply debates on Mar. 4, 2024, to answer their questions instead.

He said,

"This issue has stirred strong emotions amongst many. It is also reflected in the range of PQs file by members for upcoming sittings. I thought I will say something here today to allow members more time than the 30 minutes PQ time on Thursday (Mar. 7)."

Here are the questions from the MPs addressed by the minister:

Why teach current affairs in CCE?

The question, raised by Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC MP Sharael Taha, was about the Ministry of Education's (MOE) considerations when deciding what to include current affairs into the CCE curriculum.

Chan replied that the CCE was established as an integral part of the holistic education Singapore provides in schools.

"Because we know how important and yet how difficult it is to build our national identity amidst the larger forces," he said.

Chan also noted that Singapore's multiracial and multireligious society is "subjected" to global news, social media news, and even fake news, which pulls people in different directions and challenges the country's efforts to maintain national cohesion and harmony.

"An information war is being fought all around us. We risk being drawn into other people's fights and conflicts," he said.

"This is why the CCE lessons on contemporary issues often draw from events happening around us to help students better navigate the vagaries of the world.

We can neither shelter our children from the world nor keep the world from intruding into their lives."

Why the Israel-Hamas conflict?

Answering the second part of Sharael Taha's question, Chan said that MOE had multiple aims when including the Israel-Hamas conflict in the CCE lessons.

First, he said, is to help students understand what is going on, express their own views and manage their own emotions.

Second, to help them appreciate diverse perspectives sensitively and respectfully.

Third, to teach them how to discern information from different sources.

Fourth, for the students to play their part in supporting racial harmony and social cohesion.

"Let me emphasise what this CCE lesson is not about," he said.

"It does not tell students that one party in this conflict is good and the other is evil."

He added that it's also not about imposing perspective and interpretation, nor about creating a wedge between beliefs and identities, nor about bringing politics to schools.

Are the teachers comfortable with teaching about the Israel-Hamas conflict?

Multiple MPs raised questions about teachers, with Non-constituency MP (NCMP) Hazel Poa and MP Sharael Taha asking if any teacher declined to deliver a lesson or expressed their unease and Choa Chu Kang GRC MP Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asking whether the teachers are consulted.

Chan said MOE had received feedback that some teachers were initially unsure if they had sufficient content mastery to teach the lessons, while some wanted more time to process their own views and feelings about the conflict.

"Most took on the challenge and carried out their duties professionally because they understood the importance of the task," Chan said.

"We are grateful to them for stepping up despite any initial hesitations."

He added that school leaders also supported requests for teachers who felt uncomfortable and asked to be excused.

What about the feedback from the parents and students?

On Jalan Besar GRC MP Wan Rizal's question on the feedback from students and parents, Chan said that the ministry took all their concerns and feedback seriously.

He noted that students from primary schools to junior colleges (JCs) not only expressed their emotions on the issues — some praying for peace while others felt sad about the tragic situation — but some students also raised thoughtful questions, such as, "Is there a way out of this cycle of violence and hatred?"

Chan said one JC student said the lesson was beneficial as the information was presented to him but did not force him to agree on a certain stance.

"Some suggested we drop the lesson altogether," Chan said. "But will this be better for our students and society in the long term?"

Chan added that MOE will update the materials to address the feedback and ongoing developments.

How are the lessons taught? Are they differentiated between ages?

Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked how the lessons are taught, while NCMP Leong Mun Wai asked whether primary school students are taught about the Israel-Hamas conflict, until which level of students are taught and whether the CCE curriculum is differentiated among the levels.

Chan said that MOE would customise the lesson material for students of different age groups and reiterated that the CCE lesson was not meant to teach history or politics.

"It is impossible to do so in an hour-long session, and it was never our intention in the first place," he said.

Chan explained that the focus for younger students is to sensitise them to the plight of innocent victims, while older students will be taught how to be more discerning of different sources of information.

For the most mature students, Chan said MOE will update the lesson material based on more recent events and help them better understand Singapore's national interest.

We will certainly continue to reflect the diversity of views from our community within our lesson material.

It is a key learning objective for our students to understand how to manage differences and diversity with respect and sensitivity.

Are schools equipped to teach this?

On Ang Mo Kio GRC MP Nadia Ahmad Samdin's question about whether the schools are equipped to engage students in current affairs, Chan said that MOE will work to equip the teachers better.

Chan explained that MOE will organise workshops for the teachers, where they can discuss lesson plans with specialists and more experienced teachers, in addition to the preparations within each school.

"Given the diversity of backgrounds and experiences of our teachers, some schools have adopted useful approaches like organising their teachers in teams to conduct the CCE lesson, which enhances the quality of delivery," Chan said.

He gave the example of having teachers from different backgrounds and faiths conduct the lesson together to show students that Singaporeans with different beliefs can come together to discuss complex issues sensitively and respectfully.

Chan also took the opportunity to reassure teachers that MOE and school leaders are aware of the challenges they face and urge them to approach their school leaders if they need support.

What are the lessons MOE learnt from this episode?

Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh asked Chan what have been the lessons learnt from the episode.

Chan replied that there were a few learning points, and the first was to not "underestimate the damage that misrepresentation can cause".

He said, "It was a sobering reminder that in the online space, it is not always easy to separate those who question the material with well-meaning intentions from those who joined the fray with ulterior intent to stop negative emotions on an already sensitive topic."

On the second learning point, Chan said that "managing differences respectfully" in Singapore is still a "work in progress".

While he said most Singaporeans express views in a civil and respectful way, there is still "online vitriol and anger" towards MOE and the teachers, thus reminding them not to take things for granted.

He said that though MOE will learn from the episode, all their employees will have the full support and full protection of the law.

Chan said the third learning point was that Singapore must watch for potential external interference.

"We have to be careful not to fall prey to their attempts to rob our people and undermine our cohesion."

The last learning point, Chan said, was that Singapore's unity depends on sustained commitment and effort.

"I met more than 300 school principals again to listen to their feedback since we last discussed the issue with them in January," he said. "It has certainly not been an easy time for our teachers and principals."

"Is it still worth doing it?" Chan asked.

He said many principals told him, "How can we allow the seeds of hatred and distrust to be planted in our next generation?"

"It is our duty to guide the next generation will help them develop good character and values and build a solid foundation for them to thrive in the future."

Chan acknowledged that there is more work to be done and more to improve and extended his gratitude to those who had given feedback.

"We will continue to work with you all as partners in education so that we can plant the seeds of hope and harmony in the next generation."

Some clarifications and responses from MPs

After Chan's 16-minute speech, there were around 30 minutes of clarification when multiple MPs asked further questions about the issue and other topics relating to the Committee of Supply debates.

Singh acknowledged that his question about the lessons learned had been covered "quite extensively".

"So I render my support to the ministry's work in trying to ensure that the public conversation is a bit more even-handed.”

Aljunied GRC MP Gerald Giam suggested that MOE conduct the lessons in small classes instead of using a lecture style, which would provide more opportunities for discussion and dialogue and discussions between students.

Chan agreed with Giam that smaller discussions are needed because the students are trying to grapple with their emotions.

He said some schools do provide for that, and schools organise sessions based on their capacities and needs.

Wan Rizal asked if the right slides could be released to the public for greater transparency, a question that Poa also filed as a PQ.

Chan replied that he had discussed it extensively with his colleagues whether the slides should be published.

He eventually decided that it would "not do justice" to the teachers and their teaching by doing so as the slides "do not speak".

He said that MOE would encourage parents or public members who still have concerns to meet face-to-face, so that the teachers can explain how the slides were used.

PSP NCMP disappointed

While Chan had answered all the parliamentary questions filed by MPs on the issue during the Committee of Supply debates, Leong had asked for his questions to be answered orally in parliament on Mar. 7, 2024.

However, as the time allocated for parliamentary questions was only 30 minutes due to the ongoing Committee of Supply debates, he asked Speaker of the House Seah Kian Peng to extend the hours so that his question could be answered, noting that he believed it was a "very important issue".

Leong said it was a "simple act" for Seah to extend the timing, and if Seah wouldn't exercise that power, he wanted assurance from Seah that his question would be "at the top of the queue" for the next session.

Seah rejected Leong's request for a time extension and noted that his question had been addressed previously during the debates.

Seah said that Parliament deals with the priority of Leong's questions in accordance with the rules and standing orders.

Leong posted on Facebook on Mar. 8 to express his disappointment.