PM Lee Hsien Loong speaks in Parliament on 38 Oxley Road dispute on Jul 4

madam Speaker first of all I'd like to thank members for this debate two weeks ago when I decided to bring this matter to Parliament I explained my purpose to err fully all the accusations against me and my government to allow MPs to raise difficult and inconvenient questions whether your PAP MP and opposition MP or an n MP to enable me and my cabinet to render account to Parliament and clear the a in my ministerial statement I have fully addressed the allegations of abuse of power in his ministerial statement dpmp o T hen has explained the Ministerial Committee and how we are pulled the integrity of the government I brought the matter to Parliament because I'm answerable to MPs and to Singaporeans I've opened myself up to questioning by members it's the members responsibility to ask me any question they want and get to the bottom of the issue so I was surprised that some members asked me wires had brought this to Parliament and questioned if we should discuss this in Parliament I agree that we should not fight private disputes in Parliament nor have we done so but grave accusations of abuse of power have been made against me s p.m. and against my government doubts have been cast on our government and the leadership how can my ministers and I not discuss them in Parliament imagine the scandal if MPs file parliamentary questions on these accusations and the government replied that Parliament is not the place to discuss the matter so whatever else I or the government may or may not do to deal with this matter we have to come to Parliament to render a card it is our duty therefore I'm glad that in the last two days we've had a good debate members PAP and non PAP MPs have raised questions and my ministers have answered them and given a proper account what has been the outcome over the past two days the allegations about me abusing power which prompted the sitting have been answered no MPs have produced or alleged any additional facts or charges or stop substantiate any of the allegations mr. Lord young talks about scattered evidence centered on family displeasure but he has not accused the government of anything nor has he given any concrete evidence or cited any mr. pinging what readout the litany of allegations by my siblings but he didn't endorse them and that's significant because it shows that the government and I have acted properly and with due process and that there is no basis to the allegations of power made by my siblings dr. Lee Wei Ling and mr. Li xiannian my ministers have in the course of the debate dealt with most of the questions and points raised by the MPS I would like to deal with just a few questions firstly the Attorney General's chambers secondly whether I received my father thirdly whether I considered I am considering the legal options and finally where do we go next so AG's chambers masovia lament several of her Workers Party colleagues have raised questions about the propriety of appointing mr. Lucien Wang as Attorney General and mr. Kakuma as Deputy Attorney General because Lucien Wang was previously previously my lawyer and Akuma was a PAP MP SMS Indrani Raja gave a clear reply yesterday it's perfectly normal for lawyers 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 job but the way to deal with this is also quite standard - for the lawyers to recuse themselves when matters come up which they had previously dealt with in a previous capacity the rules are quite clear all professional lawyers know how to handle such matters and every time a person a lawyer moves from being from practice onto the bench to become a judge the judge has to do the same because he has all cases the cases may appear before the courts and he cannot participate in the cases when they turn up before the courts so there is no problem of conflict at all for Lucien Wang or three Kumar to become AG and deputy AG if matters come up which they had previously handled as private lawyers they just recused themselves and let others deal with it and so it is with a dispute with my siblings on the house Lucien Wang was my lawyer but now he is the AG I've lost a good lawyer he's 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 he used to represent me so on this matter another officer in AGC takes charge Lucien Wong is out of it when Lucien Wong's name came up as a candidate to succeed mr. VK Raja as AG I endorsed him with confidence he is known as one of Singapore's top lawyers and has a high international reputation especially in corporate and banking law I was even more confident because I had had direct personal experience working with him on this case my personal case I had also consulted him informally government matters before when we were working on the points of agreement dispute with Malaysia and I knew he was a very good lawyer and everyone involved in the appointment was fully aware that this was the basis on which I was recommending him I told them I told the Cabinet Lucien is my lawyer he's a very good lawyer but the opposition will make an issue of this but I do not consider this an impediment because there's no difficulty of conflict of interest I recommend him the AG's appointment has to be confirmed approved by the president i briefed the president before the matter formally went to him and I told him the same thing he consulted the CPA the CPA recommended that the key approved the appointment he did and indeed after the president approved Lucien's Wong's appointment and it was announced the Law Society welcomed it likewise my direct knowledge of free Kumar as an MP and a lawyer gave me confidence that he would make a good Deputy Attorney General I know he has a good legal mind and he has a good heart as an MP for people it is critical for Singapore to have a strong Attorney General's chambers and for the AGC to have a strong top leadership because the AG is a very important and demanding job as workers party MPs have themselves pointed out it's very difficult to find people of the right caliber and range of experience you can take my word for it I've been involved doing this looking for suitable people to be attorneys general for quite a long time and I've had to do it several times it's important that we get the best that are there to become the Attorney General the rule is becoming more complex and we need the most capable people to defend our interests you just look at pedra branca you would have thought the matter was settled nine and a half years ago no four days ago on the 30th of june malaysia filed an application over the ICJ judgment on 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 we have also outstanding officers within the ATS chambers coming up the ranks and we've promoted them within AGC with elevated some of them to the bench for example that they are deputy at does the Deputy Attorney General mr. Lionel Yi there are two solicitors solicitors general mr. quick mean luck and this maybes Jang all promoted to their positions recently and other career legal service officers have been elevated to the bench to become judicial commissioners in the first case in the first as a first step like Bank Hangzhou eat it Abdullah who shopping or drill him so we look for talent and we groom and develop talent within but at the same time we seek to reinforce the AG's chambers with lawyers from the private sector because they will both reinforce the team and add to the talent pool and also the ADC can benefit from their experience with private sector work we have a good team in the AGC today they hold their own with a very best to fight for Singapore's interests abroad they pursue cases in court and handle very complicated cases professionally competently where necessary safely and the appointments of Lucien one and Akuma will contribute to building the scheme and make the AG's chambers an even stronger institution now let me turn to a few of the points which have to do with Oxley Road starting with what mr. Lee we asked just now whether I deceived my father and made him believe that the house was gazetted I think when you when the allegation is that you have deceived mr. Lee Kuan Yew and detective directed at the Prime Minister that can never be a private allegation I mean hazard enormous ramifications for my standing and reputation and the method has to be answered the simple answer is that I didn't deceive my father I explained to you yesterday how my father's primary wish on the house has always been clear he always wanted to knock down where my siblings and I differ is on whether my father was prepared to consider alternatives should demolition not be possible after meeting cabinet on the 21st of July 2011 my mr. Lee asked me for my view of what the government would do with the house after he died I gave him my honest assessment I told him you've met the cabinet you've heard the minister's views if I chair the cabinet meeting given that these are the views of the ministers and the public I think it would be very hard for me to override them and not the house time I would have to agree that the house has to be connected to be kept and if I'm not the PM or I don't share the meeting all the more likely that the house will be connected he understood in August 2011 about a month later he decided to will the house to me as I told you yesterday and he told the family ho ting and I knew my father's wishes and also my mother's feelings on the house and we wanted to address their concerns should demolition not be allowed so we came up with a proposal to renovate the house to change inside completely to demolish the private spaces but keep the historic basement dining room and my wife kept the whole family comprehensively informed madam Speaker may I asked the clock now to distribute the handout to members yes please I could I'm distributing two family emails just to give you a sense of the conversation and the discussions and how they were conducted the first email is dated second January 2012 and it's from watching to my father and thanks to the whole family Lee Wei Ling Li si and Yan Li Kuan Yew Li si and long blizzard fun to keep the whole family informed on what of what we were doing it's a long email I will just take you through the beginning and the end it says hi link just to update you on one of the ideas for oxley renewal development as long mentioned the first preference is to demolish the Oxley house and build afresh the next best alternative is to renovate and redevelop parts of the house or annex so that it is livable rentable for many more years but with a new internal layout the renovation renewal idea is to keep or renew the main obviously house structure retaining its old world ambiance but completely changing the internal layout except for the basement dining room and redeveloping the back annex into a two-story annex connected to the main house thus the current primary private family living spaces in the main house upstairs will be gone and family privacy protected and then there's a long description of all the different possibilities including and then we come to the conclusion on the second page if there's objection to renting out to say expats then the family could consider moving in at least for the initial years and then link and use one of the big bedrooms and so forth where who can go way way way that the architect has done various projects including the renewal of Victoria theater as well as conservation of private dwellings and Essex as he explained conservation requirements typically do not mean preserving the house in its entirety the interior layouts are often changed to reflect new family usage needs so we have the option of redoing the entire interior layout to remove any linkages back to the private family space thanks so that's the first email I give you a second email which is 30th of April 2012 that means about four months later from my wife ho ting to my father again copy to the whole family to say that the approvals have been secured and will be delivered to him and please let her know anything else needs to be done and he replied about three hours later noted nothing to follow or to sign by me permission has been granted as I had previously signed in letters to them we'll send them to you so you see it's quite clear is quite open it's not very good the conservation plan was done honestly transparently and not on false pretenses after my father died I said in Parliament on the 13th of April 2015 as I recounted yesterday that the government will take no decision on the house so long as my sister was living in it why did I do that because people were then three weeks after his passing still very emotional over losing Miss Lee Kuan Yew some wanted to honor him by keeping the house others wanted to honor him by knocking the house down emotions were high which ever decision we made one way or the other significant numbers of people would be upset and you're just creating tensions and unhappiness and anxieties for nothing best if we postpone this major decision for Tamla time that time passed before we come to the matter that's why I said what I did in Parliament and I see it in no way contradicting my father's wishes or what I had advised my father when he was alive well many members have asked me other specific questions on matters after my father died the soon feeling was unsure why I offered to transfer the house to my sister for $1 but subsequently sold it to Li Xian yang at market value mr. Henry quick asked why I had not raised matters on the will during probate and why I am expressing concern now and have put my views in the form of statutory declarations and several members have suggested that I take legal action to clear my name and put a stop to the matter once for let me explain my overall approach to handling this family matter and to do so I beg your indulgence madam Speaker but I do have to go a little bit into the family history it's a complicated story but one golden thread running through it right from the beginning is my desire to manage the issue privately without escalating the temperature and the dispute and without forcing the issue of my legal rights 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 interests when I learn from others who were meant to tell me that my siblings were unhappy that my father had willed me the house I tried to resolve the unhappiness so in May 2015 I offered to transfer the house to my sister for a nominal sum of $1 she'd been living there for some time in fact all her life except when she was abroad and small gaps and my father had wanted her to continue living in the house after he died if she wished to so it was natural to let her own the house I only asked for one condition that if the property was so late quite acquired by the government that the proceeds would be donated to charity I thought it was a very reasonable offer my brother wanted in on the deal he wanted to join in and jointly by the house with my sister from me for $1 my sister had no objection so I agreed to this but during the discussions disagreement arose my siblings started making allegations about me and escalating them so I told them they would have to stop attacking me if they wanted the deal done because otherwise if I transfer the house to them and the quarrel continues there's no point and they wanted me to give a certain undertaking I won't go into all the details now but I could not agree to what they asked for so we were at an impasse we went back and forth for several months every few weeks my letter would go to them they wouldn't think about it every few weeks their lawyer would reply to my lawyer and so that we continue the discussion faced with these allegations I reviewed my old family emails Rakeem Lee was my father's lawyer before his last will she did not do his last will but she sent me and my siblings information about the previous wills of my father and also information about what she knew about the last will only then did I understand what had happened before my father died and became troubled by how the last will had been done but I still held back from raising the issue with my siblings because I still hope for an amicable settlement in August 2015 I dissolved parliament and called the general election my siblings then issued me an ultimatum to accept their terms by the 1st of September 2015 which perhaps coincidentally was nomination day I told them I was very busy they would surely understand I had many things on my plate and I would respond as soon as the elections were over which I did I could not allow myself the government or the PAP to be intimidated by such threats I decided to ask my siblings to clarify the circumstances surrounding the last will after that for whatever reason the first September deadline passed uneventfully after the election I again tried to settle the matter I told my siblings that we were not getting anywhere on the $1 offer with the conditions on what each side could do or say so I made them a fresh offer forget all the previous discussions new offer no conditions on what we can do or say but I will sell the house to my brother at full market value and the only condition which is attached now is that we each donate half the value to charity and then you do and say what you think fit and I am free to be my own person I am not constrained in any way and I offered this arrangement which involves the donation to charity because it was a variation that we had discussed before mr. Lee died but ultimately had not adopted so he said well if you want to settle the matter there was this old variation would you like to take it up now he took it we sign and that was December 2015 again I hope that this would settle the problem and we could keep the matter low-key and perhaps gradually subsiding later on when the Ministerial Committee asked for views from my siblings and me I wrote in to give my views so did my siblings we both commented on each other's views my siblings had put a lot of weight on the first part of the Demolition clause in the last will so I felt the need to explain the circumstances surrounding the preparation of the last will to the Ministerial Committee so that it would understand how what to make of the evidence and because of the gravity of the matter I voluntarily made my submissions to the Ministerial Committee in the form of sworn statutory declarations or as they say in the coffee shops Samba that means that what I have put down is proven to be false I can go to jail for perjury the statements cannot be taken back they are done sworn irrevocable but I did this privately because it was just to inform the committee in their deliberations and I did not want to escalate the portal unfortunately at 2:00 a.m. on the 14th of June this year my siblings made public allegations against me I was forced to respond I decided to put out the facts and released a summary of my statutory declarations again in the first instance I did not take the legal route and sue for defamation I stand by what I saw in the SDS and published in the statement but really I don't want to go further along this way if I can help it I did not and still do not want to escalate the quarrel at each point I decided not to try to enforce my full legal rights my priority was to resolve a matter privately and avoid a collision some MP still asked why I'm not taking legal action against my siblings for example mr. Lowe Teac young advocates my suing my siblings for defamation and this background which I have narrated to you explains why I have hesitated to do so as I said yesterday I have been advised a strong legal case and 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 beasts much our parents names mr. law may think that doesn't count and is neither here nor there I take a different view mr. Lowe argued that we should do whatever it takes to bring the issue to a quick resolution I agree but going to court will not achieve this it will drag out the process for years cause further distress to Singaporeans and distract us from the many urgent issues that we must deal with several MPs mr. Pritam Singh mrs. Quigg Xiao en mr. Louison mrs. Aki Mohammad suggested a select committee or Commission of Inquiry as an alternative but what's the basis for this there are no specifics to the headline charge of abuse of power what specifically did I do that was wrong and what was wrong with that whatever that may be who was involved when did it happen after two days of debate nobody has stood behind these allegations offered any evidence not even opposition MPs the Workers Party MP say they are not in the position to judge indeed mr. Lowe criticizes my siblings for making vague allegations based on scattered evidence centered on family displeasure if MPs believe that something is wrong its MPs job to pursue the facts and make these allegations in their own name decide whether something seems to be wrong anyways think something is wrong even if we are not fully sure then come to this house confront the government ask for explanations and answers if having heard the government we are not satisfied then by all means Dumanis a select committee or Commission of Inquiry but do not just repeat allegations and attribute them to others or ask for select committee or COI because accusations are round don't know what but therefore we must have a COI to find out what the accusers may not be in Parliament but that should not stop MPs from talking to them to get their story nor should it stop nor would it stop the accusers from getting in touch with MPs including opposition MPs to tell their story so that the MPs can raise it on their behalf in Parliament that is in fact how the MP system is meant to work those are the MPs duties and that one reason why parliamentary privilege exists so that MPs can who have heard troubling allegations or news can make these allegations and raise the matters in the house even if they are not completely proven and may be defamatory without fear of being sued for defamation and that's how Parliament's are supposed to function but none of this has happened over the last two days no one says there's evidence of abuse of power 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 it will be another career drama full-scale serial should we setup select committees to investigate every unsubstantiated allegation every wild rumor it as mr. Lodi account says vague allegations vague allegations based on scattered evidence centered on family displeasure as a basis for commission for ordering a select committee or COI that's not a basis but if there is evidence of wrongdoing which emerges or alleged evidence of wrongdoing which emerges then I'm the government will consider what further steps to take we can have a select committee we can have a commission of inquiry I may decide to sue for defamation or take some other legal action but until then let's get back to more important things that we should be working on where do we go from here the ministerial statements and the debate have been important valuable facts and explanations have been put on the record Singaporeans have received a full account of how the government works and what the government has done in the case of 38 Oxley Road the allegations have been aired have been answered rebutted and people can see that there has been no abuse of power by me or the government I hope that this two-day debate has cleared the air and look how things down it would be unrealistic to hope that the matter is now completely put to rest I do not know what further statements or allegations my siblings may make but with a benefit of the statements and debate in Parliament Singaporeans are now in a better position to judge the facts and see the issue in perspective and we can all go back to what we should be focused on and not be distracted from national priorities and responsibilities I thank PSM go to town miss chou-heung young mr. Charles strong and many others for your good wishes for reconciliation within the family I would I too would like to think this is possible it will be a difficult and long road but I hope that one day there will be a proximal dpmp reminded us about a national week of mourning when mr. Lee died it was an emotional week for everybody for Singaporeans who lost the founding father for my family and for me for me the most difficult and emotional moment in that whole week came when I was reading the eulogy at the state funeral service when I recounted how when I was about 13 my father had told me if anything happens to me please take care of your mother and younger sister and brother Singapore was then part of Malaysia we were in a fierce fight with a central government and a communist 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 the dough did I expect that after my parents died these tensions would erupt with such grievous consequences and after so many years I'll be unable to fulfill the role which my father hoped I would so I hope one day these passions will subside and we can begin to reconcile at the very least I hope that my siblings will not visit their resentments and grievances with one generation on to the Knicks upon the next generation and further that they do not transmit their enmities and feuds to our children I'm sad that this episode has happened I regret that in addressing public accusations against me I've had to talk about private family matters in Parliament 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 when there are questions and doubts about the government we bring them up deal with them openly clear the doubts if anything is wrong we must put it right if nothing is wrong we must say so mr. Yong Yong's spoke eloquently yesterday of the many issues she felt passionately about the many challenges we face as a nation and why we should be for on them and not being distracted by this controversy mr. Lowden called on everyone to focus on rallying Singaporeans to be united in facing the challenges and not be participating in a divisive dispute I fully agree with them we must all get back to work this is not soap opera come together tackle the challenges before us my team and I will do our best to continue building the Singapore keeping it safe making it prosper thank you very much

Channel: CNA

Views: 37,767

Keywords: Lee Hsien Loong, Parliament, 38 Oxley Road

Id: nlHOpl6cALI

Length: 37min 36sec (2256 seconds)

Published: Tue Jul 04 2017