‘Leaders must be able to take criticism, acknowledge mistakes’: PM Lee

[skyleon]

6 Facebook pages character assassinating Lee Hsien Yang

June 27, 2017

They are calling him a 'liar' and 'self-serving' ahead of the July 3 Parliament sitting.


Belmont Lay



When the chips are down and the gloves come off, politics never fails to turn into a dirty game.

Especially so in this day and age of cheap video-making, meme-ing and sh*t-posting, where anybody with an agenda can run a smear campaign against another person risk-free within the confines of social media.

On the receiving end of a lot of name-calling these past two weeks is Lee Hsien Yang, the protagonist/ antagonist in the ongoing Lee family feud over the 38 Oxley Road house.

Multiple Facebook pages have put the youngest Lee sibling in their cross hairs, taking aim at his character, motivation and spouse.

At last count, some six Facebook pages lending a hand in the anti-LHY charge share the same distinction of being run anonymously by administrators whose identities are unknown.

Are they foreign-run? How can we be sure they are locals? Just because they use “Singapore” on their pages or make references to this country?

At least two of these pages are relatively new, starting operations by making their first posts in the week after June 14, the day Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Wei Ling put up a joint statement against their eldest brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Here is a sampling of the types of content that have been put up that can be construed as a coordinated smear campaign against Lee Hsien Yang, in the run up to the July 3 Parliament sitting where PM Lee will make a Ministerial Statement to answer all burning questions regarding his late father’s house:



continue reading here : http://mothership.sg/2017/06/6-faceb...ee-hsien-yang/

[skyleon]

38 Oxley Rd: Why now, not later?

Posted on June 27, 2017 by Leong Sze Hian


I refer to the articles “Indranee asks Lee Hsien Yang: Why the urgency to demolish Oxley Road house?” and “The possible options for 38, Oxley Road” (Straits Times, Jun 27).

The latter states that “1. WHAT FINANCIAL INTEREST DOES LEE HSIEN LOONG HAVE IN 38, OXLEY ROAD?

None.

In the will, Mr Lee Kuan Yew gave 38, Oxley Road, to Mr Lee Hsien Loong, his eldest son.

In the Summary of Statutory Declarations, Mr Lee Hsien Loong says:
•After Mr Lee’s passing, his siblings, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee, expressed unhappiness that 38, Oxley Road had been given to him.
•Mr Lee Hsien Loong offered to transfer it to Dr Lee for the nominal sum of $1 on condition that if the property was later sold or acquired by the Government, all proceeds should go to charity. (Note: This condition, if accepted, would have meant that Dr Lee could not keep for herself the money received upon sale or acquisition.) This was not accepted.
•Subsequently, Mr Lee Hsien Loong sold the property to Mr Lee Hsien Yang.
•Mr Lee Hsien Loong donated the entire proceeds of the sale to charity. Mr Lee Hsien Yang also donated 50 per cent of the sale value to charity.

Hence Mr Lee Hsien Loong is no longer the owner of 38, Oxley Road. The property now belongs wholly to Mr Lee Hsien Yang.

As to “4. WHY IS THE GOVERNMENT BEING ASKED TO DEMOLISH THE HOUSE NOW?

That is a good question.

The Government has the same question.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew wanted Dr Lee Wei Ling to stay in the house as long as she wanted. The Government has publicly stated that it will respect those wishes and does not intend to do anything until Dr Lee leaves. Letting the house stand for now does not go against those wishes. Mr Lee Hsien Yang has said Dr Lee does not want to move out and she has every intention of living a long life. That being the case, the matter may well not need to be decided for another 20-30 years. It can be decided by a future government.

So there is nothing for the Government to decide now” – why not throw this question back to the Government?

Why the urgency to set up a ministerial committee in July last year?

With regard to “The real question therefore is why Mr Lee Hsien Yang is asking for an immediate commitment on demolition now.

What is the urgency?

Until and unless Dr Lee moves out, there is nothing for the Government to decide. It is also a principle that the current government will not be able to bind a future government”” –

“In response, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said: “We have never asked the Government to allow us to demolish the house now, only after Wei Ling’s departure.”

He also questioned again why the “secret committee” on the house was formed in 2016.

The youngest son of founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew said beyond the committee’s opening letters, it was “focused primarily on parroting (Prime Minister) Lee Hsien Loong’s attacks on our father’s will”.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang also claimed that an earlier proposal by him and Dr Lee, the executors of their father’s estate, had been rejected by their brother PM Lee.


continue reading here : https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...now-not-later/

[skyleon]

'Not true' that ministerial committee is bent on preventing demolition of Lee Kuan Yew's home: DPM Teo



27 Jun 2017 07:52PM (Updated: 27 Jun 2017 08:21PM)




SINGAPORE: Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean on Tuesday (Jun 27) said it is untrue that a ministerial committee studying options for Mr Lee Kuan Yew's old home at 38 Oxley Road is "bent on preventing the demolition of the house".

Labelling it a "misconception" that the late Mr Lee's youngest son Lee Hsien Yang may have, DPM Teo who chairs the ministerial committee, said he shared his personal views on some of the options for the house with him. This is to let him know that the "Government was not bent on retaining the house as he seems to believe, but that we are calmly and objectively examining a range of options", he said.

He added that Mr Lee Hsien Yang "seems supportive" of some of the intermediate options the ministerial committee is studying.

Some of these options were laid out by Senior Minister of State for Law Indranee Rajah in a Facebook post on Sunday.

DPM Teo reiterated that no decision is needed on the house for now as Mr Lee Hsien Yang's sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, is still living there. "Cabinet will only decide on which option to choose, when the time comes for a decision to be made on the house. If, for example, Dr Lee Wei Ling ceases to live in the house next month, then Cabinet will have to decide next month. If she stays there for 30 more years, then the Government in place, in 30 years, will have to decide," Mr Teo said.

He added: "There should be no need to disagree on studying the options for the time when a decision needs to be made."

DPM Teo's statement is as follows:

"I met Mr Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) several times between April and July 2015. I informed him that PM Lee had recused himself on Government decisions relating to No. 38 Oxley Road (“the house”).

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...enting-8982560

[skyleon]

Allegations from my siblings 'mostly inaccurate': PM Lee


27 Jun 2017 09:49PM (Updated: 27 Jun 2017 10:30PM)



SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Tuesday (Jun 27) said the allegations that his siblings continue to make about him are "mostly inaccurate".

In response to media queries on the Facebook posts from his brother and sister, PM Lee said: "My siblings continue to make allegations about what I supposedly did or did not do. They are mostly inaccurate. As I earlier said, I will be making a statement in Parliament on Jul 3, 2017. I will at that time deal with the allegations that need to be addressed."

PM Lee and his siblings, Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, have been locked in a public spat over their late father Lee Kuan Yew's home at 38 Oxley Road.

Over the weekend, Mr Lee Hsien Yang, alleged that PM Lee is getting ministers to repeat "insinuations that Lee Kuan Yew did not understand his own will", after a demolition clause was reinserted into the last will. Dr Lee meantime, accused PM Lee of attempting to "rewrite the past", after admitting in public "for years" that the late Mr Lee's wish for demolition of the house was "unwavering", she said.

The Prime Minister last week apologised to Singaporeans, saying he deeply regrets that the dispute has affected the country's reputation and Singaporeans’ confidence in the Government. He has stated that he has recused himself from Government decisions on the house and said that in his personal capacity, he hoped to see his father's wish honoured.

PM Lee said he invited all Members of Parliament to question him and his Cabinet colleagues vigorously on the matter on Jul 3. "I hope that this full, public airing in Parliament will dispel any doubts that have been planted and strengthen confidence in our institutions and our system of government," he said.

Earlier on Tuesday, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean said it is not true that a ministerial committee weighing options for 38 Oxley Road is "bent on preventing the demolition of the house". He had earlier said the Government has the responsibility to consider the public interest aspects of any property with heritage and historical significance.

Senior Minister of State for Law Indranee Rajah has listed options for 38 Oxley Road, including demolition of the house, preservation of the property if it is designated a national monument, conservation, or compulsory acquisition.

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...pm-lee-8982916


As usual press working overtime on this issue .

[skyleon]

Going beyond symbols, honoring Lee Kuan Yew

Posted on June 28, 2017 by The Online Citizen


by Benedict Wu

The Straits Times recently published an article by Harvard Belfer Center Fellow Derwin Pereira on June 24th entitled “Symbol of the Singapore story”.

In the piece, Mr Pereira compared the 38 Oxley Road house to that of the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Hall and Sun Yat Sen Nanyang Memorial Hall. He suggests that these buildings serve important historical significance, and that preserving the Oxley Road house would provide Singaporeans something to remember their founding history.

Mr Pereira states outright that he disagrees with the claim that retaining the house would create a political cult around Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Instead, he believes that a better way of reminding Singaporeans of his “lasting influence” is to rename Changi Airport after Lee Kuan Yew. He then cites how cities like New York name its International airport after President John F. to honor his contributions to civil rights.

What’s missing from Mr Pereira’s account, of course, is the fact that his thoughts about the political cult phenomenon are irrelevant, because the founding father himself believed that given Asia’s political context and recent monarchical history, it is easy to slip into individual worship that is not constructive to progress. Never mind that Lee Kuan Yew himself would disagree with Mr Pereira, it is even more puzzling to suggest that naming an airport after an individual would be the “better way” to commemorate his contributions—the decrepit airport in New York with bad Wi-Fi signals and inefficient airport security check lines is now associated with the freedom fighter turned President; even JFK might disagree that his legacy has been properly recognized with the airport.

There is a troubling trend in recent commentary around the Oxley Road issue around the symbolism of the house. Some range from extremely romantic views that the house belongs “to the people of Singapore” (as does Mr Pereira), while others tell us that the dispute itself is a symbol of the cracking of the political establishment from within.

But Lee kuan Yew was never about symbols. He was always of the view that Singapore’s advantage and its human capital means that we must be pragmatic and always consider options that advance our strategic interests. As DPM Shanmugaratnam mentioned of ministerial committees, we are—and should be—always on our feet to make sure that our long-term interests trump immediate ones.

We are 2 weeks into this ongoing debate, and a Ministerial statement will be issued early next month, which suggests that this dispute is not merely a “family matter” but one of national strategic interest.

However, if Lee Kuan Yew’s thoughtful pragmatism is to be taken seriously, the debate should be less about the eventual decision to demolish or keep the house. Rather, the longer term issues here are important: firstly we need to know, as a people, who gets to decide “national interest”; secondly, we need to figure out how the state decides to override private interests.

Rather than glib remarks by commentators who insist that letting the state override private interest is an approach coherent with Lee Kuan Yew’s governance approach (as did Mr Pereira), the citizenry deserves to know how these decisions get made—how do we decide whether one’s estate deserve to be looked at by a Ministerial Committee, does the Will ever matter, and do family members have any claim on what to do with one’s estate?

As Mr Pereira rightly pointed out, even though Lee Kuan Yew did not like the cult of personality, it is a fact that Singapore’s modern development is imprinted with his legacy. This was perhaps to Mr Lee’s chagrin, but it also makes the issue of the house all the more important.

As Singapore’s development story matures beyond Lee Kuan Yew and his first generation of leaders, we have to begin to consider the institutional structures in place that determine one’s strategic interest against another’s private wish.

Determining whether a particular case is worthy to be recognized as “national interest” is an issue of accountability (such as the Ministerial committee). Figuring out how said national interest might override the interests of the private citizen is an argument on legitimate processes that society should decide on.

To call this a “scandal” or “embarrassment” is to rob Singaporeans of our right to participate and shape political discourse.

continue reading here : https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...-lee-kuan-yew/

[stardawn]

I am sure the public would want to know who objected to the demolition of the property and why .

[skyleon]

Lee Hsien Yang says ministerial committee did not discuss considerations with him




Danson Cheong, The Straits Times

Jun 29, 2017 06:00 am




The younger son of founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew yesterday called into question Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean's account of discussions they had about options for his late father's house at 38, Oxley Road.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang said in a Facebook post that the ministerial committee tasked to consider the options did not disclose its considerations to him.

He also said all his discussions with DPM Teo on "options for the house occurred long before the formation of the committee and only with him in his personal capacity".

His response yesterday morning to a statement DPM Teo made the previous night is the latest development in the dispute between the three Lee siblings over the fate of the house.

A statement by DPM Teo on Tuesday night had said that both he and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had spoken of "a range of viable intermediate options" for the house.

One of them was the building of a memorial park on the site.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling have said that they have never asked the Government to let them demolish the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew's house immediately.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang, in his response, said DPM Teo's statement implies that the committee had disclosed to him and his sister the options it was considering in earlier exchanges.

It did not, he said, and added: "Their letters largely focused on parroting LHL's (Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's) attacks on our father's will."

The ongoing dispute began on June 14, when Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, posted a six-page statement on Facebook alleging that their older brother, PM Lee, had abused his power and wanted to preserve the Oxley Road house for political gain.

In his Tuesday statement, DPM Teo also said the ministerial committee was not bent on preventing the demolition of the house, as Mr Lee Hsien Yang may believe. He reiterated that the committee was set up to study and set out "the range of possible options for the house".

Cabinet will decide on which option to take only when Dr Lee no longer lives there, he said.

DPM Teo also said he had verbally told Mr Lee Hsien Yang his personal views on some of the options, such as demolishing the house but keeping the basement dining room with a heritage centre attached.


continue reading here : http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore/lee...iderations-him


And so the drama now widens .

[skyleon]

Goh Meng Seng: Potential Defamation Unanswered


June 28th, 2017 | Author: Contributions


It is really unusual for PAP government, especially its Prime Minister and Ministers, to allow highly Defamatory allegations made without a hawkish response to sue the pants off of those who made it. This is especially so when such potentially Defamatory allegations are made by influential individuals in the society or its opponents in politics.

Thus, many Singaporeans are puzzled why would the current slate of Ministers and PM allow LHY and LWL to continue their attacks which are all potentially highly defamatory against PM Lee and his Ministers to go unanswered.

Many PAP apologists may say that PM Lee didn’t want to aggravate the situation by launching legal actions against his own siblings. But what about his Ministers? Does it mean that all along, their reputation which was valued by past defamation lawsuits to worth hundreds of thousands and millions, had suddenly become valueless?

Of course, many Singaporeans were quickly reminded by some activists of what GCT and LKY had said about PAP Ministers must always defend their own reputation and integrity when they were defamed.

It is kind of irony here to have LKY’s own children to break that mythical justification which was used against lots of past and present opposition members and activists.

Many people had asked Why Why Why didn’t PM Lee and his Ministers take legal actions against LWL and LHY.

Actually, LWL has unintentionally let the cat out of the bag. She mentioned that the very first joint statement with her brother LHY, was supposed to be longer but was edited away by their LAWYERs. Why do they need lawyers to vet through their statement? Of course it is to make sure that the statement, when challenged, is defensible. This is especially so for the defamatory parts.

But yet, after their lawyers vet through their statement, it still carries a few explosive allegations which is potentially defamatory if found untrue.

It would then mean that their lawyers are satisfied that all the sentences, allegations made in that statement is fully back up by solid evidence!

This is not the usual type of impromptu attacks we see on the internet. It is a carefully planned and executed attack launched by both LHY and LWL.

If you are observant enough, whenever PM Lee or his Ministers try to deny or rebut some of the allegations stated in the first joint statement, LHY will come up with rebuttal furnished and supported with “FACTS” and evidence, mostly from the huge archive of emails!

It really makes one wonder HOW MUCH EVIDENCE have they prepared before launching the joint statement!


continue reading here : http://www.tremeritus.com/2017/06/28...on-unanswered/

[skyleon]

Lee Hsien Yang: Serious concerns with PM Lee’s attempt to cover and whitewash himself in Parliament on 3 July

Posted on June 29, 2017 by Terry Xu


Mr Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) voices concerns over Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's upcoming Parliamentary session on 3 July to address the allegations made by LHY and his sister, Dr Lee Weiling (LWL) have been making for the past two weeks and that the two have no confidence that a fair, transparent or complete account of events will be told in Parliament.

In his Facebook post on Thursday, LHY wrote, "We have serious concerns with Lee Hsien Loong’s attempt to cover-up and whitewash himself in Parliament on 3 July 2017. We have begun to show evidence of his misuse of his position and influence to drive his personal agenda. This is yet another example."

LHY and his sister, Dr Lee Weiling (LWL) have been accusing their elder brother, PM Lee of abusing his powers and position as Prime Minister for personal agenda. Both of them issued a joint statement on 14 June delivering harsh criticisms of PM Lee, saying that they are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of their brother and the role of his wife, Ho Ching. The three are children of late founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, who passed away on 23 March 2015 and his property at 38 Oxley Road is the centre of the allegations and dispute.

PM Lee has earlier made a public statement on 19 June to apologise for the dispute between him and his siblings. Apart from apologising for the matter, he said that he will make a ministerial statement to refute the allegations made against him and will subject himself to questioning by the Members of Parliament on 3 July with party whip lifted for his party.

LHY notes in his Facebook post that the impending Parliamentary session is a forum that again places his brother before his subordinates and the lack of evidence that would be available in the Parliament session. He also highlights the many instances of Ministers providing cover for PM Lee prior to the 3 July "questioning".

"They lack both sufficient background and evidence of the numerous instances of abuse and conflicts of interest, many yet to be raised. Even before the session, many of them appear to have felt obliged to give him cover. Many MPs will fear career repercussions if they speak out against their superior. Historically, few PAP MPs have dared to dissent even when the party whip was lifted." wrote LHY. Which is true, and for those MPs who dared to dissent are given the cold treatment, such as Dr Tan Cheng Bock, former MP of Ayer Rajah SMC, who voiced against the Non-constituency Member of Parliament Scheme when the party whip was lifted.


LHY notes that there will be no opportunity or adequate time for evidence to be properly drawn together, placed before Parliament, and considered by the Members of Parliament. He also highlights that there will not be any opportunity for an examining body to properly probe explanations or excuses that are presented.

"A Parliamentary session is not the correct forum for investigations of this nature." wrote LHY and states that they have no confidence that a fair, transparent or complete account of events will be told at the Parliamentary session with only PM Lee's side of the story being aired. Pointing that there is no promise of truthfulness in PM Lee's Parliamentary statement due to the parliamentary privilege, LHY notes that it could also be an opportunity for PM Lee to continue to mislead or insinuate under the privilege.

Under the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act, no Member shall be liable to any civil or criminal proceedings, arrest, imprisonment or damages by reason of any matter or thing which he may have brought before Parliament or a committee by petition, bill, resolution, motion, or otherwise or may have said in Parliament or in committee.

"We believe that key issues such as his abuse of power will be simply swept under the carpet. The accused controls both process and outcome in this forum."

So far, many politicians and journalists have voiced their opinions, stating that the Parliament is not an appropriate forum to address the allegations put forth by the two siblings as they will not be allowed to present their side of the story in Parliament and the seriousness of the matter warrants a committee of inquiry to have the matter thoroughly scrutinised. The seriousness of the matter has even warranted the Public Service Division to carry out a poll to determine the damage on the trust of public institution.


continue reading here : https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...ent-on-3-july/

[skyleon]

A PAP split is on the cards


June 29th, 2017 | Author: Contributions


After the ferocious attacks launched by Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Wei Ling, the political strength of PM Lee Hsien Loong has been severely affected. In order to shore up his political support, he has asked various cabinet ministers to stand up and speak for him publicly. They include the two DPMs, Teo Chee Hean and Tharman. Minister Shanmugam had got himself embroiled and so has Minister Lawrence Wong. Indranee Rajah got in on the act too, even former PM Goh Chok Tong, and the list goes on.

It is well-know that PAP has a rule that if they are defamed, they need to sue or leave the cabinet. But PM Lee is not suing, instead, he is waging his whole party in a show hand bet by having a parliament session to debate allegation of abuse of power by his brother. Understandably, it would be difficult to sue a family member, but PM Lee can’t stop those who think that a party and a country is bigger than his family. And since, his brother has started the attacks on PM Lee and essentially his cabinet ministers, these allegations must be dealt with swiftly and decisively.

The way PM Lee handles this crisis would make or break his leadership position within the PAP. If he doesn’t come out of this fight victorious, he might be forced into early retirement and an inexperienced team would have to takeover the helm in this current climate of global uncertainty. Those who have supported PM Lee would likely have to bow off the stage together with their leader. So it won’t be surprising if some party leaders would be careful and hedge carefully while keeping their silence.


continue reading here : http://www.tremeritus.com/2017/06/29...-on-the-cards/

[skyleon]

38 Oxley Road dispute: 'No confidence' that complete account will be told in Parliament, says Lee Hsien Yang



29 Jun 2017 05:35PM (Updated: 29 Jun 2017 06:25PM)



SINGAPORE: Mr Lee Hsien Yang said on Thursday (Jun 29) that he has "no confidence" that a "fair, transparent or complete account of events" will be told in Parliament when his brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong addresses the dispute involving their childhood home at 38 Oxley Road.

"Only his side of the story will air, with no promise of truthfulness due to parliamentary privilege," Mr Lee said on his Facebook page.

He added: "We believe that key issues such as his abuse of power will be simply swept under the carpet. The accused controls both process and outcome in this forum."

PM Lee has promised to deal with the allegations when Parliament sits on Jul 3, saying that the "baseless accusations" against him and the Government must be dealt with openly. He also invited all Members of Parliament to question him and his Cabinet colleagues vigorously on the matter.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang, however, reiterated that a parliamentary session is "not the correct forum for investigations of this nature," and said the sitting on Jul 3is another example of the Prime Minister misusing his position to drive his personal agenda.

"This parliamentary session is a forum that again places Hsien Loong before his subordinates. They lack both sufficient background and evidence of the numerous instances of abuse and conflicts of interest, many yet to be raised," Mr Lee wrote on Facebook. "Many MPs will fear career repercussions if they speak out against their superior."

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...t-will-8988812

[skyleon]

Sons, mothers, money and memory: theories about the Lee Kuan Yew family feud


By Zuraidah Ibrahim/Bhavan Jaipragas

29 Jun 2017


Who’s who in the Lee Kuan Yew family feud

‘Take it to court, lah!’: Lion City captivated as personal details emerge in siblings’ fight over estate of founding leader

Family quarrels, cold wars: emails put Lee Kuan Yew’s private life on show as daughter’s feud with Singapore PM heats up

The relatives of Singapore’s late founding leader have descended into publicly fighting over his estate. Here’s how to tell your Lee Hsien Loong from your Lee Hsien Yang

In Singapore, the President’s Scholarship represents the pinnacle of educational achievement and the promise of a high-flying career in public service. Awarded to a select few top performers in each pre-university cohort, it reflects Singapore’s belief in harnessing elite talent, an obsession of its late founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew.

Lee’s family is full of President’s Scholars. He and his wife, both Cambridge-educated lawyers, had three children. All three became President’s Scholars. As ordained, they dutifully rose to the top of their respective spheres. The scions of other Southeast Asian political families – the Marcoses of the Philippines, the Suhartos of Indonesia or the Razaks of Malaysia – included at least some individuals who let their hair down, to put it mildly. But the Lees of Singapore were the goody-two-shoes of the block, the epitome of self-discipline, diligence and responsibility.

Family quarrels, cold wars: emails put Lee Kuan Yew’s private life on showp

Last Wednesday morning, however, Singapore was rocked by the revelation of an explosive feud within the Lee family. The spat had surfaced last year, then appeared to subside. But this time, out of the blue, it was clear that things had reached breaking point.

The dysfunctional relationship among the Lee siblings might have stayed behind closed doors but for two inconvenient details. First, they were fighting over the house of Lee Kuan Yew, the man who was virtually synonymous with Singapore for five decades. Second, the eldest among the siblings is the current Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Hsien Loong.

Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. Photo: AFP

So, when his younger siblings declared on Wednesday that he was unfit for his job – and this in a country where lesser accusations have been punished with crippling defamation suits – a shocked Singapore and the world took notice.

Since Wednesday, Singaporeans have been glued to their social media feeds barely able to believe the volleys of accusations and counter-accusations between the Lees. For Hong Kong-based Singaporean writer Toh Han Shih, the fallout was reminiscent of King Lear or the Mahabharata. The comparison is not out of place, because in Singapore, dominated by the Lees for most of its citizens’ lifetimes, this really is a drama of epic proportions; a storm among the gods.

A FAMILY PORTRAIT

Lee Kuan Yew died in March 2015. He was known for his intellect, determination, and hard edge. Lee Hsien Loong, who became Prime Minister in 2004, is steeped in the same sense of duty, but without his father’s killer instincts. In addition to leading the extremely effective People’s Action Party (PAP), he is personally popular. The PAP’s strong showing in the last general election, scoring 70 per cent of the popular vote, was partly attributed to public sympathy for Lee Hsien Loong after he had lost his father.

Was Lee Kuan Yew rushed into signing his last will?p

He lost his first wife to a heart attack when they were in their early 30s, not long after giving birth to a son who suffered from albinism. He later married Ho Ching, a scientist – and President’s Scholar. She rose to become chief executive of Singapore’s mammoth investment fund, Temasek Holdings. She has held that post for the past 15 years. Last year, Ho Ching ranked number 30 in the Forbes’ list of most powerful women in the world.


continue reading here : http://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politi...uan-yew-family

[skyleon]

Chief of govt comms Janadas Devan responds to Lee Wei Ling’s post on Hsien Yang’s FB

Kena dragged in, better issue reply.

By Jeanette Tan | 3 hours



[CORRECTION on Friday at 12:30pm: We’re sorry that we got this story wrong in a previous version of this article, which we’ve since edited. Janadas posted his comment on Lee Hsien Yang’s Facebook page, on a post where he shared Wei Ling’s photo. It still remains.]

On Friday morning, we saw a post from Lee Wei Ling that dragged a new player into the ongoing Lee saga.

It quoted a 2011 email from Janadas Devan, Chief of Singapore’s government communications division, which appears to show, in no uncertain terms, that the late Lee Kuan Yew was clear in his intention to demolish the house on 38, Oxley Road.

Wei Ling has for some time had comments on her posts disabled, but her posts are shared by her brother Hsien Yang, so at about 9:45am, Janadas left a comment on the latter’s Facebook share of the photo.

Here are screenshots of the comment he posted:


Screenshots from Lee Wei Ling’s Facebook page


Which we’ve copied out here:


“Dear Wei Ling: Your latest post blares, tabloid-style, misleading information. Having edited you for many years, I know this is not your style.

The email you quote was written when I was Associate Editor of Straits Times, not Chief of Government Communications. And as you know well, I had met Mr Lee Kuan Yew with a few other journalists to discuss a book that he had proposed on 38 Oxley Rd.


continue reading here : http://mothership.sg/2017/06/chief-o...-off-comments/

[skyleon]

Lee Weiling presents email which contradicts PM Lee’s statutory declaration to Ministerial Committee

Posted on June 30, 2017 by Terry Xu


Dr Lee Weiling has released an email from Janadas Devan, Chief of Government Communications at the Ministry of Communication and Information that was sent in 2011 which seems to contradict the version of story that was allegedly declared by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in his statutory declaration to the Ministerial Committee.

Dr Lee who is the sister of PM Lee, posted an image on her Facebook page showing two screenshots of two documents.

One showing an alleged part of the declaration made by PM Lee to the Ministerial Committee formed to deliberate on the government's decision on the property at 38 Oxley Road, he allegedly states,

"Soon after the meeting Mr Lee asked me for my views on whether 38 Oxley Road would be retained as heritage site. Given the strong views expressed by the Ministers during the Cabinet meeting of 21 July 2011, which also tied in with my own assessment of the public sentiment, I told Mr Lee that I felt that Cabinet was unlikely to agree to demolish the House after he died.

Mr Lee then took a number of steps which put beyond a doubt that he came to accept Cabinet's position."

(This is the first time that this statement is seen in public as PM Lee only released a summary of his declaration which did not address this point.)

The second showed an email from Janadas which was sent on 28 July 2011, a few days after the stated Cabinet meeting. The email wrote,


"Saw MM today. First meeting on Oxley book, together with team. He was in good form. He said house will be torn down. It is obvious that is what he wants. It will be a small minded people that denies him this personal wish. I think he's wrong wishing it, but I'd feel awful denying what he obviously wants."

Not the first time that LKY's demolishment wish on 38 Oxley Road was said

In fact, what Janadas wrote is as what PM Lee himself implied in his speech on 13 April 2015 over the passing of Lee Kuan Yew.

He said,


"There have also been calls to turn Mr Lee’s home, 38 Oxley Road, into a museum and a memorial to him. But Mr Lee was adamant that 38 Oxley Road should be demolished after his passing. He wrote formally to the Cabinet at least twice to put his wishes on the record – once soon after my mother his wife had died, and the second time soon after he had stepped down from office in 2011. He said, talking about Oxley Road, that “it should not be kept as a kind of relic”. He said that he had seen too many other houses of famous people “kept frozen in time … as a monument with people tramping in and out”. They invariably “become shabby”, in his words. My mother also felt strongly about this. She was most distressed at the thought of people coming through her private spaces after she and my father had passed away, to see how they had lived.

Mr Lee stated his view on this matter in one of his books, Hard Truths. This caused a public reaction, as some people wanted the house preserved. So, in December 2011, after he had retired from the Cabinet, and after he had written to us the second time, I held a special Cabinet meeting and invited Mr Lee to attend, in order to discuss 38 Oxley Road.

The Ministers tried hard to change his mind. After the meeting, Mr Lee wrote to the Cabinet, and I quote from his letter:

“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.” End of the quote and that was the letter.

Two years later, in December 2013, Mr Lee made his will. He appointed my brother Mr Lee Hsien Yang and sister Dr Lee Wei Ling as his executors and trustees. Mr Lee wrote, in paragraph 7 of his will, and I quote:

“I further declare that it is my wish, and the wish of my late wife, KWA GEOK CHOO, that our house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629 (‘the House’) be demolished immediately after my death or, if my daughter, Wei Ling, would prefer to continue living in the original house, immediately after she moves 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 law, rules or regulations binding them, it is my wish that the House never be opened 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.”

Mr Lee’s position on 38 Oxley Road was unwavering over the years, and fully consistent with his lifelong values. We should respect his wishes, as well as those of Mrs Lee.

Dr Lee Wei Ling has informed me that she intends to continue living in the house at 38 Oxley Road. Therefore, there is no immediate issue of demolition of the house, and no need for the Government to make any decision now.

If and when Dr Lee Wei Ling no longer lives in the house, Mr Lee has stated his wishes as to what then should be done. At that point, speaking as a son, I would like to see these wishes carried out. However, it will be up to the Government of the day to consider the matter."

For those who have been following the on-going Lee family saga would be familiar with the accusations made by the children of late Lee Kuan Yew, LWL and Mr Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) upon their elder brother with allegations of him abusing his powers and position as Prime Minister for his personal agenda.

Both of them issued a joint statement on 14 June delivering harsh criticisms of PM Lee, saying that they are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of their brother and the role of his wife, Ho Ching.

While the media and the Ministers under PM Lee have been painting the issue as one that is about the property of 38 Oxley Road, how LKY was not one-minded to have his property demolished, how the younger brother intends to profit from selling the plot of land and a matter of family dispute between the Lee siblings.


continue reading here : https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...ial-committee/

[skyleon]

Lee Wei Ling, Janadas exchange words over Oxley Road spat


Published: 1:00 PM, June 30, 2017

Updated: 1:24 PM, June 30, 2017



SINGAPORE – Dr Lee Wei Ling and chief of Government Communications Janadas Devan exchanged words on Facebook on Friday morning (June 30) over the ongoing Oxley Road saga.

In a post at 7.20am, Dr Lee put up an email from Mr Janadas, dated July 28, 2011 as a rebuttal to what she referred to as claims by her elder brother Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong that their father had “come to accept” that the family home should be preserved after July 21, 2011.

In the email, Mr Janadas wrote that he met Mr Lee Kuan Yew that day, July 28, and Mr Lee told him that the house will be torn down. Saying it is “obvious” that is what Mr Lee Kuan Yew wants, Mr Janadas added: “It will be a small minded people that denies him this personal wish. I think he’s wrong wishing it, but I’d feel awful denying him what he obviously wants.”

Juxtaposing Mr Janadas’ email with a snippet of PM Lee’s statutory declaration, she wrote: “We thought that Singaporeans should hear directly from Janadas Devan, chief of Government Communications at the Ministry of Communication and Information.”

The post was immediately shared by her younger brother Lee Hsien Yang.


continue reading here : http://www.todayonline.com/singapore...xley-road-spat