I agree with most of Charles Hector's opinions on meritocracy except for one. He based his arguments on the impracticality of using test scores alone for university entrance on the lack of a level-playing field at kindergarden level.

But our government through the education system has a full 12 years to correct this imbalance. Don't use the government's failure to educate the less fortunate as an excuse to reject meritocracy.

I agree that despite the government's best efforts, students from affluent families will still hold an unfair advantage over poor students. That is why examination results alone should not be the only criterion of university admittance.

Meritocracy does not have to mean examination results alone. A tough social background can also be counted as a merit. But in any case, race shouldn't be one of the criteria.

The government should provide qualified teachers and improve teaching facilities, but it is up to the students to take up the challenge. I went to the same high schools as many of my Malay friends. They were placed on a special fast track for overseas or local universities despite having lower tests score.

Our government's solution to social imbalance is to hand them everything on a silver platter, regardless of their social background. There is no merit in the government's implementation of education policy, neither should one expect any merit from its outcome.

As the saying goes, if you give a man a fish, you feed him for one day, if you teach him to fish, you feed him for life. We already have over 30 years of combined NEP and NDP, do we need any more proof that it's not working?

When I took the SRP, one of my Chinese classmates took Islamic studies as an elective. She was the only non-Muslim who took the subject and she scored the highest mark in the entire school where the ethnic makeup reflects our larger society.

What we need now is real meritocracy, not pseudo-meritocracy or half-hearted, watered-down meritocracy.