38 Oxley Road dispute: PM Lee addresses abuse of power allegations in Parliament

madam Speaker I'm making this statement today because my siblings dr. Lee whaling and mr. Li Xian yang have made serious allegations of abuse of power against me and my government the allegations seem to concern primarily three matters one the setting up of the Ministerial Committee on 38 lost little tool the deed of gift for some artifacts from the house that were to be displayed in an exhibition by the national heritage board and three accusations of nepotism over my wife and son and accusations that I want my father's house kept standing to bolster my power these allegations are entirely baseless but they have already damaged Singapore's reputation and unrebutted they can affect Singaporeans confidence in the government I therefore have no choice but to address them promptly and publicly I also have to do so in Parliament under the Constitution the Prime Minister is a person who commands the confidence of the majority of the members of parliament as a p.m. I have a duty to explain myself to MPs and to rebut in Parliament the allegations against me and my government I know many Singaporeans are upset by this issue they are tired of the subject and wish it would end I too am upset that things have reached this state as your Prime Minister I deeply regret that this has happened and apologise for Singaporeans for this as a son I'm paying at the anguish that this strife would have caused my parents to feel if they were still alive I intend to clear the air today to explain the matter fully and to answer all questions on the matter I'm not here to make a case against my siblings Parliament is not the place for that what is private I'll try to resolve privately but what is public I have to explain and render count I stand by what I will say in this chamber I shall be separately issuing whatever I say in this debate as a statement by me outside the house which will not be covered by parliamentary privilege to respond to these allegations of abuse of power I will have to go into some background about 38 of C Road and the family discussions on the house so that members can make sense of the allegations but my account will inevitably be from my perspective so I will try my best to be objective and factual I will cover the discussions on 38 Oxley Road when mr. Lee Kuan Yew was alive what happened after miss Lee passed away and then where the matter stands today madam Speaker may I now ask the clerk to distribute handout 1 to members yes please even in one my father's wish held for many years is well known to all Singaporeans he wanted the house at 38 Oxley Road to be demolished after my mother died in 2010 my father wrote to cabinet to put his position on the record this is the first note you have in the bundle which is dated 27th of October 2010 and is a letter from mr. Lee to cabinet and it reads 38 offs Lee Road I've discussed this with my family many a time they agreed with me that 38 Oxley Road should not be kept as a kind of relic for people to through take photos of it or whatever else they want buy demolish it after I'm gone I've seen too many places which are kept frozen in time my most vivid memory is that of nero's final home set of the British naval command of the Indian Ocean fleet in New Delhi actually it was another British generals home but you get the point it was once a grand building kept as a monument with people tramping in and out it became shabby it is not worth the restoration unless they restore it just for people to look at it 38 Oxley Road has no merit as architecture so please respect my wish to have it demolished when I'm no longer cabinet noted his letter a few months later in January 2011 my father published a book hard truths to keep Singapore going in the book the question of preserving his house came up he said I've told the cabinet when I'm dead demolish it he explained again that he did not want the house to become a shambles the cross cost of preservation would be high because the house was built over a hundred years ago and had no foundation if the house was demolished and planning rules could change the value of the land as well as the surrounding plots for go up however after hard truths was published there was a strong public pushback many Singaporeans did not agree with mr. Lee they wanted the house to be preserved this was after all the house of death of Singapore's founding Prime Minister where important political decisions were made that shaped the future of Singapore we are young nation and what the house represents is of particular significance of history and nationhood so in March 2011 my father asked some newspaper editors for their views all the editors replied that they would like it to be kept given its historical importance and heritage value kun Tosa Dali then editor of British are en route to my father I was personally shocked and sad when I first read about you saying that you wanted the house demolished after you are gone the historical value of the house is priceless if we demolish it our next generations will regret it we should avoid making this mistake mr. Lim Jem cone then editor of the inaudible suggested that the house be conserved and turn into a museum like the Sun yat-sen Memorial Hall these were not the answers my heart I hoped again my father then wanted to leave the decision to his children but we told him that only he could decide he then said his decision was to knock it down I told him that in that case he should tell the editors and put it on the record and so he did after the general election in May 2011 mr. Lee retired from the cabinet he then decided to put his views on the record again and that is the second letter in the bundle you have 20th of July 2011 he wrote to cabinet to reiterate that he wanted the house not I read it says I have previously written to cabinet that a house should be demolished it has no foundations and is in poor condition it is difficult to maintain if people start trampling through the house whenever there's piling in cleaning road for new homes hairline cracks begin to appear on the walls so keeping the houses too hazardous and costly I therefore repeat my wish to have the house demolished when I'm no longer alive this is the letter which I referred to an address Parliament on the 13th of April 2015 and said he expressed his wish that the house be not done but I misspoke I said it was December 2015 in fact he wrote this on the 20th of July sorry not 2015 I said December 2011 in fact he wrote this on a 20th of July 2011 when I saw this letter the next morning that means 21st of July 2011 I immediately invited mr. Li to make his case in person to cabinet I thought that with his force of personality and conviction meeting the ministers would give him the best chance to convince cabinet as he had done so many times before my father agreed to come he met the cabinet that very afternoon but the ministers were unanimous in expressing their opposition to knocking the house down I was the only one who did not express their view because I was both the Sun and the PM and therefore conflicted after the meeting my father continued to ponder over how to deal with the house in fact even before the cabinet meeting he had been discussing with a family how to go about demolishing the house and redeveloping the site we explored in the family all kinds of permutations to demolish the house and redevelop the site maximize value we discussed who to inherit the property whether it should be one of the children several of the children whether to demolish the house before after my father died whether to donate the proceeds to charity after the site was redeveloped and if so which children would share in the donation and which charities to donate to at one point my brother suggested that my father gift the properties of Singapore subject to the condition that the house be demolished and a small public park be built in its place I said that I thought this was worth considering but I offered another option to demolish the house and redevelop the site as my father wanted but then to sell off the property and donate the proceeds to charity I asked my father between the two which he preferred and he replied the latter in other words demolished the house redevelop sell-off and donate the proceeds to charity he had even had some ideas which charities he wanted he was a practical minded man in August 2011 about a month after the cabinet meeting my father decided to will 38 Oxley wrote to me as part of my share of the SD and he told their family so ho ting and I knew my father's wishes and also at my mother's feelings we also knew how cabinet and the public billed the matter we started discussing alternatives with my father to see how best we could fulfill his wishes in the event that the house could not be demolished my father's was concerned was that the house should not become rundown and dilapidated and that it should not be an expensive burden to maintain my late mother had a different concern privacy she felt strongly that her private living spaces should always remain private she had been most distressed at the thought of people tramping through her personal spaces after she and my father passed away to book at how they had lived even when not so familiar people came into the house for one reason or the other to meet her my father she would complain afterwards you could see them looking around eyes open to try and find out how we live and she resented it so hurting and I came up with a proposal to renovate the house to change the inside completely demolish the private living spaces to preserve the privacy of the family keep the basement dining room which was of historical significance strengthen the structure which was decaying and create a new and separate living area so that the house could be lived in my father accepted this proposal in December 2011 he told the family that it was best to redevelop 30 of the road straight away after he died and do what we proposed by redevelopment he means remove the private spaces renovate the house but without knocking it down at around the same time on the 27th of December he wrote to cabinet a third time and you had the letter with you cabinet members were unanimous that 38 of the road should not be demolished as I wanted I have reflected on this and decided that the 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 quoting an either for proceeded along these lines we kept the family fully informed of all considerations and our intentions we emailed everyone including my father my sister my brother his wife no one raised any objections to the plan my father met the architect went through the proposal and approved the scheme to reinforce the found patience and renovate the house madam Speaker may I now ask the clerk to distribute handout 2 which contains the relevant correspondence yes please or anytime so you see the cover the first page is my father's authorization letter to the architect to submit the development application he signed it on the 28th of March 2012 I hereby authorize you to act as my agent to submit on my behalf an application to the competent authority under the Planning Act 1998 for a written permission to develop lot 9 9 9 0 9 x PS 20 that means town subdivision 20 at 38 Oxley Road for proposed additions and alterations to existing two-story detached dwelling house River Valley Planning area and so on I hereby authorize you to pay on my behalf to the competent authority all processing fees or charges payable by me in connection with the application and you re approved it a few weeks later on the 17th of April 2012 you have that tool I have just given you the first page of the grant of written permission the rest is the fine print but the first page puts the specifics puts the key points name an address of developer Lee Kuan Yew 38 office Lee Road data application received and so on particulars of decision planning permission is granted under section 14 brackets for the Planning Act for the application referred to details are set up in part 3 subject to conditions in part 4 additional notes in part 5 as far as I knew that was how the family had settled the matter rationally amicably while mr. Lee was still alive which is what he had hoped to achieve and strive very hard to achieve I heard nothing to the contrary until after my father died my father passed away on the 23rd of March 2015 on the 12th of April 2015 three weeks later his last will was formally read to me and my two siblings 38 Oxley Road was given to me the demolition Clause was in the will and madam Speaker may I now ask the clerk to distribute handout 3 which is the demolition clause yes please the demolition clause was in two main parts with a third minor part at the end I read it up in full I further declare that it is my wish and the wish of my late wife while got to that our house at 38 Oxley Road sing about two three eight six to nine the house we demolished immediately after my death or my daughter Wei Ling would prefer to continue living in the original house immediately after she moved out of the house I would ask each of my children to ensure our wishes with respect to the demolition of the house be carried out if our children are unable to demolish the house as a result of any changes in the laws rules or regulations binding them it is my wish that the house never be open to others except my children their families and descendants my view on this has been made public before and remains unchanged my statement of wishes in this paragraph 7 may be publicly disclosed notwithstanding that the rest of my will is private this whole thing is 1 paragraph 7 but I've broken up so you can see the different sections the following day I had to speak in Parliament on how we would honor mr. Lee Kuan Yew the question of 30 Oxley Road was bound to come up there were already suggestions from the public on what to do with the house including turning into a museum and a memorial hours personally in a difficult position because I was both mr. Lee's son and the Prime Minister so at the reading of the will I discussed with my siblings what I could say about the house in Parliament there was a difference of views yin-yang for the first time objected to the renovation plans that my father had approved he wanted the house to be knocked down immediately this was a complete surprise to me I pointed out that his position now was different from what the family had discussed in the pre-departure the house immediately anyway because my sister wailing then said she intended to continue to stay in the house and in his will my father had expressed his wish that wailing be allowed to stay there for as long as she wished so I said we should honor that and that I would say in Parliament the next day that the government would not make any decision until such time as my sister was no longer staying there we also discussed what I should say regarding my father's wishes what I should say in Parliament regarding my father's wishes I wanted to read out mr. Lee's 27 December 2011 letter to the cabinet stating his view on what to do with the house if it is to be preserved I also wanted to read out the demolition clause in his will in full my brother and his wife objected strenuously but I decided I had to do so and I said so so that my father's views would be on the record and Singaporeans could know accurately what his thinking had been later that evening I discovered that my siblings had issued a statement which contained the full demolition clause in Parliament the next day I made a statement which I had cleared with my key cabinet colleagues because I was speaking as Prime Minister I readout was a letter to cabinet and a whole demolition clause I said we should not rush into making decisions on this matter especially so soon after mr. Lee has passed away we should allow some time to pass consider the ideas carefully and make calm considered decisions which will stand the test of time we want to honor mr. Lee but we must do so in the right way I stated that my father's position on 38 Oxley road had been unwavering all these years that he wanted the house knocked down and as a son I wanted to see my father's wishes carried out I told Parliament that since my sister was going to continue living in 38 Oxley Road there was no immediate issue of demolition and no need for government to make any decision now as and when my sister was no longer living there the government of the day would consider the matter after the Parliament sitting I took two major steps one I recuse myself from all government decisions relating to thirty-eight offs Lee wrote I was conflicted being my father's son and inheritor of the house and also the head of the government it was not proper for me to take part in any decisions on 38 Oxley Road so the next cabinet meeting two days after the Parliament sitting I recuse myself from all discussions and decisions relating to the house and place dpmp ot he and in charge and this was formally recorded in the cabinet minutes from that point on I have been out of the loop whenever the government handles matters concerning the house I play no part in any of the discussions decisions whenever cabinet deliberates on the house for example when it setup the Ministerial Committee I absent myself and dpmp Oh chairs the meeting my second major action after my father died was to divest myself of the house soon after the Parliament sitting I learned that my siblings were unhappy that I was getting the house I was not sure why but I thought the best way to resolve the matter was to transfer the house to them I first offered to transfer the house to my sister for a nominal sum of $1 on condition that the property is sold later or quite by the government all proceeds or compensation would go to charity unfortunately that deal fell through subsequently I made a fresh proposal to sell the house to my brother at fair market value this time we reached agreement this was December 2015 and we also agreed that my brother and I would each donate half the value of the house to charity we both did so and in addition I topped up another half myself in other words I myself gave away the full value of the house that I had inherited and together my brother and I have donated one and a half times the value of the house to charity so if you understand that properly a house comes to me I sell it to my brother for the market value he gives me the value of the house so many dollars I give half of that dollars to charity he gets the house in addition he gives half the the same amount half the value of the house to charity on top of that I separately gave half the value of the house to charity so I gave 1 times the value he gave away 1/2 times the value the house is with him and that complicated arrangement substantially addressed a major concern of mine that was that our family be seen not to be benefiting financially from 38 of sterile either through receiving compensation from the state for acquisition or resisting acquisition or preservation conservation to profit by redeveloping and selling the property I've given you the background to 38 Oxley Road our discussions when my father was alive and what happened after my father passed away where does the matter stand today there is in substance no longer anything for my siblings and me to dispute over on the matter of the house we all want our father's personal wish to be carried out which is to knock the house down I no longer have any interest in the house my brother owns it I do not take part in any government decisions on the house so why is there still an argument I really am not sure but one possible factor may be a difference in views between me and my siblings and the difference is over this question what did my father think about the house apart from demolition was his view black and white all or nothing demolish the house no matter what all was he prepared to consider alternatives should demolition not be possible my siblings view is that my father absolutely wanted to demolish the house with no compromise and they point to the first half of the demolition clause as evidence that's the first section you have in the handout and they say that if he considered any alternatives such as the next section on the handout that was only because he was under duress because the government had the power to prevent him or his heirs from knocking it down my view is that while my father wanted the house to be demolished he was prepared to consider alternatives should the government decide otherwise indeed he put it in writing and approved alternative architectural plans which were submitted to ura as I explained earlier and approved by a ura annex we have to look at the full demolition clause and not just the first half and the full clause shows that my father did accept alternatives further I have pointed out some unusual circumstances surrounding how the last will was prepared which are relevant because of the weight that my siblings put on the demolition clause in the last will despite this difference in dues I still see no need for argument I've submitted my views to the Ministerial Committee my siblings have submitted theirs we have commented on each other's views I will leave it in the good hands of the committee in any case the government has stated that the committee will not make any decisions on the house and will not even recommend recommend any decisions on the house to cabinet the committee will only list options for the house so that when the decision does become necessary one day perhaps decades from now the cabinet of the day most likely by then under different Prime Minister will have these options available to consider there is therefore no reason at all for anybody to feel pushed into a corner by the committee as my brother has claimed to be regrettably my siblings have now gone public and accused me of abusing my office there are very few specifics in their charges but because their father their father is mr. Lee Kuan Yew the accusations gain some credibility and I have to take their charges seriously which is why I'm addressing them here in Parliament what are the allegations first alleged abuse of power my siblings have given scant details of the charge but my brother has cited as a prime example the setting up of the Ministerial Committee I have already explained that I've recused myself dpmp was in charge of this matter I had nothing to do with a decision to set up the Ministerial Committee I do not give any instructions to the Ministerial Committee or its members my only dealing with the committee has been to respond to the requests in writing by formal correspondence no different from my siblings dealings with a committee and this is the right and proper way to handle a conflict of interest my siblings argue that even though I have recused myself the ministers are my subordinates and therefore the ministerial committee cannot be independant from me in fact they say this of Parliament itself and this cannot be right because if the minister's are subordinate and can't be independent not the cap ministerial committee cannot be independent then the cabinet - me cannot be independent the government - me cannot be independent what is the process for dealing with the matter concerning the Prime Minister's personal matters but the process which we have embarked on me recusing myself in the cabinet D - me dealing with the matter is the standard way the standard practice for a person facing a potential conflict of interest he takes himself out from handling the matter he doesn't participate in making any decisions about it he let somebody else deal with it it could be his deputy it could be some other senior colleague it be it could be the rest of the cabinet as in this case and this is exactly what have done in the case of 38 Oxley Road I myself do not deal with the matter at all I take no part in the discussions or decisions concerning the house dpmp au is in full charge ministers and officials report to and take directions from D pmpo on all 38 Oxley Road matters suppose instead that I had decided as p.m. to knock down the house and had pushed that decision through without allowing the government to consider the alternatives weigh the considerations and go through a due process just because it was what my father wanted that would have been a real abuse of power that would have gone against a whole system of rules and values that mr. Lee Kuan Yew spent his whole life upholding and building up the second issue my siblings accused me of is separate from the house itself after my father passed away my siblings gifted artifacts from 30 Oxley Road to the national heritage board this was formalized in a deed of gift my siblings have accused me of improperly obtaining this deed which was between them and the national heritage board and they say I obtained the deed SPM and gave it to my lawyers and that was wrong but I disagree the deed was signed by my sister and brother who were acting for my father's estate I was one of the beneficiaries of the estate I was entitled to be consulted by my siblings before they did this but I was not consulted in June 2015 Minister Lawrence Wong updated me on a major sg50 exhibition on our founding fathers and he told me the exhibition included artifacts from Oxley Road and described the conditions attached to the gift subsequently he gave me the deed which I had not seen before as Prime Minister I had every right to see it after reading the deed I became very concerned over what NHP had agreed to the terms were onerous and unreasonable to NHB for example whenever nhb displayed the items it also had to display them with the first half of the demolition clause but only the first half which said mr. Lee went to the house knocked down and not the second half of the clause which stated what mr. Lee wanted done if the house could not be knocked out and this partial selective disclosure would mislead the public on mr. Lee's intentions furthermore my siblings had announced publicly that this was a gift but in fact they had set conditions in the fine print if any time the terms of the deed were breached my siblings could immediately take back all the items for $1 therefore this was not a gift at all they had misled the public mr. and mrs. Lee Kuan Yew had gifted many items to NHB during their lives and they had never imposed any conditions on their gifts remotely like these what Lee whaling and Lee Seon yang had imposed on nhb was wrong discovering all this as Prime Minister I had to act otherwise people might wrongly think I was party to this it's nonsensical to say that because I saw the deed in my official capacity I could not raise the matter with a family member if I come across anyone doing something wrong even family maybe especially family it is my duty to put a stop to it and set them right if I can in the same way if any Minister discovers in the course of his official work that a family member is dealing improperly with some government agency or seeking to take advantage of the government surely the minister must take this up with a family member and get him also to stop that's what the code of conduct is for this is expected of anyone in a public position especially me as Prime Minister I therefore wrote to my siblings through lawyers to object to what they had done and on the government side I told Lawrence want to take instructions from dpmp Otan on this matter I believe this was a correct and proper way for me to handle the deed of gift third my siblings have made allegations about nepotism concerning my wife and son Oh me and that I 138 a three-year-old kept standing in order to inherit my father's credibility and bolster my standing homie my son has publicly said he is not interested in politics nor have I pushed him to enter politics my wife watching is CEO of the massive holdings as CEO she reported the board chaired by mr. Lewman hang as a company the massive holdings answers to a shareholder the Ministry of Finance under minister Hanks weaker I have every confidence that both mr. limbani and missile and Minister hing Suika understand the meaning of good proper corporate governance it is at the mast a board which appoints the CEO and the appointment has to be confirmed by the president who's advised by the Council of presidential advisers if ho ting ever behaves improperly I have no doubt that that that the master board the president and the CPA know what their duty is regarding the house and how its continued existence enhances my order as Prime Minister if I needed such magic properties to bolster my standing after 13 years as a prime minister I must be in a pretty sad state and the Singaporeans believe that such magic works in Singapore I think Singapore would be in in an even sadder state now madam Speaker may I have your permission to say some words in Mandarin yes please since Ian Jose E chanting dissenting later homophobia depends on me th Adelita seongho even scindia pardon min GA hoshii tegus in she wore ET t mm its agenda chatting - tan Lucic on to mention Ron she thought was India Boren and efficient one da-da-da-da-dah judge in Scherzer eating and boozing composing the song attention if it seems in who who th July distinction slow time Colonel year to GN to be fella a certain king shantanu tan show you Giada Raja insecure woman partial Vasya Kim quite TSO tau wouldn't have dodged attitude on control one trained Lydia she wore her shampoo santosha Lhasa run goofin pingzhi shall I run away dirty maitre en her so mean Haruna Putin said Russia Hammond high creating sang-hwa danke pie fight and food arsenal insula ran mean reason for the syndrome Oh put a patrol to weighing porters here how will consider tutor was I in with a yin yang bong Seon see that Yeshua taught until final item 3 my kiss to Sakai quality so that isn't given the wrong tree my oh hi forming Seyfert enforcer for the detention religious angle or Tanjung a unit rental foods in the even or at 18 sauna partaken teammates gender friendship so it only or peacefully taco or jelly ransom Santa truly the condescension coutry the Hoshi Titus wangkong sentence en otro Ilana tan Joaquin de todo con su wen Ming Shan region filling Darin what actually TNCs a ho Rhonda Jiwon trained surgeons away party as a council funded shinto 14 course buddha ego you order on transition food only tangentially de Givenchy o want ren21 yep itani metal Nicaraguan country decision Paul Watson Lee Putin were angry Otto keyb potosi a putana Jimenez Allah so each omelet answer oil certain way Hofer Mujahideen the mingle order fortune eat udon parsley Dora family okay whoa holy war fashion certainty MA and boom on whether an food and food Hammond was gentleman te your watch and found two and Ron came a Mei Tai yasue sentence in the equation can Cassie have a nature so diligently coho over funds to a mighty PD Indian War miles water chamber 22 son opposition to the found the water ran hurt intentionally we're in 20 way was until upon to the journey person sure why not go run what the team a and our money a 1-1 agenda Tamil rip okuu chatting nationally generating to fan come to you sir India three water all ransom kanji to its info so how will contributor to occur what Anna put audacity hai cái' to Oshima Heinen Tasha pancit oh it's only what it out open and coalition England early hominid Twitter truth the bully in wages editor shown higher than mean tuition for the senior year Indiana Singapore the forties example in sir or PC take away chanting sure sure roaming Taniya yota waha water 20 Sun we tingly Anton's her if up I'm sure the Jason who is a Alou and portia de Jong Hyun chance for even create real digitally Samsung for winter tour so people the Quan attention yet son Jimmy entry Tommy Annette women to an Indian woman for the long run sending you a coma certain foundation HR HFE certain for distinguish adultery thank you to our intention certainly patent future Warhol fortune pal walkway general meant into Delta K so even the ETA tradition night Hank Phillippi Android modular and mint written for the yellow siddharth on Fernando chief water remain the syndrome Tinian we are tan tan tan tanga TSO even desertion winter certain and pop off and written here or eating a passage in sourcing to see our children hidey-ho amenity a sir consider chinchilla when T Hernan the Darwin man the teacher who or I should see one notarial omen oncology pan was relation or peaceful wizard and mint written for the syndrome syndrome in potent the Hyuga kingly nocl Tarkin who sue the temple innovators the singe a polarization 23 pal queda please I'm charting tuvans or inky duck windra oneself up one for tae-soo Sam taja Belgian or c1 just to the poor wee penguin general two young cheetahs are hosting the phone poor or how are they linked out 1/3 way TC trendy fool wait that you are fool them speaker may I now continue in English I've brought this matter to Parliament because Singaporeans are entitled to a full answer from me and my government Parliament may not be a court of law but it is the highest body in the land it is also where my government and I are countable to mps and to the people of Singapore many people have asked me why I'm not taking legal action to challenge the will of sue for defamation or take some other legal action to put a stop to this and clear my name these are valid questions I took advice I considered my options very carefully I believe I have a strong case in normal circumstances in fact in any other imaginable circumstance than this I would have sued immediately because the accusation of the abuse of power is a very grave one however baseless it may be and it is in fact an attack not just on me but on the integrity of the whole government but suing my own brother and sister in court would further be smush our parents names at the end of the day we have rather and sister and we are all our parents children it will also drag out the process for years and cause more distraction and distress to Singaporeans therefore fighting this out in court cannot be my preferred choice every family will understand that family disputes do happen but they are not something to flaunt in public that's why I've done my best to deal with this out of the public eye for example I kept my submissions to the Ministerial Committee private my purpose was not to pursue a fight with my siblings but to assist the committee in its work unfortunately my siblings made public allegations against me and then I had no choice but to defend myself and release the statements and the facts about the matter I stand by the statements I have published but I really don't want to go further if I can help it today I'm making this statement in Parliament to account to members and to Singaporeans and to deal with this issue expeditiously so that Singaporeans can understand what it is all about and we can put the matter to rest I hope once and for all dpmp Oh we'll be making a ministerial statement after me he will explain his and the government's actions and decisions on this matter other relevant ministers will speak too I invite members to raise all questions suspicions or doubts directly in this chamber with me and my team I've seen the questions filed by the Workers Party MPs it's striking that the questions are general and concerned broad principles and rules they contain no specific allegations of facts about any wrongdoing or impropriety but if I'm mistaken and the Workers Party has come across such allegations of facts please raise them today my ministers and I will deal with all their questions and give comprehensive answers because we have nothing to hide I have told the BMPs that I'm lifting the party whip strictly speaking there's no weight to lift because there's no vote to be taken but I said this to emphasise what I expect from this debate a robust questioning and a full airing and accounting of the public issues and allegations all MPs where there are PAP MPs opposition MPs or nm piece should query me and my ministers vigorously and without restraint that is a way to dispel all the doubts innuendo enter to tattle that has been planted and circulated that is the way to strengthen confidence in our institutions and our system of government and refocus our energies on the challenge that we face as a nation the legacy of mr. Lee is much more than an old house mr. Lee's legacy is Singapore and the values that we uphold we've built something special in Singapore a cohesive multiracial meritocratic society a fair and just society where the same rules apply to everybody whether they are minister or an ordinary citizen whether you are the prime minister or the children of the founding prime minister you are not above the law my colleagues and I are in politics in government to fight to uphold this legacy to keep Singapore successful we have sworn to serve Singapore faithfully when private interest and public duties clash we make sure that our private interests do not sway our public decisions when allegations of impropriety and corruption are made we take them seriously and investigate them fully ministers are bound by a code of conduct which is tabled in Parliament and after every general election I if you lose of prudence to every PAP MP so that they know how to conduct themselves to protect their own reputation and to safeguard the integrity of the PAP government and the Singapore system in Singapore everyone is equal before the law mr. Lee understood this most of all when the dust has settled on this unhappy episode people must know that the government in Singapore operates transparently impartial II and properly that in Singapore even mr. Lee's house and mr. Lee's wishes are subject to the rule of law that the government he built is able to withstand intense and sustained attacks on its reputation and integrity and emerge not just untainted but in fact strengthened this is the house that mr. Lee built not 38 Oxley rule when mr. Lee was asked what were the most important things to him in life he said my family in my country it pains me that this episode has put both under cloud and undamaged to Singapore I hope one day I'll be able to resolve the unhappiness within the family but today I stand here before you to answer your questions clear any doubts and show you that you have every reason to maintain your trust and me and my government my colleagues and I will continue to serve you and work with you as we have always done to the best of our ability thank you madam Speaker

Channel: CNA

Views: 8,801

Rating: 3.8923078 out of 5

Keywords:

Id: GaVwt3-1M0E

Length: 53min 58sec (3238 seconds)

Published: Mon Jul 03 2017