- There is actually common ground among the siblings despite the public disagreement
- PM Lee does not want to sue his siblings, but there is no guarantee that they won’t sue him
Man who held up sign calling for PM to resign at Raffles Place arrested for second time
By Louisa Tang
Published: 5:27 PM, July 4, 2017
Updated: 6:50 PM, July 4, 2017
SINGAPORE – A man, who called for the resignation of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at Raffles Place MRT station, had been arrested for the second time in two days, while out on bail.
A police spokesman said the 41-year-old was detained at 12.53pm under the Public Order Act. He had been arrested on Monday (July 3) for the same offence.
The man, whom TODAY understands has been identified as Singaporean Yan Jun, was out on bail when he was arrested again on Tuesday.
Photos and videos circulating online have shown him holding up a sign at Raffles Place MRT station asking PM Lee to resign over the “Terrex conspiracy”.
continue reading here :
PM Lee cries during closing Parliament speech on July 4, 2017
He managed to compose himself.
By Belmont Lay | 10 hours
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong became visibly emotional during his closing speech in Parliament on July 4, 2017.
The moment came towards the end of the final statement in the two-day Parliament hearing.
This was after members of parliament were given the chance to grill the prime minister regarding allegations raised by his two siblings over the 38 Oxley Road house. His statement is a round-up to address any outstanding queries.
PM Lee could be seen visibly holding back his emotions as he recounted the early years in Singapore and his father’s role as prime minister then.
PM Lee said he was instructed then by his father, the late Lee Kuan Yew, to take care of the family in case anything happened to him during a tumultuous period in Singapore’s early history.
PM Lee said after taking multiple pauses in his speech: “After so many years, I’d be unable to fulfil the role which my father hoped I would.”
continue reading here :
PM open to setting up inquiry panel if there is proof of alleged wrongdoing
By Toh Ee Ming
AND
Siau Ming En
Published: 9:22 PM, July 4, 2017
Updated: 11:53 PM, July 4, 2017
SINGAPORE — Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said on Tuesday (July 4) there is no need to convene a Committee of Inquiry (COI) or a Parliamentary Select Committee to look into allegations against him made by his siblings, as there were “no specifics to the headline charge of abuse of power”.
Nevertheless, if Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling continue to make accusations and there is proof of alleged wrongdoing, he would assess these options, PM Lee said.
Over the two-day Parliamentary debate, several Members of Parliament had raised the prospect of convening an inquiry to end the saga once and for all, citing concerns that the dispute would rage on even after Parliament wraps up its debate on the matter.
But PM Lee said: “What specifically did I do that was wrong? What was wrong with that? Who was involved? When did it happen?” Not a single Member of Parliament (MP), not even Opposition MPs, have stood behind these allegations or offered any evidence, he noted.
He questioned whether Select Committees should be set up “to investigate every unsubstantiated allegation, every wild rumour”. It was the job of the MPs to pursue the facts and make those allegations in their own name if they believed something was wrong, instead of merely repeating allegations and attributing them to others, he said.
“If you think something is wrong, even if you are not fully sure, then come into this House, confront the Government firmly, and ask for explanations and answers,” he said. MPs can demand for a Select Committee or COI if they are not satisfied with the Government replies thereafter.
The accusers may not be in Parliament, but PM Lee said that should not stop MPs from talking to them, or prevent the accusers from getting in touch with the MPs and raising the issues on their behalf.
“In fact, that is one reason why Parliamentary Privilege exists, so that MPs can make allegations in the House that are not completely proven and may be defamatory, without fear of being sued for defamation,” added PM Lee.
On Tuesday, Workers’ Party chief Low Thia Khiang asked PM Lee to “confirm that he will sue his siblings … or agree to a Select Committee if they make more allegations in public”.
In response, PM Lee said that it depends on what his siblings say, and he will decide accordingly. “If there is serious evidence of alleged wrongdoing, certainly I will decide what to do, and we have to consider a COI, Select Committee, defamation (lawsuit) or there may be other options,” said PM Lee.
Noting the potential impact on the function of the Government should
continue reading here :
Parliament finds no evidence of abuse of power in family spat: PM
By Kelly Ng
AND
Toh Ee Ming
Published: 4:00 AM, July 5, 2017
Updated: 6:28 AM, July 5, 2017
SINGAPORE — During a parliamentary debate that spanned almost 11 hours across two days, not one Member of Parliament (MP) — of the 29 who spoke —substantiated any allegations of abuse of power hurled against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong by his siblings. In contrast, the Government has been shown to have “acted properly and with due process”, as PM Lee put it.
Wrapping up the debate that he had called for to address grave allegations levelled against him by Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, PM Lee said that facts and explanations have been put on the record, and Singaporeans have been given “a full account of how the Government works, and what the Government has done, in the case of 38 Oxley Road”.
He added: “The allegations have been aired, have been answered and rebutted. And people can see that there has been no abuse of power, by me or the Government. I hope that this two-day debate has cleared the air and will calm things down.”
He acknowledged that it would be “unrealistic to hope that the matter is now completely put to rest”.
“I do not know what further statements or allegations my siblings may make,” he said. But with the benefit of Ministerial Statements delivered by him and Deputy PM Teo Chee Hean, PM Lee said Singaporeans are now in a better position to “judge the facts and see this issue in perspective”.
During the two-day debate, a total of 18 People’s Action Party (PAP) MPs, five WP MPs and six Nominated MPs rose to speak.
The eight MPs who weighed in on the closely watched debate yesterday reiterated concerns on issues such as the circumstances behind the drafting of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s Last Will, the role of the Ministerial Committee set up to look into the options for 38 Oxley Road and the panel’s next steps.
Some of the MPs again raised the suggestion of convening a Committee of Inquiry (COI) or Parliamentary Select Committee to probe further into the dispute.
But PM Lee told the House that there was no basis to set up a COI or Select Committee, given that none of the allegations were substantiated. “What specifically did I do that was wrong? And what was wrong with that, whatever that may be? Who was involved? When did it happen?” PM Lee said.
Nevertheless, such an option was still on the cards if his siblings make further accusations and there is “serious evidence of alleged wrongdoing”, PM Lee said.
Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong also gave PM Lee his full backing, as he lashed out at PM Lee’s siblings as well as Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s wife, Mrs Lee Suet Fern. “If the Lee siblings choose to squander the good name and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew, and tear their relationship apart, it is tragic but a private family affair,” said Mr Goh, who was the Republic’s second Prime Minister before handing over the baton to PM Lee in 2004.
“But if in the process of their self-destruction, they destroy Singapore too, that is a public affair.”
He added that based on what Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife were “freely telling many people”, their goal was to “bring Lee Hsien Loong down as PM, regardless of the huge collateral damage suffered by the Government and Singaporeans”.
Apart from Mr Goh, other political office-holders who spoke yesterday include DPM Teo Chee Hean and Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat, who was Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s principal private secretary for about three years.
continue reading here :
Lee Hsien Yang aiming to bring PM Lee down, says ESM Goh
Former prime minister Goh Chok Tong says he reaffirms his “full confidence in the integrity of” his successor Lee Hsien Loong.
SINGAPORE: It is clear that Lee Hsien Yang’s goal is to bring his elder brother Lee Hsien Loong down as Prime Minister, said Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong on Tuesday (Jul 4).
The former prime minister was speaking on the second day of parliamentary discussion over a public dispute between the children of Singapore’s late founding leader Lee Kuan Yew, centred on allegations made in mid-June by Lee Hsien Yang and his sister, Lee Wei Ling, against PM Lee that he is abusing his powers to block the demolition of their 38 Oxley Road family home.
“Are they whistleblowing in a noble effort to save Singapore, or waging a personal vendetta without any care for the damage done to Singapore?” ESM Goh asked of PM Lee’s siblings.
“It is now no more a cynical parlour game. If the Lee siblings choose to squander the good name and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew, and tear their relationship apart, it is tragic but a private family affair.
“But if in the process of their self-destruction, they destroy Singapore too, that is a public affair.”
Said ESM Goh: “Unsubstantiated accusations have been dished out on Facebook and the media, ad nauseam. Singaporeans are getting sick and tired of all this. We cannot, and will not, allow ourselves to be manipulated as pawns.
“There must be a clear conclusion at the end of this debate. Either we clear PM over the allegation on his abuse of power, or we censure him.”
He said the family feud, while “blown out of proportion”, has tarnished Singapore’s reputation and caused “huge collateral damage” to its Government and its people.
VOUCHING FOR PM, DPM
Although of the view that a minister should sue against baseless allegations, ESM Goh nonetheless said he understood PM Lee’s dilemma in not wanting to take his siblings to court.
“Being the eldest in the family, he must harbour hopes of reconciliation, however remote it seems now, even at a cost to his own political standing,” he said.
“I reaffirm my full confidence in the integrity of the Prime Minister. I have known and worked closely with him for more than 30 years. I brought him into politics in 1984, and I should add, it was not at Lee Kuan Yew’s behest.”
“He was my Deputy Prime Minister for 14 years. He has been Prime Minister for some 13 years.”
Read more at
ESM Goh tells Low Thia Khiang to move on, Low says sorry cannot
Or else it’s just ownself defend ownself in parliament.
By Chan Cheow Pong | 9 hours
In otherwise long and dreary parliament session on July 4, there was an exchange between Workers’ Party Secretary-General Low Thia Khiang and Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong that brought some life to the debate on Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s ministerial statement in parliament refuting allegatons of abuse of power by his siblings.
ESM Goh had used the example of how he handled the Hotel Properties Limited (HPL) case to illustrate how a controversy in the past involving founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and then Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was resolved conclusively, and asked Low and other Members of Parliament (MPs) to “state their position clearly on PM’s and the Government’s integrity.”
Low responded in his trademark incisive and colourful way, comparing the parliamentary session as “ownself defend ownself” and went to push the point to clarify why PM Lee is not suing his siblings.
You can read the interesting exchange below.(We have highlighted the quotable quotes in bold):
“Madam Speaker, the Workers’ Party has not gone through the due process to decide whether or not, to conclude whether the allegations made by the Lee siblings are baseless. We keep our minds open and are prepared to give the Prime Minister the benefit of the doubt. But we don’t know. And I speak for myself because I have not gone through that process. For me personally, I will not be convinced until the entire allegations are given a conclusive airing. We should know what else do they (the siblings) have.
I would like to clarify on ESM’s speech, he cited the example on the HPL case. I was in this house then. Yes, I was convinced. Why was I convinced? And why is this case different from the HPL case?
Firstly Madam, in the HPL case, it was a market rumour, I was unaware of any allegations of corruption or wrongdoing. Secondly, the person at the centre of the issue, Mr. Ong Beng Seng, issued a public statement, explaining the matter to clear the air before the parliament sitting. Thirdly, the subject person Mr. Lee Kuan Yew and Mr. Lee Hsien Loong, both father and son were not the Prime Minister, not the head of government at that time. It was the then Prime Minister Mr. Goh Chok Tong who called for an investigation based on a market rumour, and came to parliament for a public explanation and the debate.
But for this parliament session, it is the Prime Minister, the head of the government and the Secretary-General of the PAP accused of wrongdoing. This episode, there are no investigations done, it’s ownself defend ownself in parliament with the PAP MPs. I mean I wonder how you would want to convince me and my party and Singaporeans that it is conclusive, and it is something that we can all be convinced entirely. Though I said I am prepared to give the benefit of the doubt to the Prime Minister.
Madam, I understand the Prime Minister’s difficulty in, I mean, sueing your own siblings. And he is worried that he will further damage his parents’ name. [Sigh] But I mean I hope he would clarify the doubts I have this question, this nagging question that why he didn’t sue.
First, does he not agree that his family is not any ordinary Singapore family. And the person at the centre of the issue is the Prime Minister of Singapore, not any other person.”
continue reading here :
5 takeaways from the Parliament Debate on 38 Oxley Road
It’s not over yet and we are unsure when it’ll be over.
By Chan Cheow Pong | 8 hours
The Lee family saga arising from the disagreement among the three siblings over founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s wish to demolish the house at 38 Oxley road has captivated the attention of Singaporeans for nearly three weeks.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong delivered a ministerial statement in Parliament on Jul 3 and participated the debate on Jul 4 to address questions on his alleged abuse of power as his siblings claimed.
For Singaporeans who desperately hoped to get their lives back to normal, we also know that the issues are far from being fully resolved.
Here are 5 takeaways after following the intense two day debate, to make sense of it all before new developments make this article irrelevant.
This was the conciliatory message that Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Teo Chee Hean sent out, as expressed in his closing speech on July 4, had stated four areas of agreement with Lee Hsien Yang (LHY):
i) He personally would not support the options at either end of the range: Preserving the House as it is for visitors to enter and see the private spaces or demolishing the house and putting the property on the market to develop new private residences such as luxury apartments.
“Mr Lee Hsien Yang in his statement on 1 July 2017 stated the same thing.”
ii) He personally thinks there are merits in the intermediate options under study which could provide a good solution.
“Mr Lee Hsien Yang has in his public statements indicated that he is open to some of these options.”
iii) There is no disagreement on allowing Lee Wei Ling (LWL) to continue living in the property.
“Mr Lee Hsien Yang also acknowledges that no decision is needed now as Dr Lee Wei Ling continues to live in the property…This is also the position of the Government.”
iv) Government has a duty to go through due process for when a decision needs to be taken, at some future time
“In his statement on 1 July, Mr Lee Hsien Yang also said that he also recognised that ‘no man stands above the law’. There is no disagreement here either. “
The ball is now in his siblings’ court.
Averaging one Facebook post a day, LHY and LWL have continued to wage a social media campaign, seeking to undermine PM Lee’s personal and political standing.
But it is unclear how they can take their case further, besides making repeated accusations against PM Lee to further hurt his reputation and cast aspersions at the government and its institutions, which some observers see as being deliberately provocative.
PM Lee has stated explicitly that suing his siblings “cannot be my preferred choice”, but he has also taken steps to show that he is prepared to go to court to defend his positions. This include making sworn Statutory Declarations (SDs) and also separately issuing what he said in the parliamentary debate as a statement by him outside the House which will not be covered by Parliamentary privilege.
“I voluntarily made my submissions to the Ministerial Committee in the form of sworn Statutory Declarations (SDs), or as they say in the coffee shops, sumpah. That means that if what I put down is proven to be false, I can go to jail for perjury. The statements cannot be taken back – they are done, sworn and irrevocable.”
continue reading here :
‘We are not making a criticism of the Government’: Lee Hsien Yang responds to 38 Oxley Road Parliament debate
05 Jul 2017 07:58PM (Updated: 05 Jul 2017 09:09PM)
SINGAPORE: The dispute over the 38 Oxley Road house would have remained a private family matter, had Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong not used Government agencies and a “secret” ministerial committee to “force his way,” said his brother Lee Hsien Yang on Wednesday (Jul 5).
“Sadly, it is Lee Hsien Loong who has dragged the Government into a personal dispute,” the younger Mr Lee wrote on Facebook, a day after Parliament concluded a two-day debate over allegations of PM Lee misusing his power to deal with the dispute.
During the Parliamentary debate on Tuesday, former prime minister Goh Chok Tong questioned if the Lee siblings were waging a personal vendetta without considering the damage done to Singapore’s reputation.
In response, Mr Lee said: “We are not making a criticism of the Government of Singapore, as we made clear from the beginning. What we have said is that we are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of our brother, Lee Hsien Loong.”
He added: “The PM should abide by the same high standards that are expected of even junior civil servants. To show evidence that he has failed to meet these standards, is not to attack the Singapore system, but to preserve it.”
Mr Lee again accused his brother of using his position as Prime Minister to drive his personal agenda, and said he and his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, “felt threatened” by PM Lee after the death of their father, Singapore’s first prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.
The dispute largely surrounds the future of the late Mr Lee’s house at 38 Oxley Road, and whether it should be demolished as stated in his last will.
“Our father’s legacy is more than bricks and mortar,” Mr Lee wrote. “He made sure that all Government officials acted with justice and integrity. He accepted nothing less than incorruptibility, especially for the very top. Singapore can yet live up to his legacy.”
Read more at
Lee Hsien Yang, Lee Wei Ling say they will stop presenting more evidence on Oxley Road dispute
Singapore
Lee Hsien Yang, Lee Wei Ling say they will stop presenting more evidence on Oxley Road dispute
The younger siblings of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong say they “will cease presenting further evidence on social media, provided that we and our father’s wish are not attacked or misrepresented”.
SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s siblings, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, released a joint public statement on Thursday (Jul 6) addressing the family dispute surrounding the family home at 38 Oxley Road.
In the statement, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling said they would cease presenting further evidence on social media, “provided that we and our father’s wish are not attacked or misrepresented”.
Earlier in the week, there was a two-day debate on the issue in Parliament, during which the Prime Minister delivered a ministerial statement in a bid to refute allegations of abuse of power made by his siblings.
Closing out the debate with another speech on the second day, PM Lee expressed regret over the spat and said he hoped for reconciliation.
In their statement on Thursday, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee provided detailed replies to “some claims made” in the recent parliamentary session, noting that they did not have the opportunity to present their views in Parliament.
“It is impossible for Members of Parliament to effectively question PM Lee, when his party controls almost all the seats in the house. No independent investigator has gathered evidence, interviewed other witnesses, or subpoenaed the government’s own records. As we pointed out before, Parliament is not the right forum for investigations of this nature,” they said.
“In Parliament, many spoke up to parrot Lee Hsien Loong’s attacks on Lee Kuan Yew’s will and on us. This entirely proves our point that Hsien Loong’s subordinates are beholden to him, and cannot be impartial judges of their own boss.”
The siblings said that releasing further evidence on social media will “only muddy the facts, and put pressure on government agencies to make excuses for PM Lee”.
“If there is ever a truly independent inquiry to examine the evidence, they are welcome to ask. Ultimately, it is up to the people of Singapore whether they hold Lee Hsien Loong to a true accounting,” they wrote.
Read more at
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...g-more-9007970
And so the saga continues . Ownself defend ownself . Ownself check ownself ?
Public has had enough of Lee siblings’ fight
But political watchers say there is likely no resolution to dispute over 38, Oxley Road, after parliamentary debate
Rachel Au-yong & Joanna Seow, The Straits Times
Jul 06, 2017 06:00 am
Singaporeans want to put the ugly dispute involving the children of founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew behind them, but the debate in Parliament on the matter has not brought it to resolution, political observers said yesterday.
At the same time, it is unlikely that the allegations made against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong will hold much water in court or people’s minds, unless his younger siblings can provide evidence for their accusations of abuse of power in relation to their father’s house at 38, Oxley Road, the observers added.
The two-day debate on Monday and Tuesday, in which a total of 36 ministers and MPs spoke, drew mixed reviews from the observers.
Some felt that it has put to rest the allegations, with the Government providing clarity on key issues that were previously topics of contention.
They included how and why a ministerial committee to look at options for the Oxley Road house came to be, and why the National Heritage Board (NHB) had tried to back out of a deal with the estate of Mr Lee over some artefacts from the house.
Dr Gillian Koh of the Institute of Policy Studies said the ministerial committee was not a “mysterious or secret” one, as alleged by Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang.
“From the debate, we have learnt that all three siblings knew what the point of the committee was, and had responded to it,” she said.
On Monday, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, who chairs the committee, said Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang were informed about the committee on July 27 last year, shortly after it was formed.
He also said they were invited to make representations to the committee.
Another issue was on a donation deal between the NHB and the executors of the late Mr Lee’s estate.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang, who with his sister are the executors, had complained that the NHB had tried to back out of a legally binding deal to exhibit artefacts from the house.
But Dr Koh said: “We have learnt that the PM was involved not only as a PM but a beneficiary as well, and his consent was not sought for the gift or the terms in the deed. But, in order not to create a ruckus, he had let the whole issue slide.
‘IRONIC’
“So, it was ironic that one side of the equation was calling the other out for not doing it properly, when that side had not conducted itself properly.”
continue reading here :
http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore/pub...siblings-fight
Not true. Many questions still unanswered .