Wednesday, 5 July 2017

38 Oxley Road debate in Parliament Day 2 - 4 July 2017

No evidence to support abuse of power allegations, says PM Lee Hsien Loong
He hopes Singaporeans are in better position to view issue in perspective after debate
By Zakir Hussain, Political Editor, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Parliament wrapped up two days of debate on allegations of abuse of power over 38, Oxley Road, with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong saying there was no evidence to back claims that led to the sitting.

Singaporeans have been given a full account of how the Government works and what it has done in the case of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew's house, and ministers have dealt with questions raised, he said.

PM Lee admitted it was unrealistic to hope the matter - which has gained international attention and affected the country's reputation - would be put to rest.

But he hoped that following the statements made by him and Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean as well as the debate, Singaporeans would be in a better position to judge the facts and see the issue in perspective.

No MPs had produced additional charges or substantiated the claims made by his siblings, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, in the past three weeks, he said, stressing a point several speakers had also made. This showed he and the Government had acted properly and with due process, he said, hoping the session would clear the air over the accusations and calm things down. "People can see that there has been no abuse of power, by me or my Government," he said.

Even before yesterday's sitting began, PM Lee's siblings issued a statement accusing him of misleading their father over the status of the family home.

PM Lee had on Monday disclosed in Parliament that Mr Lee Kuan Yew had signed off on plans to redevelop the house, an indication that even as he wished for it to be demolished when he died, he was prepared to consider other options.

But Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang claimed PM Lee gave their father the impression its gazetting was either "inevitable" or that it was already gazetted.

In response, PM Lee yesterday distributed two family e-mails to MPs showing their father approved the plans for the bungalow and how they were done "honestly, transparently, not on false pretences".

The family quarrel came into the open three weeks ago when PM Lee's siblings issued a statement accusing him of misusing his power to set up a ministerial committee to block demolition and use organs of state against them.

Since then, various claims have been made by the siblings against their brother and government officials, drawing a series of rebuttals almost daily in the lead-up to this week's debate.


A total of 36 ministers and MPs spoke in the House over two days, with many noting that the allegations of abuse were not backed up.

While Monday's sitting had calls by MPs to investigate and resolve the issue thoroughly, yesterday's session had one particularly strong theme: a call to the siblings to reconcile and think of the larger house - Singapore - that their father built.

Said Mr Charles Chong (Punggol East): "Mr Lee Kuan Yew would not wish to see his family affairs demolish the standing and reputation of Singapore that he spent his lifetime building."

Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat noted that 38, Oxley Road holds special significance because what happened in its basement - where the founding of the People's Action Party was discussed - is a relevant part of the nation's history.

Mr Heng, once Mr Lee's principal private secretary, spoke of Mr Lee's willingness to consider alternative views on the matter of redeveloping his house. Mr Lee, he added, observed a strict separation between his private wish and the duty of government, and was committed to a sense of history, the rule of law and good governance.

PM Lee, too, had recused himself from deliberations on the house, and kept a strict separation between his private duty as a son and his public responsibilities as head of Government.

"As several MPs have pointed out, the irony is that if PM were to do what Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling wanted, to impose his private wishes as a son and have the house demolished, we would not have this disagreement made public, but he would have abused his power," Mr Heng said.

Weighing in on the allegations, Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong said he had "full confidence in the integrity of the Prime Minister", whom he had known and worked closely with for over 30 years.

Mr Goh said the statements by PM Lee and Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean accord with his knowledge of how the Government and ministers operate, saying he was fully satisfied that DPM Teo acted independently as chairman of the ministerial committee.

Mr Goh also revealed that he was trying to mediate between PM Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang in their dispute over the demolition of the house, and emphasised to Mr Lee Hsien Yang that the dispute was between him and the Government - as PM Lee had no say over the fate of the house.

Mr Goh also challenged Workers' Party chief Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied GRC) to follow up on his censure of the siblings, by making a clear statement that his party has concluded the claims are baseless.

Mr Low said he could not come to such a conclusion. "We keep our minds open, we are prepared to give the benefit of the doubt to the PM. Personally, I will not be convinced until the entire allegation is given a convincing or conclusive airing," he said.

Speaking before PM Lee, DPM Teo said there is no reason for dispute over the house as both Mr Lee Hsien Yang and the Government recognise no decision needs to be made now as Dr Lee continues to live in it. He said the ministerial committee would "continue doing the work that is needed, calmly and objectively", to study possible options for when a decision has to be made.

"I hope that these unfounded allegations will stop. They have no basis, and undermine confidence in our system of governance, and unfairly tar our public officers who are trying their best to do their duty."

In closing the debate, PM Lee said he agreed on the need to resolve the issue quickly, but going to court would "drag out the process for years, cause further distress to Singaporeans, and distract us from many urgent issues".

Addressing calls by several MPs for a select committee or Commission of Inquiry (COI) as a platform to hear the allegations, Mr Lee said there were no specifics to the headline charge of abuse of power.

But if alleged evidence of wrongdoing emerges, he and the Government will consider what further steps need to be taken.

"We can have a select committee, we can have a COI, I may decide to sue for defamation or take some other legal action," he said.

"But until then, let's get back to more important things that we should be working on."

Thanking MPs for their wishes for his family, PM Lee, who looked emotional, said he hoped there would one day be rapprochement.

"My purpose has not been to pursue a family fight, but to clear the air and to restore public confidence in our system. This is how the system is supposed to work," he added. "When there are questions and doubts about the Government, we bring them out, deal with them openly, and clear the doubts. If anything is wrong, we must put it right. If nothing is wrong, we must say so."

ESM Goh Chok Tong: Oxley house issue a ruse to bring PM Lee Hsien Loong down
By Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

The dispute over 38, Oxley Road is "a fig leaf for the deep cracks" in the Lee family, which perhaps started decades ago, Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong told Parliament yesterday.

Mr Goh, who was Singapore's prime minister from 1990 to 2004, said he had full confidence in the integrity of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, and asked his accusers what the motive was for their attack. "Are they whistle-blowing in a noble effort to save Singapore, or waging a personal vendetta without any care for the damage done to Singapore?

"I have kept my ears open. From what Lee Hsien Yang and his wife are freely telling many others, it is clear that their goal is to bring Lee Hsien Loong down as PM, regardless of the huge collateral damage suffered by the Government and Singaporeans," he said.

Speaking during the debate on allegations of abuse of power by PM Lee in relation to the Oxley Road house, Mr Goh reaffirmed his confidence in the integrity of PM Lee as well as Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean and other Cabinet ministers in the ministerial committee looking into options for the house.

Mr Goh said the dispute, which erupted into the public sphere on June 14 when Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling issued an online statement making many accusations against their brother, has been "blown out of proportion". But their allegations are given weight as they are PM Lee's siblings, he said.

"I have come to the conclusion that neither money nor the house is the real issue. The dispute over 38, Oxley Road is only a fig leaf for the deep cracks within the family, cracks which perhaps started decades ago. What then is the agenda of PM's accusers?" he said.

Parliament also heard yesterday how PM Lee had been given an ultimatum by his siblings on the eve of the 2015 General Election, saying they would go public with their dispute if he did not agree to their demands.

They set a deadline of Sept 1, which happened to be Nomination Day for the polls on Sept 11.

PM Lee told MPs, among other things, his siblings wanted him to undertake to help them get their father's 38, Oxley Road house knocked down. But, he added, he was not prepared to be intimidated on the eve of the polls, and told them so.

Workers' Party gives PM Lee Hsien Loong benefit of doubt, but can’t say if charges are baseless, says Low Thia Khiang
Claims made by PM's siblings have not been fully probed, so WP will keep an open mind, says Low
By Charissa Yong, Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

The Workers' Party (WP) cannot conclude whether the allegations made against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong by his two younger siblings are baseless, as their claims have not been thoroughly investigated yet, party chief Low Thia Khiang said in Parliament yesterday.

Declaring that his party will keep an open mind, he added: "We are prepared to give the benefit of the doubt to the Prime Minister.''

He also said that "personally, I will not be convinced until the entire allegation is given a convincing or conclusive airing".

Mr Low (Aljunied GRC) was responding to Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, who had asked him to state clearly his position on whether the accusations of abuse of power Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had levelled at PM Lee were baseless.

PM Lee's siblings made the claim in a June 14 statement on social media, alleging that he abused his power in his bid to thwart the demolition of the family home in Oxley Road. It spilt into the open the family feud, with the accusations calling into question the integrity of the Government.

For Mr Goh (Marine Parade GRC), the debate reminds him of a 1996 episode when he, as Prime Minister, investigated Mr Lee Kuan Yew and then Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on their purchase of discounted condominium units in Nassim Jade.

He found that they had acted with integrity.

Mr Low was already an MP then, and declared that he was convinced the two Lees were blameless.

But the ongoing dispute over the Oxley Road house was different, Mr Low said yesterday.

First, the Nassim Jade case was a "market rumour" without any allegation of corruption or wrongdoing.

Second, the person at the centre of the Nassim Jade episode - property developer Ong Beng Seng - issued a public statement to explain the matter to clear the air before the Parliament session.

Third, the people in the dispute were neither the prime minister nor the head of the Government at the time.

However, in the current case, he said, the Prime Minister, who is the head of the Government and secretary-general of the People's Action Party (PAP), is accused of wrongdoing.

"This episode, there is no investigation done, it is ownself defend ownself in Parliament with the PAP MPs," he said.

"I wonder how would you convince me, my party and Singaporeans that it is conclusive and something we can all be convinced of entirely?" he added.

Mr Low felt the court was the correct platform to settle the dispute, a point he made on Monday, the first day of the two-day debate.

Yesterday, however, he said he understood the difficulty PM Lee faced in taking legal action against his siblings. Still, he hoped the PM would clarify why he did not sue.

Was he not worried his reluctance to sue his siblings would be seen as double standard, he asked.

Mr Low also pointed out that when Mr Goh was prime minister, he had sued WP politician Tang Liang Hong for making a defamatory police report in 1997.

"Does not this also show that blood is thicker than water? Own sibling cannot sue... but political opponents and critics, sue until your pants drop."

In a swift rejoinder, Mr Goh described Mr Low's remarks as "political sophistry", and added: "As for Tang Liang Hong, he is not (my) brother."

Mr Goh also chided WP MP Png Eng Huat (Hougang) for reading out the allegations the Lee siblings made in their statement.

In doing it on Monday, he was "spreading rumour" when he should have stated his position on what was being read, Mr Goh said.

Replying, Mr Png said he read aloud the allegations because he was seeking clarification on them.

ESM Goh: I have full confidence in PM Lee's integrity
He calls on all MPs and NMPs to state their position on the integrity of PM and the Govt
By Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong has "full confidence" in the integrity of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, he said yesterday.

Speaking in Parliament on allegations of abuse of power by PM Lee in relation to the house at 38, Oxley Road, Mr Goh said the debate must end with a clear conclusion: PM Lee must either be cleared of the allegations or be censured.

"After so much has been said by both sides and the Government, it is clear that the allegations are baseless," he said, calling on MPs, including Workers' Party MPs and nominated MPs, to state their position on the integrity of the PM and the Government.

In reaffirming his confidence in PM Lee, Mr Goh said: "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."

Mr Goh, who was prime minister from 1990 to 2004, recalled how he had called for a similar debate in Parliament in 1996, to look into the purchase of discounted apartment units in Nassim Jade by then Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and then DPM Lee Hsien Loong.

"My judgment and integrity were at stake then as today, when I state my conclusion on the PM's character and integrity," he said.

He questioned the motives of PM Lee's siblings, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling. They had made accusations against their brother in a June 14 statement and other online posts since then.

Mr Goh said the Prime Minister is central in upholding the incorruptibility of Government, which is what distinguishes Singapore. This is why he must be of impeccable character.

"When trust in the Prime Minister disappears, his moral authority and political capital shrivel. Therefore, the constant self-policing, restraint and care of the Prime Minister in wielding the immense power at his disposal is paramount."

Mr Goh also vouched for the character of Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean and the Cabinet ministers in the ministerial committee looking into options for the house. He said he brought Mr Teo into politics after he distinguished himself in the Republic of Singapore Navy, and they stood together in the 1992 by-election in Marine Parade GRC.

"He went on to serve key appointments with distinction. Today, he is Minister-in-charge of the Civil Service and Coordinating Minister for National Security. To suggest that he would do PM's bidding blindly is to insult the civil service and Singapore Armed Forces, never mind the PAP and DPM.

"Many of the other ministers served under Lee Kuan Yew, too. And they have stood up to him. Lee Kuan Yew told them that he wanted to have his house demolished after his death. They said 'no'. They are not yes-men," he said.

It is imperative the issue is settled so that trust can be restored and further damage to Singapore's reputation can be prevented, he added.

Mr Goh urged the Lee siblings to settle their dispute quickly, sort out any misunderstandings and reconcile, or at least prevent the situation from worsening.

"If reason fails, I appeal to the emotions and sensibility of the Lees to stop trying to drag each other down and move on... Keep the quarrel private and seek mediation or arbitration to resolve your differences," he said.

"No one doubts your deep filial piety... your parents were proud of you. This is what your father said during the debate on the Nassim Jade episode: 'The proudest thing (for your mother) are her three children - upright, well-behaved and honourable... They were brought up straight, they are likely to stay straight. It is like, as I have said, a code of honour. If you break that code, you have brought shame... upon yourself and family.' "

PM Lee Hsien Loong: I did not deceive my father
He gave Mr Lee his view of what Govt would likely do with house
By Charissa Yong, Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday rebutted his siblings' claims that he deceived his father Lee Kuan Yew and made him believe the family home in Oxley Road had been gazetted.

"The simple answer is that I did not deceive my father. I explained to you yesterday how my father's primary wish on the house had always been clear - he always wanted it knocked down.

"Where my siblings and I differ is on whether my father was prepared to consider alternatives should demolition not be possible," he said at the end of a two- day debate in Parliament.

PM Lee was responding in Parliament to allegations by his siblings that he abused his power by blocking the demolition of their late father's house at 38, Oxley Road.

Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had accused him of misleading Mr Lee that the gazetting of the house was either "inevitable" or had already happened.

PM Lee said that what he told his father was that the house was likely to be gazetted.

He made the remark on July 21, 2011, after his father met the Cabinet to discuss the status of the house.

Ministers at the meeting were unanimous in not wanting the house destroyed, contrary to the late Mr Lee's wishes.

He later asked his son - the only minister who did not give an opinion on the house - for his view of what the Government would do with it after he died.

PM Lee said: "I gave him my honest assessment. I told him, you have met the Cabinet and heard the ministers' views. If I chaired the Cabinet meeting, this being the view of the ministers and the public, I think it would be very hard for me to override them and knock the house down. I would have to agree that the house be gazetted."

He added: "And if I was not the PM or I did not chair the meeting, all the more likely the house would be gazetted."

He said his father understood.

After that, PM Lee and his wife Ho Ching came up with renovation plans for the house in lieu of demolishing it, and his father approved them. His wife kept the entire family informed and updated on the plans, PM Lee said.

He gave MPs copies of two e-mails on the renovation that she sent to the whole family.

He read them out in Parliament.

In the first e-mail addressed to Dr Lee in January 2012, Ms Ho listed detailed possibilities for the house in descending order of preference.

Ms Ho also mentioned the project architect Mok Wei Wei, who is the managing director of W Architects and has worked on the renewal of Victoria Theatre and conservation of private dwellings.

Conservation requirements typically do not mean preserving the house in its entirety and interior layouts are often changed, she said, citing Mr Mok.

In her second e-mail dated April 2012, she told Mr Lee that the Urban Redevelopment Authority had approved the plans.

PM Lee read out a reply from his father to this e-mail, in which he said he had already granted his permission on the plans.

"It is quite clear, it is quite open, it is not very curt," PM Lee said of his father's reply. "The conservation plan was done honestly and openly, and not on false pretences."

He also explained his statement in Parliament on April 13, 2015, a month after his father died.

Then, he said the Government would take no decision on the house, as long as his sister lived in it.

People were still very emotional over the death of Mr Lee, he added.

Some wanted to honour him by keeping the house, while others wanted to honour him by knocking it down.

"Emotions were high. Whichever decision we made, one way or the other, significant numbers of people would be upset, and you are just creating... tensions for nothing.

"Best if we postpone this major decision for a calmer time, let time pass before we come to the matter."

He added: "That is why I said what I did in Parliament. I see it in no way contradicting my father's wishes, or what I had advised my father when he was alive."

PM Lee's siblings say he 'misled' their father
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

The younger siblings of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong accused him of misleading their father, founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, over the status of the family home.

They claimed that PM Lee had given their father the impression that the gazetting of 38, Oxley Road was either "inevitable" or that the house was already gazetted.

Because of the "misrepresentation", Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who had wanted to demolish the house, had considered "alternatives" to demolition, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling said.

In Parliament on Monday, PM Lee had revealed that his father had approved of renovation plans to the house, which would involve demolishing the private living spaces but preserving the basement dining room which had historical significance.

He said this showed that while Mr Lee wanted to demolish the house, he was prepared to consider other options, if the Government decided otherwise.

The younger Lee siblings alleged that their brother wanted to preserve the house for political gain.

PM Lee has denied this.

In a Facebook post yesterday morning, which he said was also on behalf of his sister, Mr Lee Hsien Yang wrote: "From 2010, LHL improperly misrepresented to our father LKY that gazetting of 38, Oxley Road was either 'inevitable' or that the house was already gazetted. We now know that no decision had been made."

Mr Lee Hsien Yang cited an e-mail dated Oct 3, 2011, from their father to all three Lee siblings as well as PM Lee's wife Ho Ching, in which the patriarch wrote that "Loong as PM has indicated that he will declare it a heritage site. That will put an end to any rebuilding".

This was proof that their father was sceptical about the renovation plans, said Mr Lee Hsien Yang, as it would be inconsistent with PM Lee's insistence that the house would be gazetted.

He added: "In Parliament, LHL has tried to play with words, asserting that just because Lee Kuan Yew left instructions for what to do if the house was gazetted, that means that he 'accepted' that the house should be gazetted."

He said that leaving instructions for how to deal with a "bad event" did not imply acceptance or desire for such an outcome.

"Suppose someone leaves instructions saying, 'I don't want my books to catch fire. But if my books do catch fire, please call my insurance company.'

"That does not mean that he 'accepts' that his books will catch fire. Obviously, it is not an excuse to burn his books."


We all practise making mountains out of molehills. It is a simple matter of a battleship telegram and three old letters which my wife came across in 38, Oxley Road, and told me about. I thought they were significant and relevant to the exhibition on Mr Lee which NHB was putting up.

And I facilitated and arranged for her to pass it to the PMO, and for the PMO to send it on to the NHB exhibition. That's all. You call that representing the Prime Minister's Office. She didn't have a business card from the PMO.

- PRIME MINISTER LEE HSIEN LOONG, in response to Workers' Party chief Low Thia Khiang on allegations that his wife Ho Ching had acted on behalf of the Prime Minister's Office in loaning items from 38, Oxley Road to the National Heritage Board.


If I am a policeman and I know there is an investigation against some family member of mine for drugs or money laundering or something, I have to keep that confidential, I can't go and tell him.

But if it comes to my knowledge that somebody, my wife or my daughter or my son-in-law, went to a government department and roughed up the place and demanded to be given special attention or demanded special terms for their deal, then I would better go and tell them straightaway.

- PM LEE, to Non-Constituency MP Daniel Goh on the distinction between public and private matters. Mr Goh cited PM Lee sending a letter of objection to his brother over a Deed of Gift which he obtained in his official capacity as Prime Minister.

PM Lee says siblings threatened to go public with dispute during 2015 polls
By Charissa Yong, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday revealed how his siblings had issued him an ultimatum on the eve of the 2015 General Election, saying they would go public with their dispute with him if he did not agree to their demands.

They set a deadline of Sept 1, which happened to be Nomination Day for the polls on Sept 11.

Among other things, PM Lee told MPs, his siblings wanted him to undertake to help them get their father's 38, Oxley Road house knocked down.

This was part of a deal that the Lee siblings had tried to reach in which PM Lee would transfer the house to them for a nominal $1, if they stopped making allegations against him, he said.

But, he added, he was not prepared to be intimidated on the eve of the polls.

"I told them I was very busy, and they would surely understand I had a lot on my plate. I would respond as soon as the elections were over, which I did," he said.

He also pointed out that he had asked his siblings to clarify the circumstances surrounding their father's last will.

PM Lee had noted previously how he had grave doubts about how that final will had come to be drafted and the role played by his brother, Mr Lee Hsien Yang, and his wife, Mrs Lee Suet Fern, in it.

The Sept 1 deadline passed without event.

This revelation came to light in Parliament yesterday as the PM sought to explain why his offer to transfer the 38, Oxley Road house to his siblings for a nominal sum fell through.

PM Lee gave details of these and other family matters in Parliament yesterday, saying he had always wanted to manage the family matter privately. He had even compromised some of his own interests to seek an amicable solution.

Over two days in Parliament, MPs like Ms Sun Xueling (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) asked why PM Lee had offered to transfer the house to his sister for $1, but later transferred it to his brother at market value.

Mr Henry Kwek (Nee Soon GRC) asked why PM Lee did not raise his concerns over his father's will earlier, before it was deemed valid and granted probate. PM Lee addressed both issues.


In May 2015, PM Lee offered to sell the house for $1 to his sister to allay his siblings' unhappiness over their father leaving the house to him, as his share of the estate.

All he asked was that if the property were sold later, or acquired by the Government, all proceeds would go to charity.

PM Lee said his brother "wanted in on the deal", to jointly buy the house with Dr Lee for $1.

In a Facebook post after yesterday's sitting, Dr Lee Wei Ling said she had asked Mr Lee Hsien Yang to join in on the deal.

But disagreements arose over the conditions of the deal, said PM Lee. He said his siblings started making allegations against him.

"I told them that they would have to stop attacking me if they wanted the deal done, because otherwise... there was no point my transferring the house to them," he said.

But he could not agree to his siblings' demand that he undertake to help them campaign for their father's house to be torn down.

"I said, I cannot do that. I do not know what you will do, and I do not know whether I will agree with everything you will do," said the Prime Minister.

After the election, PM Lee made a fresh offer to sell the house at full market value to his brother to break the impasse. The only condition of this deal was that each brother donate half the value to charity.

The deal was inked in December 2015. This plan was a variation on what had been discussed with their father, but it had not been adopted.

"I hoped that that would settle the problem and I could keep the matter low-key," said PM Lee.


Later, when the ministerial committee studying options for the house asked all three Lee siblings for their views, PM Lee wrote in with his thoughts. The siblings commented on each other's views.

But because his brother and sister emphasised the first part of the clause in their father's will about demolishing the house, PM Lee said he felt the need to explain the circumstances surrounding the will.

His sister-in-law, Mrs Lee, was involved in the making of the seventh and final will.

It differed from the previous ones in the shares of the estate it gave to each sibling, and included a clause on demolishing the house that had been taken out of the two most recent wills.

MPs have asked if Mrs Lee's involvement was a conflict of interest as her husband, Mr Lee Hsien Yang, was a beneficiary of the estate.

PM Lee said yesterday that he chose to make statutory declarations on the matter due to its gravity. A person may be jailed or fined if he is found to have made a false statutory declaration.

PM Lee said he made his statements privately because he did not want to escalate the quarrel.

He released summaries of the declarations publicly only on June 14, when his siblings made public their allegations against him.

"I was forced to respond," he said.

No basis for select committee now, says PM Lee
By Joanna Seow and Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong did not rule out the possibility of a parliamentary select committee or a commission of inquiry (COI) being formed should evidence of wrongdoing emerge.

But, he told Parliament as he wrapped up a two-day debate on charges of abuse of power, there is no basis for that right now.

He said: "People can see that there has been no abuse of power, by me or the Government."

The debate has given Singaporeans a full account of how the Government works, and what it has done in the case of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew's house.

And allegations have been aired and rebutted.

No evidence of abuse of power has been produced in the two days of debate, PM Lee said.

"Even the opposition is not accusing the Government of abuse of power. So, it is not a case of oneself defend oneself. Why do we need in these circumstances a select committee or COI, and drag this out for months?" he asked.

Referring to a jibe made by Workers' Party chief Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied GRC) yesterday when he expressed the hope that the feud between the Lee siblings would not become a "Korean drama show", PM Lee said: "It would be another Korean drama full-scale serial. Should we set up select committees to investigate every unsubstantiated allegation, every wild rumour?"

If, however, evidence of wrongdoing emerges, he and the Government will consider what steps to take. But until then, he said, "let's get back to more important things that we should be working on".

Several MPs across party lines, such as Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied GRC), Nominated MP Kuik Shiao-Yin, Mr Louis Ng (Nee Soon GRC) and Mr Zaqy Mohamad (Chua Chu Kang GRC), had suggested forming a select committee or COI to conduct an official investigation.

But PM Lee's reply is that there have been no specifics to his siblings' accusations of abuse of power. "What specifically did I do that was wrong?... Who was involved? When did it happen?"

If MPs believe something is wrong, it is their duty to pursue it, and make allegations of wrongdoing in their own name, he added.

The accusers are free to get in touch with MPs, including opposition MPs, to tell their story so that MPs can raise it on their behalf in Parliament. That is the purpose of parliamentary privilege, so that MPs can make allegations in the House without fear of being sued for defamation, he said.

He added: "If having heard the Government, you are still not satisfied, then by all means demand a select committee or a COI, but do not just repeat allegations and attribute them to others, or ask for a select committee or COI because accusations are around."

The public dispute between PM Lee and his younger siblings, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, has captured the nation's attention in the past few weeks.

But it is time to move forward, PM Lee said as he brought two days of debate to a close yesterday.

He highlighted Nominated MP Chia Yong Yong and Mr Low urging Singaporeans to focus on more pressing issues, and unite.

"I fully agree with them. We must all get back to work. This is not a soap opera. Come together, tackle the challenges before us," said PM Lee. "My team and I will do our best to continue building this Singapore, keeping it safe and making it prosper."

Lucien Wong, Hri Kumar strengthen AGC: PM Lee
By Rachel Au-Yong, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Singapore must have a strong Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) to defend its interests, and the appointment of private-sector lawyers Lucien Wong and Hri Kumar Nair to the top positions will make the institution stronger, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday.

He made no bones about his endorsement of Mr Wong, his former personal lawyer who was appointed Attorney-General in January, or Mr Hri Kumar Nair, a former People's Action Party MP who became the Deputy Attorney-General in March.

He also rebutted suggestions by the opposition that the two men might find themselves conflicted because of their background, and pointed to what they brought to the table for Singapore.

"The role (of Attorney-General) is becoming more complex and we need the most capable people to defend our interests," he said, noting a recent application by Malaysia to challenge the International Court of Justice's judgment over Pedra Branca.

"We are confident of our case. We think the Malaysian case has no merit. But unless we have a top-notch team, we may mishandle the case with very serious consequences. Do you want to take a chance?" he said.

He told Parliament he had "endorsed (Mr Wong) with confidence" after his name came up as a candidate to succeed Mr V.K. Rajah as Attorney-General, as he was a good lawyer: "I was even more confident because I had direct personal experience working with him on (the Oxley) case."

He also told Cabinet that though Mr Wong was his lawyer and the opposition may make an issue of it, he would not consider it an impediment. "Everyone involved in the appointment was fully aware that this was the basis on which I was recommending him," he said.

President Tony Tan Keng Yam was notified of Mr Wong's relationship with PM Lee, and after the appointment was approved, the Law Society welcomed it, PM Lee added.

Similarly, with Mr Nair, PM Lee said his experience as an MP and lawyer gave him confidence that he would make a good Deputy Attorney-General.

On Monday, several Workers' Party MPs had questioned the propriety of appointing Mr Wong and Mr Nair to their positions earlier this year.

The appointment of Mr Wong had been cited by PM Lee's younger brother Mr Lee Hsien Yang as an example of abuse of power in relation to the dispute over 38, Oxley Road.

PM Lee reiterated that it is normal for lawyers to have existing clients and connections, and to encounter potential conflicts of interest when they change jobs: "In fact, lawyers with no clients and connections probably have no jobs."

He added that it is standard practice for professional lawyers to recuse themselves when matters come up that they had previously dealt with in another capacity.

"So, there is no problem of conflict at all in Lucien Wong or Hri Kumar becoming AG and DAG. If matters come up which they had previously handled as private lawyers, they just recuse themselves and let others deal with it," he said.

This would be the case with the house, he added.

"Lucien Wong was my lawyer, but now he is the AG, I have lost a good lawyer, he is not advising me anymore in this matter and in the AGC, the Government cannot use Lucien Wong either to advise it on this matter because he is conflicted... So, on this matter, another officer in AGC takes charge, Lucien Wong is out of it," he said.

PM Lee hopes for reconciliation with siblings
He hopes resentments, grievances won't spill over to next generation
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh and Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

One day, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong hopes to reconcile with his siblings. "It will be a difficult and a long road, but I hope that one day, there will be rapprochement," he said in a speech that had several MPs wiping away tears.

The three children of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew have been locked in a public feud over the fate of their father's house at 38, Oxley Road.

Since June 14, the younger Lees have kept up a flurry of attacks against their brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, in whom they say they have "lost confidence".

Over the course of the two-day debate - which unearthed intimate family matters even as it dug into allegations of abuse of power - several members, including Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong and Nominated MP Chia Yong Yong, had expressed their hope for reconciliation in the family.

Things took an emotional turn yesterday, when PM Lee recalled the sombre week of mourning that followed his father's death on March 23, 2015.

Voice wavering, he said the most difficult moment for him was when he was delivering his father's eulogy at the state funeral service.

He had recounted then how, when he was about 13, the late Mr Lee had told him: "If anything happens to me, please take care of your mother, and your younger sister and brother."

Singapore was then part of Malaysia, and was embroiled in a fierce fight with the central government and the communalists.

"My father didn't tell me, but he knew his life was in danger. Fortunately, nothing happened to my father then. He brought up the family, and I thought we had a happy family. And he lived a long and full life," said PM Lee.

"Little did I expect that after my parents died, these tensions would erupt with such grievous consequences and, after so many years, I would be unable to fulfil the role which my father had hoped I would. So, I hope one day, these passions will subside and we can begin to reconcile."

He added that he hoped his siblings would not let their resentments and grievances with one generation spill over to the next.

PM Lee had to once again make his case on his reluctance to take his siblings to court after Workers' Party chief Low Thia Khiang grilled him on this.

"In normal circumstances, I would surely sue because the accusations of abuse of power are so grave. But suing my own brother and sister in court would further besmirch our parents' names," he said.

He stressed that he had, from the start, wished to resolve the dispute privately, without escalating it and resorting to legal recourse.

"I adopted this approach because it involves family, and I was hoping all along to work out an amicable resolution even if that meant compromising some of my own interest," he said.

But when his siblings made public allegations against him, he was forced to respond, he said, adding that this is not a road he wants to go down further if he can help it.

PM Lee said: "At each point, I decided not to try to enforce my full legal rights. My priority was to resolve the matter privately and avoid a collision."

Although he agreed with Mr Low that everything possible should be done to bring the feud to a swift resolution, PM Lee said that going to court will not achieve this.

"It would drag out the process for years, cause further distress to Singaporeans and distract us from the many urgent issues that we must deal with," he said.

DPM Teo Chee Hean hopes for Lees to resolve issues
Minister, who has known Lee siblings for many years, offers them conciliatory words
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean yesterday had conciliatory words for the younger Lee siblings, who had over the weeks levelled attacks against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his Government.

Drawing on his personal relationships with Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, Mr Teo expressed his hope that the family will find it in themselves to resolve their disagreements.

Mr Teo said he has known both brothers for more than four decades, serving for some of those years as colleagues and comrades in the Singapore Armed Forces.

They have contributed much to Singapore, and he holds them both in high regard.

"It is with deep sadness that the Hsien Yang I see now is not the Hsien Yang I knew. I see hurt and his strong emotions consuming him. I do not understand what underlying deep-rooted reasons there may be for this," said Mr Teo.

"But for Hsien Yang, I hope these strong emotions I see now in his heart will dampen over time, and that he will find peace and solace within himself. He has more to contribute to Singapore if he chooses to do so. I wish Hsien Yang and his family well, as I always have."

As for Dr Lee, whom he has known for many years too, Mr Teo noted that she must have had a difficult time these past few years, looking after her parents when they were unwell, and losing both while facing her own health challenges.

"For Wei Ling, the Government has said that it will not do anything to affect her right to continue living at No. 38, Oxley Road," he said. "I wish her happiness, time to do the things which she enjoys with her friends, now that she has the time, and above all, good health and a long life."

He hoped the siblings can resolve their private disagreements within the family, "with the passage of time, and the cooling of emotions".

"Singaporeans, too, can give the space to Prime Minister Lee and his siblings to work through their disagreements," he added.

Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat also shared his thoughts on the children of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew. The former principal private secretary to Mr Lee noted that all three had made their contributions to Singapore: PM Lee, with a lifetime of public service; Mr Lee Hsien Yang at the SAF and at Singtel, where he was chief executive officer; and Dr Lee as a passionate paediatric neurologist.

Dr Lee, he noted, built up the National Neuroscience Institute well when she was heading it.

"I appreciate Dr Lee's care and concern for me when I was hospitalised last year," said Mr Heng, who had suffered a stroke, adding that she visited him and advised him on his condition.

"All of us - the children of Mr and Mrs Lee, as well as fellow Singaporeans - share one goal, which is to honour the legacy of Mr and Mrs Lee."

Mr Heng noted a Facebook post by Mr Lee Hsien Yang, in which he stated that his hope was to ensure his father's wishes were honoured.

" I believe I speak for all members in this House and many Singaporeans when I say we all hope to do the same, to honour Mr Lee's wishes, and furthermore to honour his legacy and the ideals and principles of our founding leaders," he said.

Ministerial committee on house will carry on with its work: DPM Teo
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

The ministerial committee which has been attacked over charges of abuse of power relating to the house of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew will continue its work calmly and objectively, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean said yesterday.

Reiterating that there is no basis to these allegations, he set out possible steps ahead for the committee.

Mr Teo told Parliament he will consult his colleagues on whether it would be useful to put out the range of options for 38, Oxley Road for the public to ponder, without having to arrive at a decision now.

But, he said: "I need to weigh this against arousing emotions again, when what we can really benefit from now is time for calm reflection, especially when no decision is needed now."

Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling's accusations against the committee have stoked concerns, with 16 MPs weighing in on the matter over the past two days. The younger Lees claim it was formed to block their father's wish to demolish 38, Oxley Road at the behest of their elder brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Mr Teo said there is nothing mysterious about this committee. It is a matter of due process for the Government, and while PM Lee's siblings have charged that it was "shrouded in secrecy", they knew about it and its terms of reference.

Mr Teo explained it was formed to examine the property's historical significance, the late Mr Lee's thinking on it, and possible plans for the house and neighbourhood.

"These are all matters which the Government has to take responsibility for, and must plan for. These are not private matters," he said.

The committee is starting the process now, so that "drawer plans" are ready for the government of the day to refer to, at the time when a decision must be made.

"This is just the normal process of Government doing its work, properly, calmly and objectively," he said. "Usually people will find this quite boring, so there is nothing to get excited about when we form yet another committee."

To questions from MPs on why the Government had chosen to set up a committee instead of relying on government agencies, Mr Teo said the committee is not replacing these agencies in their work.

It merely seeks to improve coordination and oversight on the matter of the Oxley Road house. This, he added, does not preclude consultations with heritage professionals and the public at a later stage.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten) asked whether PM Lee had any influence on government deliberations relating to the house.

"PM Lee did not. But Mr Lee Hsien Loong as a private person was invited to convey his views to the ministerial committee in the same way his siblings were," Mr Teo said. "He did so formally and in writing, and this is proper and correct. The lines are clear."

He pledged the Government will carry out its responsibilities on the issue objectively, fairly and calmly.

"I would like to assure this House, and all the siblings that on the matters that I have the responsibility to deal with, in particular with regard to No. 38, Oxley Road, I will continue to deal with them objectively and fairly, all the time working for the interests of Singapore and Singaporeans," he said.

NHB had asked Lee Suet Fern to recuse herself over Deed of Gift
By Rachel Au-Yong, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

The National Heritage Board had initially found Mrs Lee Suet Fern's offer to facilitate a donation deal with Mr Lee Kuan Yew's estate useful, but ended up being caught in a private family dispute.

This picture emerged when National Development Minister Lawrence Wong and Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean spoke about a Deed of Gift involved in the exhibition yesterday. Eventually, NHB had to ask Mrs Lee, its board director, to recuse herself from matters related to the deed.

Mrs Lee had offered to help with a deal that would see items from the 38, Oxley Road house donated as artefacts for an exhibition on Singapore's founding fathers in 2015.

But MPs wondered if there was a conflict of interest, as she is also the wife of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's brother, Mr Lee Hsien Yang, an executor of Mr Lee's will.

NHB had thought Mrs Lee would be "useful as an intermediary" with the Lee family, said Mr Wong.

"Later, as NHB had to engage in more extensive discussions with the executors to resolve the legal issues, the chairman of NHB approached her on June 12 to recuse herself on matters concerning the deed, which she did," he said.

These issues included whether the will's executors, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, could enter the deed without consulting all its beneficiaries - including their older brother PM Lee.

PM Lee had also taken issue with "highly unusual" clauses in the deed, like the right to buy back the donated items at $1 as long as the house was not demolished.

A second condition was to display only the first part of the demolition clause in Mr Lee's will during the exhibition - citing his wish to demolish the house.

But the second part of the clause, which concedes the possibility that the house may not be demolished, was not to be displayed.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang had previously criticised NHB's decision to delay exhibiting the items after signing a legally binding deed.

Yesterday, Mr Wong said: "No one realised there were these sharp differences of views...

"The executors spoke for all the beneficiaries - this was my assumption too when NHB updated me on the discussion, and I only realised the situation was very different when I spoke to PM. With the benefit of hindsight, some of these roles should have been better clarified, and NHB has strengthened these roles internally."

Speaking later on the issue, DPM Teo defended the board, saying: "If the NHB is to be faulted for anything, it is that they were drawn, through this Deed of Gift, into this private disagreement."

Referring to the demolition clause requirement, he said he was uncomfortable with NHB, a public institution, being drawn into "presenting a particular point of view which was incomplete".

But as NHB had already signed the deed, he agreed with Mr Wong that they should proceed with the exhibition rather than have a public controversy.

"Contrary to this being an abuse of power, these were efforts to keep NHB, a public agency, and to keep a major public exhibition neutral... It is ironic that these efforts to keep our public agencies neutral is now being distorted into allegations of abuse of power for private interests," he said.

Mr Wong said PM Lee would have been entitled to receive a copy of the agreement with the executors, both as a beneficiary of the estate as well as in his official capacity.

Lee Kuan Yew 'held strong views but could be persuaded': Heng Swee Keat
LKY's willingness to do so seen in previous instances
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew held strong views on certain issues when he was alive, but could change his mind when persuaded by robust arguments, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat said yesterday.

The late Mr Lee's willingness to do so could be seen in when he changed his mind on the issue of the benefits of exposing children to languages in their early years.

Mr Heng, who was Mr Lee's principal private secretary from 1997 to 2000, said Mr Lee initially believed that the benefits of early exposure would wash out as the child grew.

But he changed his mind after evaluating evidence over the years, and even set up a fund, with his own money and from other donors, for bilingualism in 2011.

He asked Mr Heng, who was education minister from 2011 to 2015, to guide his ministry in using the fund to boost bilingualism across all levels, with special attention paid to those in their pre-school years.

"I share this experience to show Mr Lee's willingness to change his views if he was presented with robust arguments," Mr Heng said on the second day of a debate on allegations of abuse of power brought against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong by PM Lee's siblings.

Yesterday, Mr Heng recounted a Cabinet meeting in July 2011 which Mr Lee was invited to attend, and during which he stated his preference for the house to be demolished after he died.

Mr Lee also listened to the views of the Cabinet. "Except for PM, who did not speak, Cabinet members were unanimous in persuading him that the house should not be demolished. All of us who spoke felt deeply that, as a young nation, we needed a deeper sense of history, and that the house was of historical significance," said Mr Heng.

Mr Lee looked "very thoughtful" after the session, he said.

Cabinet members did not hear from Mr Lee until December that year when he sent them a note.

That December 2011 note was read out on Monday in Parliament by PM Lee. In it, Mr Lee stated that if the house was preserved, its foundations needed to be reinforced and the building refurbished.

Mr Heng said: "To me, that note, sent five months after the meeting, showed that he had been mulling over the issue during that period, and, importantly, he had taken other views on board."

The note also showed that Mr Lee felt it was proper and important to inform the Government "that he was prepared to consider the possibility that the government of the day might decide not to demolish the house".

Mr Heng, responding to a question by Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC), said that no Cabinet minister had put pressure on Mr Lee .

"Despite his seniority and his role as the founding prime minister of Singapore, he did not once use his status to advance his case. He just stated his preference, and then listened intently to the views of Cabinet members," said Mr Heng, referring to what Mr Lee did at the July 2011 Cabinet meeting.

He also said that each time Mr Lee wrote to Cabinet on the issue, he had done so of his own volition.

Yesterday, Mr Heng also pointed to an application that Mr Lee submitted to the Urban Redevelopment Authority in 2012 to renovate the house as further proof that Mr Lee had accepted the possibility that the Government might choose not to demolish the house.

"This shows that Mr Lee had a plan, and he put it into action," said Mr Heng.

Basement dining room 'holds significance for country, not just PAP'
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

The events that unfolded in the basement dining room of 38, Oxley Road during the early days of Singapore's history hold a special significance for the country, and not just the ruling People's Action Party (PAP).

This was the reason why Cabinet members did not want the house demolished.

They conveyed this view to founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew at a Cabinet meeting in July 2011.

Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat recounted this meeting in Parliament yesterday, adding that Cabinet members were unanimously against demolishing the house because of its historical significance.

The basement dining room was the site of many historic meetings between Mr Lee and his team of pioneer leaders.

"Those years marked a pivotal moment in our nation's history - in fact, they were the start of a series of events that led to independence," said Mr Heng.

"It is therefore right and proper that we consider this history in any decision to demolish or preserve the house, or parts of it."

Mr Heng said he was surprised that Workers' Party MP Png Eng Huat (Hougang) "took such a narrow and partisan view" of the history of the house.

On Monday, Mr Png had described 38, Oxley Road as "just an old house", and noted that its basement dining room was the site of the founding of the PAP, and not modern Singapore.

Mr Heng said yesterday: "What happened in the basement dining room and at Oxley Road is relevant not just for the history of the PAP."

He pointed out that the house was not just where the PAP began in 1954, but also where its leaders made the "difficult decisions" to contest elections in 1955 and 1959.

Mr Heng also said Mr Lee was convinced that Singapore needed a sense of history.

"Not just in knowing what happened in the past, but why it happened - that would help to anchor and guide us for the future," he said.

He said that five months after the meeting, Mr Lee wrote to Cabinet to say that if the house was preserved, its foundations needed to be reinforced. It showed he had taken "other views on board", said Mr Heng.

Yesterday, other MPs also spoke about the historical significance of 38, Oxley Road, with one - Ms Cheng Li Hui (Tampines GRC) - calling for the house to be preserved.

"It is a part of Singapore's history. It has meaning for all Singaporeans, past, present and future. This is my view and that of many of my residents," she said.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten) said all options for the property should be considered. "Once demolished, part of our history would be gone forever," he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean has said that demolishing the house but preserving its basement dining room would be a good intermediate solution to the dispute surrounding the fate of the house.

Singapore: The big house greater than 38, Oxley Road
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

The real house that founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew built is not the one at 38, Oxley Road, but Singapore - the country that he had left to all Singaporeans.

Ministers and several MPs yesterday urged Singaporeans to focus on building up this "big house" and move forward from the ugly spat Mr Lee's children are embroiled in.

The three siblings are tangled in a dispute over the fate of their family home: 38, Oxley Road.

Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang want the house demolished, which they say is in accordance with their father's wishes.

But Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, they allege, wants to preserve it for political gain and, in his bid to do so, abused his powers.

PM Lee has refuted their allegations.

Several MPs lamented in Parliament yesterday that the dispute has damaged Singapore's reputation.

Deputy Speaker Charles Chong (Punggol East) said there was a "sense of disquiet" among those who considered Mr Lee Kuan Yew the foremost founding father of modern Singapore.

The late Mr Lee would not wish to see his family in this current state, he added.

"But more importantly, I think Mr Lee Kuan Yew would not wish to see his family affairs demolish the standing and the reputation of Singapore that he had spent a lifetime building," he said.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten) said he and his residents were grieved by the allegations made by the two siblings, saying the accusations had brought "dishonour" to their father's name.

There are ways to resolve such disputes without the need for such "public accusations".

"The legacy of (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) seems likely to be damaged by the continued accusations, and we just have to move on," he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean sought to draw the attention of the House back to Singapore, the house the late Mr Lee "left to all of us".

He said Singaporeans are "sons and daughters" who have been brought up by Mr Lee and his team of pioneer leaders, and learnt the lessons that he taught.

"He and our pioneers brought us all up. Built this house which we call Singapore," said DPM Teo.

"We have not been written into Mr Lee's will. But what he has left to all of us is more precious, more valuable. He left us our Singapore, our big house, which he worked together with us to build."

Earlier, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat said that Singapore is a "greater house" than 38, Oxley Road, one that Mr Lee had built lovingly.

He urged MPs not to let the dispute distract them from the task of honouring Mr Lee's wish for a successful Singapore, a mission he had devoted his life to.

This was the way to "honour Mr Lee's wishes and legacy", he added.

"This house - we cannot allow to be demolished," Mr Heng said to loud approval from MPs as they thumped the arms of their chairs.

Taking the call a step further, DPM Teo expressed confidence in Singapore, saying it will remain strong and robust.

"Mr Lee and our pioneer leaders put in firm foundations - robust processes, institutions and a system of governance which continue to strengthen," he said.

As Singapore ponders the options for 38, Oxley Road, Singaporeans should remember the struggles of the country's early years and the values passed down by the country's leaders, he added.

"This should also be an occasion to unite us. There is no reason why this should divide us. Mr Lee in his wisdom left us enough room to decide, and placed his trust in us to do so," DPM Teo said.

Oxley Road debate: Three bright red lines drawn
Singapore's legislature affirms no basis for allegations of abuse of power by PM Lee - for now. But this is unlikely to be the end.
By Chua Mui Hoong, Opinion Editor, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

After two days of debate in Parliament on the Oxley Road issues, what has emerged?

I would say: Three bright red lines have been drawn, if we can see them.

Murky allegations have swirled for three weeks about Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. These centre on charges that he abused his power as PM to block the demolition of his late father's house at 38, Oxley Road. That the allegations came from PM Lee's own siblings - brother Hsien Yang and sister Wei Ling - lent them weight, and rocked a nation.

As charge and counter-charge were posted on Facebook, denting the image of the Lees, the Government and Singapore, PM Lee decided to call for a parliamentary sitting to discuss the allegations. In so doing, he subjected himself to parliamentary scrutiny.

After two days of debate with at least four ministers making statements and MPs questioning them, PM Lee concluded by saying that the allegations remained unsubstantiated; he had given account of his own actions; and that Parliament could now move on. "People can see that there has been no abuse of power, by me or my Government," said PM Lee.

He did not see a need to call for a select committee, as some MPs had suggested. He had not sued his siblings in court for defamation, although, as noted throughout the debate, Singapore ministers have sued for far less damaging comments.

But as he made clear, the Government, and he personally, were keeping their options open, depending on what else the siblings might say, since there is "freedom of speech" and no one can control what they might say.

He acknowledged that it was unrealistic to expect that the session would lead to a full resolution of the dispute as it was unclear what else might follow. But at least the session had helped clear the air, he argued.

There was indeed an airing of issues that had first been brought to the public domain by the Lee siblings. Within its narrow ambit, Parliament carefully deconstructed and examined the issues and came to a conclusion: that there was no case to answer.

Yet, whether the matter rests here remains in doubt. Within hours of the close of the session, fresh Facebook posts were flying about, with Dr Lee Wei Ling putting up a riposte to disagree with PM Lee's account of the proposed $1 deal for the house that fell through.

So, despite the confidence-building outcome within Parliament, many Singaporeans out there will feel, as Workers' Party (WP) MP Leon Perera noted, that there is "no closure" yet to the whole issue, until the siblings substantiate their allegations and these are examined by an independent panel, or court, or committee.

I agree there is no closure yet. But that is in part because the Lee siblings look set to continue their war of words against their elder brother. The fact that the accusations are likely to continue, however, is no reason to say the Parliament sitting that has just ended was a waste of time.

What that sitting has done is establish that, as of July 4, the elected legislature of Singapore examined the allegations made thus far, and did not find them serious enough to take any action on.

That is the first bright red line drawn. Whatever other allegations may be made later, is for another time.

The second bright red line drawn is that PM Lee accounted for his actions in Parliament, which accepted them.

Although the accusers were absent, their accusations were very much present. PM Lee answered the most serious charges:

• That he abused his power as PM to influence decisions on what to do with the Oxley house.

• That he manipulated a ministerial committee into doing what he wanted.

• That he misused his power as PM to get information about an agreement made between his siblings and the National Heritage Board over items that the siblings gave from their father's estate for a heritage exhibition.

On each of these specific charges, PM Lee gave clear, detailed accounts, corroborated by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean and National Development Minister Lawrence Wong, who are both members of the ministerial committee set up to explore options for the Oxley Road house.

DPM Teo said PM Lee recused himself from decisions on the Oxley house and that the committee operated independently.

Mr Wong said the information PM Lee received about the exhibition gifts as PM would have been given to him in his personal capacity anyway as a beneficiary of the estate of the late Mr Lee.

Nominated MP Chia Yong Yong pressed the last point and asked Mr Wong to clarify whether PM Lee getting the information about the deed of gift as Prime Minister was the same as Mr Lee the private individual and beneficiary getting the information.

Mr Wong, as the minister in charge, said "yes, for all intents and purposes I see no difference".

Whether one agrees with Mr Wong or not, the minister in effect cleared PM Lee of wrongdoing.

As observers watching the Lee siblings' public spat unfold, it is crucial that we try to distinguish between charges directed at Mr Lee Hsien Loong as their brother, and charges about his conduct as PM.

So far, it would appear, their charges made as of July 4, about his abuse of power as PM, did not stick.

He may or may not have been a model son or brother, he could or could not have done better to handle family disagreements as the eldest child, but those family dynamics are irrelevant to the present situation, where we are tasked only to assess whether he abused his power as PM.

So that is the second bright red line. Whatever one thinks of his actions as a family member, Mr Lee Hsien Loong as PM has shown Parliament his actions stand up to scrutiny.

The third bright red line is that, at least in the parliamentary forum, a public accounting has been made.

Parliament is not a reality game show or a frivolous entertainment arena. It is a serious forum. MPs are elected and have the full moral and legal weight of voters' mandate to back them. When they say Aye or Nay, their words matter.

It has to be thus, or we can forget about parliamentary democracy.

To be sure, Singapore's system is far from perfect. A House dominated by People's Action Party MPs will likely hold back on criticising its own leader, especially at a moment as politically charged as this one.

On Monday, Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary spoke of iron sharpening iron as a characteristic of robust debate; alas what I heard in Parliament over these two days was more akin to the thud of wood hitting wood. Apart from the WP MPs and some NMPs like Ms Chia, who quizzed PM Lee and his ministers, and a few PAP MPs such as Ms Sun Xueling and Mr Zaqy Mohamad, most of the others confined themselves to reading out prepared speeches rather than taking on board the new disclosures, and drilling deep into them.

For all the questions raised, no MPs from any corner of the House seemed to take the side of PM Lee's accusers, or offer any evidence to back up their claims, let alone advance them to killer effect.

The third bright red line, therefore, is that, whatever its faults, the House took a close look at allegations of abuse of power by PM Lee and appeared to conclude that there was no basis for those charges.

What's next? The Lee siblings do not look like they will desist from making more allegations. As Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong said, in his trademark blunt manner, Mr Lee Hsien Yang's end game may well be to push for PM Lee to resign.

He said: "From what Lee Hsien Yang and his wife are freely telling many others, it is clear that their goal is to bring Lee Hsien Loong down as PM, regardless of the huge collateral damage suffered by the Government and Singaporeans.

"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."

It was WP chief Low Thia Khiang, in a candid, hard-hitting speech on Monday, who coined the term bright red lines in this debate. He said: "The problem with this whole saga is that the line between the private and the public has been blurred and crossed too many times by the Prime Minister, the Lee siblings and the Government too.

"We need to restore the line, make it a bright red line, resolve the aspects of dispute that have crossed into the public domain and push the dispute back into the private domain."

Unfortunately, from the events of the last three weeks, it looks like Singaporeans will have to put up with blurred lines between private and public, family and national issues, for a while longer.

But at least for now, there has to be some consolation about the bright red line drawn in this debate: That on July 4, based on evidence presented publicly so far, Singapore's elected legislative body implicitly affirmed that the allegations against Mr Lee Hsien Loong for abuse of power as PM were unfounded.

Whether that bright line becomes red from bloody internecine warfare later, no one can tell.

MPs hope doubts over Lee Kuan Yew's last will are looked into
Question of whether Lee Kuan Yew was independently advised 'raises moral issues'
By Yuen Sin, The Straits Times, 5 Jul 2017

Was Mr Lee Kuan Yew independently advised about the contents of his last will?

This question is of legal significance and also raises moral questions, Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten) told Parliament yesterday.

"If there has been any misconduct in relation to the drafting of the will, then it is no longer a private matter," he said.

He was reiterating a point Senior Minister of State for Law Indranee Rajah made on Monday that under Singapore law, the lawyer drafting a will is required to be independent.

Mr Lim said he hoped the matter would be "treated with proper seriousness by the authorities".

"No one should be above the law, regardless of whether the person is the Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew's children or anyone related to the family.

"The challenge by Mr Lee Hsien Yang is that PM Lee is abusing his authority to ask (the) Cabinet to preserve 38, Oxley Road against the wishes of (Mr Lee Kuan Yew). This means the Government has an obligation to better understand what were (Mr Lee Kuan Yew's) wishes."

Mr Lim added that if Mr Lee had in March 2012 authorised architects to submit development applications for 38, Oxley Road, as Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong revealed on Monday, then the demolition clause that was inserted in the last will seems to contradict Mr Lee's position.

In a statement last month summarising a legally binding statutory declaration he had made earlier, PM Lee publicly raised concerns over the circumstances in which his father's final will - the seventh version - was made.

He asked what role his sister-in-law Lee Suet Fern and her law firm had played, and whether they had a conflict of interest, as her husband Lee Hsien Yang stood to gain under the final will.

The sixth will had given Dr Lee Wei Ling an extra share, but the last will reverted to the original equal division among the three siblings.

Ms Indranee had noted that the late Mr Lee had consistently taken independent legal advice for his lawsuits and his first six wills.

The issue was not whether the late Mr Lee knew what he was signing, but "whether he received independent advice as the law uncompromisingly requires", she said.

But it is not for the committee to decide whose claim on how the will was drafted is valid, as it is simply trying to understand Mr Lee's wishes on the house, she added.

Other MPs also raised questions in relation to the will and Mr Lee's intentions about what to do with the Oxley house yesterday.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) had concerns about whether the Cabinet had put pressure on Mr Lee to change his decision on the property during its meeting with him in July 2011.

PM Lee had told the House on Monday that while his father wanted the house demolished after his death, the public, newspaper editors and Cabinet ministers disagreed with his view on the matter.

At a meeting in July 2011 with the Cabinet, ministers were unanimous in telling Mr Lee they were opposed to knocking the house down.

He later accepted a proposal to redevelop his house at 38, Oxley Road, said PM Lee.

"Did the Cabinet ever put pressure on Mr Lee Kuan Yew to change his decision on 38, Oxley Road? Or did the Cabinet mislead Mr Lee by saying that, no matter what his decision is, the Oxley house will be retained?", asked Mr Liang.

Both Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) and Mr Lim also questioned PM Lee's decision to issue on June 15 a summary of points he had made in his statutory declaration, which questioned the circumstances behind the making of the final will.

Oxley Road: Singaporeans want ugly spat to end, say political observers
By Rachel Au-Yong and Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 6 Jul 2017

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 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 it has put to rest the allegations, with the Government providing clarity on key issues that had previously been topics of contention.

These include 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 home.

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 all the 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 home.

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."

She added: "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."

Some observers, however, felt that the debate did not probe deep enough in some areas.

SIM Global Education's Dr Felix Tan noted that fewer than half of the 101 parliamentarians spoke.

He said MPs should have grilled PM Lee more, for example, on how he would handle his siblings' allegations of abuse of power since he is not willing to sue them at this point.

"From what I have seen on social media, which I take with a pinch of salt, many people are not satisfied with the debate but just want to see the matter resolved," said Dr Tan.

Ultimately, the debate has not brought the issue to a close.

This is exacerbated by the fact that PM Lee's siblings are unlikely to let the matter rest, said East Asian Institute senior research fellow Lam Peng Er.

"In the coming days, I am sure things will come in dribs and drabs from the siblings on Facebook because they were not represented in Parliament," he said.

"I don't expect Lee Hsien Yang to ride off into the sunset after conducting guerilla warfare."

Political commentator Derek da Cunha said: "Many Singaporeans will likely identify with the Workers' Party's brand of opposition - being constructive and responsible."

The party had prioritised national interest and did not take potshots at PM Lee, he added.

"The WP was prepared to cut the PM some slack on the matter because emotions can run high in family disputes."

Oxley Road: PM Lee Hsien Loong waives legal immunity for speeches

This means he can be sued for what he said in Parliament regarding Oxley Road dispute
By Tham Yuen-C, Assistant Political Editor, The Straits Times, 6 Jul 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong waived his right to legal immunity yesterday for his speeches in Parliament on the Oxley Road house dispute, making good on a promise he made during the two-day debate.

He released his speeches as statements on the Prime Minister's Office website last night, along with some handouts he had distributed to MPs during the sitting.

This means he can be sued for libel for what he said about the dispute involving him and his two siblings over their late father's house at 38, Oxley Road.

In a note accompanying the statements, he said: "As I stated I would do in my ministerial statement on July 3, 2017, I am reproducing the speech that I made in Parliament here as a statement made by me outside of Parliament, which is not covered by parliamentary privilege."

The sitting this week had been dismissed by his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, and brother, Mr Lee Hsien Yang, who said "only his side of the story will air, with no promise of truthfulness due to parliamentary privilege".

Words spoken in Parliament are privileged to let MPs speak freely without fear of being sued.

PM Lee had said on Monday at the start of his ministerial statement that he would stand by whatever he was going to say. Earlier, he also called on MPs from both sides of the House to grill him, and asked for the People's Action Party Whip to be lifted.

Wrapping up the debate on Tuesday, he said his siblings' accusations about his abuse of power had been rebutted, noting neither they nor any MP had brought up evidence to back the claims.

But it did not put a stop to the bitter row. Last night, Mr Lee Hsien Yang repeated his charge that PM Lee had misused his position and influence over the Government and its agencies to drive his personal agenda.

The family feud had spilled into public view on June 14 when the two siblings posted statements on their Facebook pages to denounce their elder brother for trying to block the demolition of their late father's house against his wish.

They believed their father, founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, wanted the house demolished without compromise, but PM Lee was of the view that Mr Lee was prepared to consider alternatives should the Government decide otherwise.

At the sitting, he cited old correspondence to show Mr Lee's shift in thinking over time.

These letters, which were among the documents released yesterday, were written by the late Mr Lee to the Cabinet between Oct 27, 2010, and Dec 27, 2011.

In the first two letters, he asked the Cabinet to respect his wish for his house to be demolished.

But in the last letter, written after a July 2011 meeting with the Cabinet, he said: "Cabinet members were unanimous that 38, Oxley Road should not be demolished as I wanted. I have reflected on this and decided that if 38, Oxley Road is to be preserved, it needs to have its foundations reinforced and the whole building refurbished. It must then be let out for people to live in. An empty building will soon decline and decay."

Among the other documents PM Lee released were an authorisation letter dated March 28, 2012, signed by Mr Lee, for his house to be redeveloped, and a written permission from the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) dated April 17 the same year.

There were also family e-mails showing that PM Lee's wife, Ms Ho Ching, had kept the family informed of the plans for the house.

In an e-mail with the subject "Oxley renewal concept", sent on Jan 2, 2012, Ms Ho described the various redevelopment options proposed by architect Mok Wei Wei, who was introduced to the family by Mr Lee Hsien Yang.

She also said that if there were objections to renting out the house after it was renovated, the family could move in, with Dr Lee taking a big bedroom, PM Lee and herself taking the other big bedroom, and their son Yipeng taking one of the smaller bedrooms.

The e-mail, addressed to Dr Lee, was also sent to Mr Lee, PM Lee, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife, Mrs Lee Suet Fern.

Another e-mail, dated April 30, 2012, was sent by Mr Lee to Ms Ho.

He acknowledged her e-mail on the same day, in which she informed him the URA had given permission for the redevelopment and that it had a sealed letter, marked secret, for him.

She had also asked him to let her know if he needed her to follow up on the URA letter. Mr Lee said there was nothing to follow up and that he would send her the written permission.

He also sent his acknowledgement e-mail to PM Lee, Dr Lee, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife.

Lee Hsien Yang says he is against PM Lee Hsien Loong, not Government

By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 6 Jul 2017

Mr Lee Hsien Yang last night made plain that the target of his attacks is his brother Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, and not the Government.

In his latest Facebook post, he argued that he was not hitting out at the Singapore Government, but his brother, for failing to live up to the high standards of integrity that his father Mr Lee Kuan Yew had set for those in public service.

"To show evidence that he has failed to meet these standards is not to attack the Singapore system, but to preserve it," said Mr Lee Hsien Yang. The legacy of their father, founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, was more than "bricks and mortar", for he "made sure all government officials acted with justice and integrity", he added.

"He accepted nothing less than incorruptibility, especially for the very top. Singapore can yet live up to his legacy," he said.

He repeated his previous statement that he and his sister Dr Lee Wei Ling "are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of our brother".

"Since Lee Kuan Yew's passing, we have felt threatened by LHL's misuse of his position and influence over the Singapore government and its agencies to drive his personal agenda," he said.

He and Dr Lee want to demolish the 38, Oxley Road house, saying it is in accordance with their father's wishes. They have alleged that PM Lee abused his power to try and preserve the house for political gain.

PM Lee has denied their claims.

Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong told Parliament on Tuesday that the siblings were not "whistle-blowing in a noble effort to save Singapore", rather they were waging a personal vendetta against their brother PM Lee.

Mr Goh said: "From what Lee Hsien Yang and his wife are freely telling many others, it is clear that their goal is to bring Lee Hsien Loong down as PM, regardless of the huge collateral damage suffered by the Government and Singaporeans."

Yesterday, Mr Lee Hsien Yang did not deny this point in his post. He said the "private family dispute" would not have spilt into the open had PM Lee not used government agencies and a ministerial committee to push his agenda.

"Sadly, it is Lee Hsien Loong who has dragged the Government into a personal dispute," he said.

He was referring to a ministerial committee considering options for the house. However, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean had told the House on Monday that well before it was formed, allegations of abuse of power were already being made in smaller circles.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang added that the PM and his wife should not be above the law, adding that PM Lee should abide by the same standards expected of junior civil servants.

Last night, Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam shared a clip of Mr Goh's remarks in Parliament on Facebook, adding: "ESM Goh Chok Tong says what Lee Hsien Yang's real motive is - jealousy, bring down PM Lee Hsien Loong, using house as excuse."

Oxley Road: Lees' public feud takes conciliatory turn; Lee Hsien Yang and Wei Ling say they accept offer to settle dispute in private

By Toh Yong Chuan, The Straits Times, 6 Jul 2017

SINGAPORE - After three weeks of accusations and rebuttals, the public feud between the three children of founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew over their family home has taken a conciliatory turn.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, younger siblings of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, said that they accept their elder brother Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's desire to settle their quarrel in private and will stop posting evidence against him online.

In a seven-page joint statement on Facebook, they said: "We look forward to talking without the involvement of lawyers or government agencies" and added: "We do not wish to see Singapore embroiled in a never-ending public argument. For now, we will cease presenting further evidence on social media, provided that we and our father's wish are not attacked or misrepresented."

The two had gone public with their dispute on June 14, accusing PM Lee of blocking their father's wish to demolish 38 Oxley Road because he wanted to inherit Mr Lee Kuan Yew's political capital. They accused him of abusing his power by hijacking organs of state to pursue his goals. PM Lee has denied their allegations and addressed their charges in a two-day Parliament sitting this week. He also said during the Parliament session that he hoped to reconcile with his siblings one day.

The sticking point between the two sides is the interpretation of Mr Lee Kuan Yew's wish to demolish the house. The younger siblings said that their father was against preserving the house because he did not want to create a monument to him while PM Lee said the founding PM was open to preserving parts of the house because of the heritage value. The basement dining room of the house was the meeting place for founding members of the People's Action Party.

In their latest statement, the younger siblings disclosed that they have not spoken to their elder brother since April 12, 2015 when Mr Lee Kuan Yew's will was read. Mr Lee died on March 23, 2015, aged 91.

They repeated their charge that Parliament was the wrong venue to address the issue as PAP MPs are beholden to PM Lee and cannot be impartial.

"We love Singapore, and want only that it prospers, under a government that has integrity and respects the rule of law. We would not have brought this dispute into the public eye, if there was a neutral and unbiased venue to resolve our differences in private," they said.

They also apologised to Singaporeans for taking their quarrel public. "We are private citizens with no political ambitions. We have no unfiltered access to mainstream media, and are not savvy with social media. We have made a lot of mistakes along the way; please forgive us."

"We seek only to honour our father Lee Kuan Yew's demolition wish," they noted.

Referring to the ministerial committee set up to consider options for the house, they said that they are glad that the committee has acknowledged that it has no authority to rule on the validity of the will and that they will not be making "further submissions to the committee in its current form."

Thanking Singaporeans for their support, they said: "We know some of you have very different views about the house and its preservation. We respect your views and your voice. You have our heartfelt thanks."

"Ultimately, it is up to the government, and the people of Singapore, to decide whether and how to hold (PM) Lee Hsien Loong to account," they added.

Was Lee Kuan Yew rushed into signing his last will?

PM Lee Hsien Loong releases summary of statutory declarations to ministerial committee looking into options for Oxley Road house - 15 June 2017

PM Lee Hsien Loong apologises for damage to Singapore caused by family dispute over Lee Kuan Yew's house at 38 Oxley Road

Mr Lee Kuan Yew and 38 Oxley Road

38 Oxley Road: Symbol of the Singapore story

PM Lee Hsien Loong Ministerial Statement on "Alleged Abuse of Power on 38 Oxley Road" in Parliament on 3 July 2017

38 Oxley Road debate in Parliament:
Day 1 - 3 July 2017
Day 2 - 4 July 2017

Statement by DPM Teo Chee Hean on Ministerial Committee - 17 June 2017

Statement by PM Lee Hsien Loong on 38 Oxley Road - 19 June 2017

Ministerial Statement by PM Lee Hsien Loong on "Alleged Abuse of Power on 38 Oxley Road" - 3 July 2017

Ministerial Statement by DPM Teo Chee Hean on the Ministerial Committee on 38 Oxley Road - 3 July 2017

Closing Statement by PM Lee Hsien Loong on the Ministerial Statements on 38 Oxley Road - 4 July 2017

Closing Statement by DPM Teo Chee Hean on the Ministerial Statements on 38 Oxley Road - 4 July 2017

Oxley Road Dispute

No comments:

Post a Comment