A: The government's position has been consistent. Singapore is multi-cultural. Multiculturalism means different cultures living side by side, coexisting together and sharing increasingly common areas. Genuine multi-culturalism is not just words. Genuine culturalism means respecting the separate cultures, languages and heritage of the different communities in Singapore. We need community elites who can perform the duty of passing the culture and the language to the next generation. So you must have teachers to teach students, and then you must have students who will become teachers one day.

Q2: But when we have this layer of elites, we need to have a critical mass to support them. If not, they would work in a vacuum. It might be easier to create the elites, but how are we going to create that critical mass?

A: We have got to rely on both local resources and foreign talent. I ask myself whether we are able to throw up future Pan Shou’s and Chen Wenxi’s. Pan Shou was from Xiamen and Chen Wenxi from Jieyang. It is very difficult. But we must try. And if we can't home-grow them in Singapore we should be prepared to import them in the same way as before. Many of our most famous talents were not born here. But the dominant culture must be local. And we should be prepared to bring talents from all over the world, China, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Hong Kong, Taiwan, even the West. Then we will have a rich culture. Then we will have scientists and engineers, writers and poets, dancers and sportsmen. Then we will have a rich cultural life.

Q3: But do we have people who will be able to read what our writers have written, to appreciate the arts which they have created, especially when they are in Chinese?

A: This is worrying. Readership of Chinese newspapers and books among younger Singaporeans is going down. Take for instance, the readership of Zaobao, Shin Ming and Wan Bao. The Chinese newspapers have done extensive surveys. The trend is very clear, that among the 20s and 30s, there is a sharp decline of readership even though overall readership has increased, because of older Singaporeans, new migrants and foreign workers. There is a relative switch to the English language among the young. We also see this same trend in the readership of Eight Days vs i Zhoukan. Globally, i Zhoukan sells many more copies than Eight Days. But among teenagers, many more Eight Days copies are sold than i Zhoukan. Even in the cinema hall, since a few years ago, we are screening more English language movies than Chinese language movies. All this reflects a different profile of younger Singaporeans who are bilingual. They have a choice. They are more attracted to high-tech Hollywood movies. In contrast, the Hong Kong movie industry has stagnated. Fortunately, Channel 8 has been able to retain its dominant position. This is because we freed up channel 8 so that the people there could do more creative work. They have maintained Channel 8’s position in a multi-channel environment. I would say that among young Chinese Singaporeans, they are comfortable watching Chinese TV programmes and movies, and speaking Mandarin. But when it comes to reading, there is some difficulty. When it comes to writing, there is greater difficulty. That's the problem. We cannot have an elite that cannot read and write. We need high mastery of the language. We must build up the mountain peak. That's very important. If we don't succeed in doing that, the process of cultural transmission will be adversely affected.

I am not worried over the longer term. Chinese people are practical. In the longer term, China will become a big economy and there will be many opportunities there. Many Singaporeans will on their own, without pressure from their parents or teachers, deepen their knowledge of Chinese language and culture in order to be part of the action in China. This is why I am not too worried over the longer term. In the shorter term, if you look at the numbers and the survey results, we are going to face a dip. We must bridge this gap. That is really the main task of the Speak Mandarin Campaign in the coming ten years.

Q4: So, will the task of Speak Mandarin shift from promoting speaking of the language to reading and writing?

A: They should shift from just promoting the speaking of Mandarin to the general promotion of the Chinese language. We started last year with the promotion of Chinese Internet.

While in the longer term I am not pessimistic, if we have a break in cultural transmission, we will lose many things. Cultural transmission requires the baton to be passed on year after year. If we have a break and then pick up Chinese again later, we would have lost the generation in between. Many precious things will be lost which would be a great pity.

Q5: Do you think the break is already there?

A: Culture is tenacious. The fact that we are always worrying about it, that parents and teachers are always complaining, this is the reason why Chinese culture is so tenacious. When we stop worrying about it, then we have lost, it's gone. Why do I have this quiet optimism? When I attend cultural events organised by junior college and university students, I am touched by how things which we thought were lost have been revived and given a fresh interpretation.

And I must say I am not unhappy by the strong public reaction to STB's plan to re-do Chinatown. Although it was a good plan, STB didn't do the presentation very well. As a result, there was an uproar. And mind you, not from older Singaporeans but from younger Singaporeans. Initially, I thought it was inconvenient for STB. But when I thought about it, I realised it was a very good phenomenon. Many of us can trace at least a part of our ancestry to one part of Chinatown or another, whether we are Cantonese, Hokkien or Teowchew. And if we have no feeling for Chinatown, if we don't care if Chinatown were erased to the ground and redeveloped into a new city like Pudong, if we have that kind of attitude, I think we are a very weak people. So even though they have long moved out from Chinatown, something inside them which we thought was long forgotten bestirs itself. Yes, when I was a child, my grandfather brought me here; yes we ate there, that was the old Xin Basha; further down there used to be a restaurant which served a delicious soup; we remembered the red light area; and so on. Prof Wang Gungwu told me that he met a group of young Shan Shui Singaporeans recently, mostly professionals, who were unhappy that their heritage have been forgotten. I thought it was a very good sign. The protest did not come from older Singaporeans but from younger Singaporeans, articulate Singaporeans, English-educated Singaporeans. It's marvellous. We should build on this. This is the spirit of Singapore 21.

So I spent one morning a few weeks ago, gathered various people together from the Heritage Board, the Heritage Society, the Kreta Ayer CCC, the Chinese Federation of Clan Associations, the National Arts Council, URA and STB. Let’s all get involved in the project and make it a success. STB is prepared to spend some money. That's very good. And our objective is not to preserve Chinatown as a mausoleum, as a dead place, but to preserve its memories while preparing it for the future. We want Chinatown to be dynamic and bustling while retaining its Chinese character. There is no harm having an Italian restaurant or a French restaurant, or a graphic studio. It doesn't matter. But when people walk around, the old streets are still identifiable, the old theatres are still there and the old clan associations are still operating. Then all of us will feel much better and much more at peace with ourselves.

When you read the curriculum vitae of a Chinese leader, it always identifies the province and the town he came from. And this is not just a modern tradition. When you read registers of scholars who become Jin Shi, they not only recorded the individual’s position in the Imperial Examination, they also identified the town and province he came from. And where his parents came from. There's always a strong need to identify your origin, where you came from and what feng shui, what local soil produce such an accomplishment. In other words, what they say in San Zi Jing, Guang yu Qian, Yu yu Hou. You bring honour to your ancesters, you bring glory to your descendents. And that is how rootedness is created. If our ancestors having come from China to Singapore, we lose all our memories and think that we can create a whole new world, thinking that we are thereby modern, we have in fact cut off our own legs.

So I have a certain quiet confidence, but this quiet confidence requires that we worry everyday and do things to make sure that we don't lose the connections. We must keep reminding ourselves and our young. I have been working with our clans to encourage Chinese Singaporeans to retain the old tradition of registering births, marriages and deaths with the clan associations. But, of course, also do it for the daughters since we are Republicans now. Pass this tradition on. It is precious. If it is not tenacious, it would not have lasted five thousand years. So it is not going to disappear in Singapore. But it is not going to disappear only because we worry about it all the time.

Q6: Minister, coming back to the issue of Chinatown, isn't it the fact that when the whole thing created an uproar, it brings up this worry that when we think about development, we might forget to preserve our heritage?

A: We are not doing too badly, you know, when you look at Singapore today. In fact, I am worried when I visit China. China is in the first flush of economic development, so they like to see new things. They think nothing of destroying old buildings. They see a mountain, they will punch a hole through it. They see a river, they build a bridge across. Take say, Pudong. One whole side of the river was razed to the ground and rebuilt with almost no memory of the past.

It was like us before. In the first phase of development, this is what happens.

Then when you reach a certain level of material comfort, you say, `Hey, wait a minute! Let's preserve bits of this and that. And I see now, some Chinese cities beginning to do this, especially the more advanced cities, and the restoration of heritage sites. The monks have come back to the temple. I remember when I first went back to Chaozhou. My ancestors came from Chao An. The hero Han Yu or Han WenGong of the Chaozhou people lived in Chao An for only eight or nine months, but he did so many things there that he left a deep impression. They named the river after him. Across the river, there is Han Wen Gong's temple. During the Cultural Revolution, it was ravaged, statues smashed. The place was run down when I first visited it with my parents in 1983. When I went back, this time with my wife in 1986, the whole place was spruced up. Then when I went back again in 1991, there were many additions. At the back, there was a new pavilion, an exhibition hall and so on.

I think that's good. It means that once a certain material level is reached, the old instincts are revived. That is very much in the history of China. When you visit old temple sites, while the structures are not that old, the sites are very old. Many of them were destroyed, rebuilt, destroyed and rebuilt again. If you go to Chang An now, the old Chang An forbidden city was many times the size of Beijing's GuGong. The Tian Jie itself was over hundred metres wide. They are all gone now. Only the inner walls remain, the outer walls are mostly gone. But I am sure in China, they are going to restore more and more. As they rediscover the past, many things will be rebuilt. One more cycle of Chinese history. Then maybe in 200 years, decline again, armies marching up and down again, ruins once more. That's how it was written in San Guo Yan Yi - tian xia da shi, fen jiu bi he, he jiu bi fen. These are the cycles of history, of destruction and construction. But the cultural genes are passed on from mother to child, in the little poems and wise sayings. Then later, they go back to the historical records. They have great respect for history. Every dynasty has the responsibility to record the history of the previous dynasty, starting with Sima Qian’s Shiji. So Jin wrote about Han, Sui Tang wrote about San Guo and Nan Bei Chao, Song wrote about Tang, Ming wrote about Yuan and so on.

And we have inherited the tradition. We must preserve it. How can we lose it? If we lose it, we lose everything. That's the most precious, isn't it? It is not the buildings or the wealth. Those things come and go. But the cultural DNA is passed on, it is tenacious, it will never die.

Q7: So, do you think Singapore is at this stage of restoration, trying to find back our roots as well?

A: Oh yes, nostalgia is big business in Singapore now. In décor and music, you go to some of these new restaurants, some of them rather tacky, but never mind, they try. Retro is fashionable now. I told my staff in MITA some years ago that nostalgia is in fashion. It reflects the mood of a new middle class that has become bored with just material things. So the arts become important, music becomes important, taste becomes important. It is no longer just quantity, but quality. We have become more settled, more civilised. Finer things matter much more now. Collection of art objects, support of theatre construction, drama groups, symphony orchestras, they have all become more important. During my years in MITA, our society was going through this transformation which is why in the last five to eight years, the arts and heritage scene has changed so dramatically. The changes represented a certain maturing of our society. Our parents didn’t have the opportunities. They were happy just to have enough to eat, a shelter over their heads and schooling for their children. When their children grew up, all these things were assumed to be already there. We hope in every generation, there will be improvement and not deterioration compared to the earlier generation. We have the responsibility to our parents to add on to what they left us and not just consume what they have given to us. If all we do is consume our inheritance, we are worthless. We are value-subtracters, not adders.

Q8: If we may move on from Singapore and its past to Singapore and its future -- we have always aspired to be the gateway to Asia. How do you think Singapore is doing?

A: Singapore is a complex city-state, very heterogeneous and diverse. I cannot remember the name of the English poet who described the universe reflected in a drop of water. Singapore is a little bit like that. We reflect the complexity of the whole world within our city-state. The reason why from time to time we debate about cultural elites, SAP schools and madrasahs, and about the English-educated and Chinese-educated, is because we reflect the tensions of the world within our little city-state. But it's also a source of great strength. When we go to China, we have people who know China, who understand China from the inside; when we visit America, we have people who studied there, who are familiar with the American way of life; when we visit Indonesia, we have experts who understand Indonesia; so too India.

Because we are an incredibly diverse society, the governance of Singapore is not easy. It means that tensions arising from our multi-racial and multi-religious character are daily problems. But to the extent that we can manage these tensions, they become a strength. Of course, if we cease being able to manage these tensions, they will destroy us from within.

It's like the heart of a high-powered engine. There are certain points in the engine where tremendous mechanical forces pull in different directions. It can be a pin, a pivot point or an axle. If that breaks, the whole engine flies apart. But if that holds, the whole machine functions perfectly. There are certain things in our society, which we must hold tightly and safeguard, so that everything works well. But if you tinker with the heart of the machine in an unthinking way, things can go wrong very quickly and catastrophically. If we manage our multi-racial and multi-religious tensions well -- and it's easier said than done -- we will excel. Then we can perform all kinds of incredible acts in the world. The leaders of Singapore, whether they're those from the Chinese community or the other communities, must have a common understanding of our society and a deep sense of the core that holds us together. That's crucial to our long term existence and prosperity.

Q9: I understand the fact that in our dealings with the region, we must have a deep understanding of the region. Will this fact that most Singaporeans, in fact most young Singaporeans, tend to understand the region through the Western media.

A: I don't think so. Yes, we watch CNN and CNBC, we read Time and Newsweek, but I don't think our people see everything from the western point of view. We are probably the most Westernised society in Asia, that's true. Maybe except the Philippines, which has a different colonial history. But are we a part of the West? We're not. And many of our Western friends get frustrated with us because they want us to be a part of the West, but we tell them that we cannot be. So that's why they criticise us from time to time, because they want us to be like them. Yes, the clothes we wear, our taste, the things we buy, the designer goods are all influenced by the West. But deep inside, are we Western? I don't think so. I mean, you take, say, the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. Many Westerners assumed that it was a simple mistake. Few Asians believed that it was so simple. They're suspicious. And I think many Singaporeans were suspicious. I mean yes, they did not think it was something that was sanctioned by the top leaders, but they didn’t buy the simple explanation either that it was because of an old map.

So why this difference in response between Westerners and East Asians? I've asked individual Japanese and Vietnamese, `Do you think it was an accident?' They were skeptical. So in a subtle, sometimes sub-conscious or unconscious way, there's a racial element involved. Many Chinese-Americans are deeply offended by the Cox Report on China's theft of American nuclear secrets.

When we talk about Westernisation, yes, there's some degree of Westernisation, but when it comes to how you raise your children, you may watch Oprah Winfrey and Ally McBeal on television, but when you raise your own children, you do it in a different way. One kissing scene on TCS, locally produced -- long articles in the newspapers, a public debate. If it were Hollywood or Hong Kong or Taiwan, Singaporeans don't care. But if it involves Singaporeans, they're very protective, as if these are our brothers and sisters, so higher standards must prevail. That's a very good sign. While our people are knowledgeable about the world, if you dig deep into their core, it is conservative and still very Asian.

Q10: But do you think that the Asianness you just described -- is it adequate for us in our dealings with other Asian countries like, for example, China?

A: No, we could do much better. The Nantah generation had a much better feel for China than, say, SAP school graduates. There's a difference. But then our SAP school graduates have a much better understanding of the West than the old Nantah generation. They speak better English, write better English. But it's a trade-off. You can't have everything. In Singapore, it's always a juggling act. We want everything, but we can't have everything. So we feel frustrated sometimes, because our hopes and our desires are greater than what we're able to achieve. That's not a bad thing. We can only be an artist if we're all the time struggling to be better than what we are today. If we are satisfied and smug, I think we'll not amount to much.

We have to decide. Take for instance Chinese calligraphy. We don't require it of our students, they don't have to pick up a brush, because the school curriculum is already jam-packed - Chinese, English, Maths, Science and, now, National Education. So many things that we want our children to be, we want them to be birds, we want them to be animals, we want them to be fish all at the same time. But on their own, some Chinese families do send their kids for calligraphy classes in community centres and clan associations. You can't force it on everyone, because not everyone can do so many things.

Q11: If this trend goes on, will there be a possibility that we actually lose our bonds with the region? For example, my father, he can speak Malay, so when he goes to Indonesia he can speak to the Indonesians. But if I go to Indonesia and if that particular Indonesian can't speak English, then that's it, there's no way I can communicate with him.

A: For the older generation, their lingua franca in the marketplace was Malay. So most of our parents would have been able to speak Malay, some kind of pasar Malay. Now, because we've moved to English and because English is much more used in the region now, our lingua franca in ASEAN has become English, and Malay has diminished in importance as a trading language, as a language in the marketplace. Many Malays are able to speak English, so we meet on that common ground. It's a historical phenomenon. But it's important that we maintain good relations with Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. We must understand their culture and know at least a bit of their language. Some of us should be specialists. And we do require civil servants and army officers to learn some Malay. But we cannot require everybody to do so. Your father may know Malay while you don’t, but your father might not know many things that you know.

Q12: Given that China is becoming an increasingly important economy as you just now mentioned, how well are we prepared to face China, given that many of our key officials are Western-educated? We might not be Westernised, but do we really appreciate Chinese culture? Do we know China that much? Do we really understand them?

A: If we try to relate to China on Chinese terms, we will always be looked down upon. One Chinese leader remarked privately that Singapore is like a bonsai. He had a patronizing attitude towards us. In other words, if we try to be more Chinese than the Chinese, we will fail. Our strengths are in different places; our weaknesses are in different places. So I don't think that should be the starting point, that we must be like them. It's not possible. They start from a young age in a single-language environment; they pick up the brush much earlier. Ours is a different soil. So I would take as a starting point that history has taken us down a different path.

Of course, if you look at the map of East Asia, China is a large part of the total land area. The population of China is twice that of the rest of East Asia combined. If we add up all the Southeast Asians and the Japanese and Koreans, that's still only about half the population of China. Given China’s size and population, history and tradition, its influence is inescapable.

And if China continues on this path of economic progress and development, China's influence on the region will be very big in the next century. And it'll affect us all powerfully from Japan and Korea to Malaysia and Indonesia. Kim Dae Jung early this year made a decision that more Chinese characters should be used in Korea. Of course he said it's all for tourism, but the reasons are much deeper. Even in Vietnam, the learning of Chinese is becoming popular among Vietnamese people. They can't read their own ancient texts otherwise.

Throughout Southern Asia, including Indonesia now, there's a great revival of interest in Chinese language and culture. To me the danger in the long term is how we maintain our multi-racial character, given the swing of the Chinese pendulum. We must have that certain stabiliser in us, that the more the pendulum swings one way, the more we must lean in the opposite direction in order to maintain our poise and our balance.

When we deal with China, we must have a sense of our own history and of the role that Singapore played in the Chinese revolution, which was the greatest revolution in human history. We are not a city in China, we are not a province in China. By an accident of history, we're different. But we still have links - links of the past, links of blood, links of culture, links of economics. But we have different destinies, and our destiny is in Southeast Asia. And that's what will always make us different from Hong Kong.

But at the same time, it's important for Singaporeans to know that their ancestors made major contributions to the Chinese revolution. Two years ago I visited the Song Qingling villa in Beijing, which is now a museum. In one of the halls, there is an x-ray machine donated by the people of Singapore. And when Singapore tourists go there, they gather around it and marvel at how Singaporeans have contributed to this x-ray machine. But if you know the history, it's not a surprise at all. In fact, Singaporeans played a bigger role in the Chinese Revolution than Hong Kongers or Taiwanese. And most Singaporeans don't realise this. Kang Youwei was here, all the factions were here. Sun Zhongshan was here. When Sun Zhongshan set up the Tongmeng Hui in Tokyo, a branch was immediately set up in Singapore. And when the Guangxu Emperor died in 1897, all the shops in Singapore were shut down. But my wife's great-grandfather, he was a Tongmeng Hui member, refused. They threw stones at his shop. So already at that time, there were stirrings of Republicanism in the local community. And this is why the Guangxu Emperor gave calligraphy to a Teochew temple and a Hokkien temple in Singapore, because the Imperial government was fighting for support among the Nanyang Chinese who were turning Republican. Sun Zhongshan came here many times. He collected a lot of money here. This is why we should support SCCCI's effort to restore Wanqing Yuan. In 2011, the hundredth anniversary of Xin Hai Geming, there will be a big celebration.

When the artist Xu Beihong came here, he held a big exhibition. And I think 10-20% of Singaporeans turned up for the exhibition, not because they were connoisseurs of art, but because they identified Xu Beihong as an anti-Japanese Chinese patriot, and so they came to support him. The rich bought his paintings, and he made many friends here, and so many of his paintings are now in homes of established families in Singapore. And this is the reason why when the Japanese came down here, they were so brutal to the Chinese population, because as far as the Japanese was concerned, this was an extension of the war in China. And for many Chinese in Singapore, it was an extension of the war in China. And so tens of thousands were massacred in cold blood. Some Japanese may wish to forget that period of history, but how can we?

If we look back, it was because of that history of entanglement with China that there was this great split between the Chinese-educated and the English-educated in Singapore, the struggle between the communists and the PAP, and the big fight over Chinese education. And in some ways, it was the Peranakans who played a major role in creating modern Singapore, because they did not feel a strong emotional link to China. Lee Kuan Yew, Goh Keng Swee, Toh Chin Chye and many others were all English-educated, some of them speaking Malay at home, with deep roots in Malaya -like Goh Keng Swee in Malacca and Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore. And they were the ones who were not swept along by the tide of the Chinese revolution, whereas those in the Chinese schools and whose parents and grandparents had fought against the Japanese, they supported the communists and were sympathetic to their cause. The major break came after the initial flush of the Communist Revolution, especially after the disappointment of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. And those who went back to China, who went thinking that they'd be welcomed, were in turn set upon, denounced and heartbroken. If Tan Kah Kee had died later, he too would have suffered.

So if you look at the history of Singapore, we must see it from that perspective, then we'll understand better the issues when we discuss SAP schools, when we reflect on the Tang Liang Hong affair, when we talk about Nantah and the Chinese elite. We must have this historical perspective of how we got here and why we cannot but have a separate destiny from China.

Without the historical perspective, we'll make big mistakes, fundamental mistakes. And that's why in the Singapore History Museum now, there's a conscious attempt to set the context of Singapore history, so that Singaporeans understand how we became what we are. It's not to pass judgement on who was right or who was wrong, but to explain how we were caught in the crosscurrents of history, why different positions were taken and why we have the present outcome. Families were split by these crosscurrents. We do not know when the currents of history will again pull us in different directions, but when they do, we may not have a lot of time to think. If we do not abstract from the lessons of the past and internalize them as instincts, we'll repeat the mistakes.

Q13: Yet despite these historical links, there still seem to be some faultlines or problems in our dealings with China, as evident in the Suzhou Industrial Park incident.

A: Suzhou, I would say, shows how different we have become from the Chinese in China. Fundamentally, the problem of Suzhou is a cultural problem. To a certain extent, for China to modernise, some of its cultural characteristics must change. But will China become like Singapore? That’s impossible. China is a continental power, Singapore is a city-state. Singapore was created by the British. We have a different history and administrative tradition. There are some things that China can benefit from studying the Singapore experiment, but there are many things which are irrelevant because conditions are different. The difficulty of the Suzhou project, I think, has proved that we are different from the Chinese. This also gives us some comfort that the success formula of Singapore is not easily copied. If we're so easily copied, then we'll be under competitive pressure very quickly. But because the Singapore model is not easily copied, what we have is an enduring advantage, not an ephemeral thing. I mean, the master plan, the MRT, Sentosa's Underwater World, all that can be copied and they are replicated all over China. But to achieve clean government and social cohesion across races, between rich and poor, between the well-educated and less-educated, to do a 15% wage cut across the board and not have Singaporeans rioting, demonstrating or going on strike, that’s something uniquely Singaporean and not easily replicated anywhere else in the world.

So when we try to transfer some of our software to Suzhou, it is not easy. I think the Chinese are also learning what they can abstract from Singapore and what they cannot because of different conditions. And both sides would have learnt in the process. On both sides now, there is a profound realisation that although there are cultural similarities, we operate very different systems.

Q14: But how do we make this apparent stumbling block work to our advantage in this project?

A: China is a big country, we're learning about conditions there. Suzhou is only one aspect of a much bigger and wider relationship.

Q15: Coming back to Singapore's position in modern history of China, and linking to tourism. Some well known figures from China travelled to Singapore earlier this century, people like Yu Dafu, Lao She, Xian Xinhai and so on. Can we tap on this? Will the STB do something to promote the places where these people had lived or visited?

A: Oh I think we should do all these things. They add interest, diversity and ornamentation to Singapore. That's why we have the exhibition of Xu Beihong's paintings, the Robert Kuok collection last year. There was a Robert Kuok collection because Xu Beihong stayed in Singapore for some time. He stayed with a local Fuzhou, Huang Manshi. Huang Manshi stayed in a house belonging to the Huang Clan Association of which he was the secretary. Xu Beihong wanted to show his gratitude to the family he stayed with by giving many of his paintings to Huang Manshi. He knew that his paintings would be valuable one day. When Huang Manshi was old, he worried for his family. After his death, they would have to leave the Huang Clan Association’s house. Huang Manshi knew Robert Kuok’s mother, a fellow Fuzhou. They agreed to exchange the paintings in return for a new house which Robert Kuok was building in Singapore. Robert Kuok's mother had a great influence on Robert Kuok. That was how the paintings went into the hands of Robert Kuok. They were not displayed for many years. They were displayed for the first time in Singapore. When we displayed it, so many Singaporeans came out with their own stories of Xu Beihong. Many Xu Beihong’s paintings are in private family collections in Singapore. One day we should collect them together and have some kind of a gallery or at least a catalogue of all the Xu Beihong's paintings in Singapore.

All the others you mentioned, we should record their lives here. Our links with China are also of the present and the future. For example, the son and grandson of Wu Guanzhong live here. Among contemporary artists in China, many have links to Singapore. They like coming here. Some of their children work here. It's not just a historical relationship, it's a continuing relationship, and we should celebrate it, the way the Europeans celebrate the movements of their great musicians and artists. Picasso was in Paris, so they remember him in Paris. Every place where Beethoven or Mozart played is remembered, the church where they performed, their patrons, whether it was a prince or a bishop or a cardinal. This is part of the richness of European history. They don't claim an artist exclusively for a city or country. Because if you are a successful artist or musician, you are likely to have travelled, and each city that you travelled to feels honoured that you are part of its history. This is the same reason why we celebrate P Ramlee's years in Singapore

Q16: If Picasso had been in Singapore, I'm sure STB would promote that, but would our officials in STB know Xu Beihong and his visits to Singapore? On the bookshelves, we have books telling the stories of well known Chinese figures in Singapore, but would the officials be aware of all these?

A: Many of them may not be aware, so these are the things in the attic which should be dusted off, re-framed and put on display. The Wanqing Yuan project is one of them. Once you record Sun Zhongshan in the Nanyang, then all his friends and enemies who came here would also come into the story. Sun Zhongshan was the focal point. And then when you look at the Guanxu calligraphy in the Telok Ayer temple, everything makes sense. Each item by itself may not make sense. They are all part of one picture. That's all part of the history which should be restored, put on display, and passed on to young Singaporeans. It's part of a glorious history. It's not something to be ashamed of. It's something to be proud of. We were very poor once so we had to scratch around to make a living. Having reached a certain point of development, we are now enriching our education and doing much more heritage work. We have improved our museums, recruited more people, conducted conferences and seminars. It's not too late. I think it is important for Singaporeans to know that our history is part of a much larger story. We must not, in our educational system, reduce the focus of each generation, making the circle of our minds smaller and smaller. That will be a real disaster. Our parents had a big circle. Our children should also inherit a big circle. Our spirit should be that of a Big Singapore.

Q17: Still on this point of tourism. Is it likely that STB is putting too much emphasis on tourist from the West and along the way, failing to appreciate the size of market in East Asia?

A: STB's job is to attract tourist to Singapore, so they have got to read the trends and meet the market needs. They are at the front line, they are not historians, we should not expect that of them, that's not their main job.

But during the entire economic crisis, tourism growth from China was double- digit, throughout the crisis, double-digit growth. As the Chinese travel more, Chinese tourism will become more important to Singapore. From a tourism perspective, STB is now doing much more promotion in China.

But are we doing all this for the tourist? We’re not preserving our heritage just to please the tourists. The tourists are just a bonus. We're doing it for ourselves and our children. But if in the process, Tourism Board can also use it for tourism, that's marvellous. But even if there's no tourist, we'll still do it for ourselves.

Q18: Besides all these places like Chinatown and Little India, will STB actually consider developing other places with unique characteristics, such as Katong or Holland Village?

A: I'm not sure whether they will be of interest to the tourism industry. Part of the charm of Katong where I grew up is because it's not a touristy area. It has very indigenous roots. I'm not sure if I want Katong to be a tourist area. I'm quite happy for it to be what it is. I think that's a question more of town planning, how we maintain the old character in various parts of Singapore. I lament the fact that when I drive to Punggol now, I see nothing there which I can remember. Punggol, for so many of us, was part of our growing up and I cannot help but feel that we would have been better off if there were some points preserved in Punggol which connected us to the past. In Hougang, there's a local well which the CCC rebuilt under Dr Ker Sin Tze’s leadership and gave it the old name. Okay, that's help, but I think we should have done much more. And I hope that in the plans to improve Changi Point which many of us have fond memories of, I still go back there from time to time to jog and swim, I hope MND will do it in a way which doesn't destroy the memory.

When I go there, when I see the little creek and the little boats chugging in and out, I feel a little flutter in my heart. Please don’t erase that. I’m sure many Singaporeans feel the same way. That’s part of the sensitivity of good urban redevelopment. We are getting much better. There are old buildings along the Singapore River which are well done like the new MITA building at the old Hill Street Police Station. We are getting more mature as a people. I'm not blaming anybody. It reflects the stage of development of our society.

Q19: One last question, what is your happiest moment in MITA?

A: I saw your question beforehand and I was trying to recall last night what was my happiest moment in MITA. I must say that I have difficulty in recalling any specific event or happy moment. What makes me feel warmest about MITA is the many people who have come forward with passion and dedication to advance our work in art, heritage, culture and other areas. So many people have come forward to help, so many, starting with Tommy Koh, Chan Heng Chee and Hsuan Owyang, so many people; I should not mention specific names because I'll miss out many of them. So many people have helped out in so many areas. From different language groups, different cultural groups and different religious groups, they have come forward and volunteered. I've made friendships which I will treasure for the rest of my life. We have worked together and created things together. That is really my greatest joy.

Q20: ...and your most difficult decision?

A: The most difficult decision I would say was the transformation of the media field, especially the transformation of the old SBC. We knew that the world would change dramatically with IT and cable TV. The trend was already very clear in the West. So I forced the corporatisation of SBC and encouraged the people there to try new things. There was a lot of public reaction. Everytime you make changes, like shifting the news time from 9.00 to 10.30, many viewers get upset. Or when we made mistakes like the RaRa show, I had to answer many questions in Parliament. I received strong criticisms from Members of Parliament at the budget debates. At the same time, I knew that all the people in TCS were watching me live to see how I responded. We had to take the comments humbly and in good faith, think hard about them and improve where we could, but at the same time, persist in the general direction we had taken. Without the RaRa show, there would not be "Under One Roof" or "Phua Chu Kang" today. Without HongKong directors, which elicited many questions in parliament, there would be no channel 8 today. Even with cable television and Internet, channels 5 and 8 remain anchor stations in the lives of Singaporeans. Had we not made the move, channel 8 and 5 today might have been wiped out by competition.

It was difficult. It was politically complicated. Everytime we made an adjustment, whether it was experimenting with the programming of Symphony 92.4 or shifting a particular program from one station to another, there was an uproar because we are all creatures of habit and suddenly, "eh, how come it is gone?", "How come it is jazz music instead of classical music?" Viewers and listeners got upset, they wrote in and complained, questions were raised in the press and in Parliament.

But we had to press on because if we didn't, if we had said "stop, reverse", then we would be in a very difficult position today. In the last budget debate, SBC or TCS was no longer an issue. We could have easily avoided some of the mistakes that were made by not changing. But that would have been the greatest mistake of all. Had we not persisted, we would not be where we are now today and Singapore could not become a multi-media hub . Now you have everybody here, including CNBC, HBO and MTV. And we also have Channel News Asia and 93.8 as well.