There are basically two parts to this family feud. One is about the fate
of the family house in Oxley Road. The second part is about allegations
about Hsien Loong’s integrity. The first part is easy to deal with,
legallee, oops, sorry should be spelt legally.
LKY being a lawyer by training and knowing what his rights were as a
citizen, knew very well that his will is but the will of a private
citizen. He could write his will but ultimately it is the govt that
would make the decision on what it wants to do with the house. And the
govt has all the right and reasons to gazette it as a national monument
under the National Heritage Board. LKY had conceded this point if you
read his will carefully. He is not above the law and the law or the
state has the final say in this matter.
What is this thing called the Ministerial Committee and why was it
delving into the intricacies of the will? The Ministerial Committee
should do all its due diligence on what is the best thing to do with the
house and make a recommendation to the govt on what should be good for
country, taking note of LKY’s last wish. And if it so chooses to gazette
the house as a national monument, it would be nice and polite to
explain to the family of its decision and make the appropriate
compensation for acquiring the property.
The tricky part is how to say it to the family especially when it was
LKY’s last wish and many people would like to grant him that for what he
had done and would hope that the govt could agree, not that the govt
must obey LKY’s last wish. Period.
What is disgusting and patronising is for people to cast aspersion about
the intellect and soundness of mind of Lee Kuan Yew when he signed the
will. LKY, should these people forget, had a double first in law from
Cambridge, a rare honour given to the brightest law student from this
great university. Many of those that are making silly remarks about LKY
not knowing what he signed in his will, that he carelessly signed
without reading, without knowing, is uncalled for. Some even suggested
that he needed legal advice from those that would best got a second
class upper law degree or the very few first class from NUS.
How many of these people could advise LKY when they could not even hold a
candle to him in matters of law and when writing a will is not rocket
science?
The less these people try to discredit LKY when he is already not around
to use his knuckle duster on them the better it is for their own
credibility. No one is really good enough to tell LKY what he should
write in his will. This is a no nonsense and very meticulous man. This
is a no brainer. He is not senile or mad when he signed his will. And he
is no fool. No one could trick him into doing things that he did not
want. Want to question his intent?
The second part of this feud is the troublesome one. Hsien Yang and Wei
Ling had said many things that questioned Hsien Loong’s character and
suitability to be the PM. At the moment these are just allegations and
they have to prove what they said with concrete evidence to make it
stick. Hsien Loong on his part would have to defend these allegations,
to clear his name, that he is an honourable man and a man of
unquestionable integrity.
How are these allegations and Hsien Loong’s defence to be settled? Is a
PM statement in Parliament satisfactory to prove that Hsien Loong is
what he said he is and Hsien Yang/Wei Ling’s allegations were baseless?
In Parliament it is a one sided affair with Hsien Loong saying his peace
in the absence of the accusers, Hsien Yang and Wei Ling. When there are
two conflicting versions to the matters at hand, it is only right and
proper to settle it in a court of law where there is a neutral
arbitrator to allow both sides to say their peace supported by evidence
and then make a judgement on the allegations. How else can such a matter
be resolved if the two parties did not meet on a level playing field?
If Hsien Yang and Wei Ling could not prove their case, then it is
defamation, defaming of the Prime Minister, a very serious thing.
The allegations are serious and would affect Hsien Loong’s credibility
as a PM and he has no choice but to defend himself vigorously, not in a
Parliament when one side with an absolute majority could just shout down
the other side giving the impression that more or the majority means
right or the truth.
What do you think? Can this matter rest without a judgement, without an
answer? Can these allegations be left floating in the air and the people
left scratching their heads or gossiping behind Hsien Loong’s back?
Uncle RB, if Ah Long not going to sue A Yang & A Ling in the court, it will only show one thing -- all these allegations by Long siblings r true & Long characters r a questions mark..probably Ah Long already knew tat & weighs the matters well, a very high probability is to keep the white lightning party rules 4ever is more important than anything else ( or even paving the way for his whoever his descendents of the the Lee clan), tat's why Ah Long fights to keep his dad estate as the Chinese FengShui of some elders could have advice Long Ge not to torn down as it's a '龙脉'or Dragoon's heart, by keeping it ensures the empire to continue it to rules as long as ever..
ReplyDeleteYou will be greatly disappointed if you are expecting something new to come out of the Parliament session.
ReplyDeleteThe committee will still be there.
A vote of confidence on our PM by the Parliament.
This is at least a temporary closure to this episode away from the public ears.
If The Dragon thinks that he can just make a Ministerial (Millionaire) statement in Parliament and get questioned "vigorously" by his balls-less and sycophantic minions to replace the Defamation Suit in the High Court in order to clear his name, he must be very desperate!
ReplyDeleteA desperate person will even pretend to cry in the Parliament for the whole world to see. If need be the character-assassination tactic might be used against his own siblings.
He can make use of all the State Organs and Government Machinery he wants in order to put down and discredit his accusers, none other than his own blood brother and sister. It is two mouths against one still.
But there is one thing he had screwed himself. He sold the house to his brother for 150% above market value in 2015. That in real terms is $36 million plus 300% tax deduction from his income tax, if he had donated that to charity. Which he claimed he did. This is not just a simple transaction. This is a calculated premeditated sale in order to gey cadh from his own younger brother and huge tax deductions from Inland Revenue.
Secondly, he already knew he wanted to make the house a National Heritage well back in 2011 when he told his father directly. That was the time when his father wrote his First Will, which included the Demolition Clause. So why did he deliberately sold the house for huge cash to his younger brother? Isn't this tantamount to Insider Trading, which many Directors have been charged under Criminal Breach of Trust.
If he goez to Court to challenge his siblings' accusations, then mire skeletons might drop out from the Cupboard or Cabinet. Don't you think so?
The Dragon has screwed himself too deep to be able to pull it out!
Not sure what to make of the yappings from the hanger ons.. but if i need to reflect on the millions who turn out at his funeral..the thousands who weep n cried as if the end of days are here..what a great man..gone!!!! Really?? How great can a man be if his dying wish cannot be fulfilled..
ReplyDeleteAs most Singaporeans know, any debate in Parliament on issues is no more than, as they say, merely staged to get the rubber stamping action that the PAP is famous for.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that LKY made his last will in 2013, even when he was still the MP for Tanjong Pagar, if I read correctly, goes to suggest that he is neither senile nor unclear about what he wanted to be done, when he made his last will. Anything to suggest otherwise about his mental faculties would be an insult to his position and character, for wanting to stay on as MP.
Now, it looks like the whole PAP cabinet and government organ are out not only to discredit the characters of LHY and LWL, but the old man himself as well.
9.25 has foods for the thought. Sold a property to get cash and claim the property on power of state machinery. The buyer of this property will have problem to redevelop the property to profit.
ReplyDeleteThe whole matter should be seen on: who has the weight to decide on the property. The original owner s wishes should take first place: demolish is the keyword. No need to have degree to learn the meaning: tear it down. Dictionary has it.
Some woman politician tried to tell what the dead man had wanted to support the opposite meaning: not tearing it down.
Dead man s wish to tear it down was not FIRST declared on the will. It came as no surprise to public because the dead man declared it to the editors of public media entrusted to write the volumes of books on life of the dead man. This was what i learned about the property from public media.
It was an offer to the world at large: demolish, tear down the property. Go to court, there will be editors/readers as witnesses.
On using parliament to declare on the fate of the property is something unheard of, hardly can happen in UK Australia, which local laws and political systems are based upon. It reflects on the inability of politicians to find avenue to resolve issues.
Once the parliament was used to talk about cleaning a hawker center roof top at an opposition ward. 90 over multiple millionaires collecting cash from coffers listened to the story. What is the results on setting the laws on cleaning hawker center roof top? No laws was reset.
In the coming statement, the new laws on will? If some committee can rule on how to interpret a dead man s will, then in future, all wills will need to be pre interpreted by some committee. Common will would be on property and cpf distribution. No one will ignore how the laws will be tweaked.
This story of a family attracted world wide attention. From Scmp Nectar Gan s article, China alone had 5000 over comments on Weibo. 1440 likes on a statement saying some one was lackey of USA in Asia. The story attracted negative views to a tiny place whose reputation was once built positively by the dead man. The unfortunate choice of its own voters. No more good luck to it. One single way down the road. Thanks to the dragon who wants to stay on and on with the house "to milk political capital", according to Scmp s comments. Will it work to the benefits of its voters? You have the answer by looking beyond the tiny island s shores.
"No one is really good enough to tell LKY what he should write in his will."
ReplyDeleteYa, all those junior nobodies like Indranee, Grace Fu, Lawrence Wong, etc . . .
The Lizard (that is what his name sounds like) antagonised China by aligning himsrlf with the Evil Empire. Now China has a few short, medium and long term plans to ensure this Lizard gets what he deserves.
ReplyDeleteHis brother has carefully chosen HK as his immediate sanctuary not by chance. He must have known more things than we do. From HK, he can be engaged as a Consultant to devekop HK as a more formidable challenger to Daftieland in all areas - telecommunication, aviation, shipping, banking and finance, litigation, etc.
Moreover, China is helping Malaysia to develop the ports at both the Eastern and Western sides with a linking Highway plus High-Speed Train in the immediate future.
China is also going to develop the Kra Isthmus Canal in the long term.
In the medium term, China will help develop Indonesia and the Philippines on a Mutual Benefits Basis.
Daftieland will be totally by-passed. Moreover. Chinese Investments and Tourism will be pulled out phase by phase, starting with the curtailment of the gambling dollars.
So what will happen to Daftieland?
"He is not above the law and the law or the state has the final say in this matter. "
ReplyDeleteBut "the state" is consisted of, and "the law" made by, the PAP ministers . . .
You nailed it Sir or Madam.
DeleteThe Sin Law Makers shall make Laws to suit their Agenda whether the people like it or not.
The people have absolutely no say or whatever.
Can this matter rest without a judgement, without an answer?
ReplyDeleteRB
What judgement? What answer?
Let the majority voters make the judgement on which parties to vote for, PAP or opposition, at the next election.
And the outcome of PAP winning again will be the best answer for Hsien Loong to his critics, including his siblings. And this settles the question. Case closed.
Simple case of one Bro wants to retain House for future power base.
ReplyDeleteOne bro after paying so much wants to double the outlays and migrate elsewhere.
First bro used all.means to blockade the Demolition and sale of the Land..Using others for his cause.
That's why one gentleman wrote to the press asking why his status in the title deed is named as "Tenant" instead of "Owner"
For in future, any property that deemed valuable and useful to the PAP can be turned over to them.
The law gonna be passed very soon in Parliament. The simple reason, the Government and the State has an interest in it.
LHY is gonna to be the next Li Ka Shing in HK. Li had announced his retirement soon.
He gonna cooperate with Carrie Lam and Xi with its vast hinterland to drown SINKIE land.
Workers' Party MPs may want to preserve the shop house at Syed Alwi Road where they hold their meetings for posterity !
ReplyDeleteAnd the outcome of PAP winning again will be the best answer for Hsien Loong to his critics, including his siblings.
ReplyDelete11:52 am
Ya lor, and this one his siblings also know lah, that's why they decided to leave Sinkieland. No point staying on to fight, tio bo? Sure lose one what.
Only daft Sinkies choose to stay on to suffer, and to be replaced in their jobs by cheaper, smarter foreigners.
Sure one got new law to take over properties deemed of national interest. Property with 999 years or 9 million year lease also no use leh!
ReplyDeleteSinkieland and all land belongs to the Government. The government belongs to PAP. Who can challenge? Sure die one. Even siblings of dragon prince knows, therefore time to leave. Daft peasants have no where to go and will continue to vote for lightning to strike them. Die die must slog until death for the government which is the PAP, generation after generation after..........Change will never come.
Maybe one day we will merge back with matland. More chinese there means that chance is high. We never wanted to be independent. We were kicked out. For the elites it is not good. But for the people, it is better. Cheaper housing, cars, daily expenses etc.
ReplyDeleteHsien Yang is trying to fulfill his filial piety (孝順) duty to his father (父親) by acting according to his will, but PAP's Indranee Rajah is trying to block him citing national interests . . .
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteNo matter how the First Family Feud Saga concludes, there is only losers.
Some lose their property and others lose their integrities.
Absolutely no winner, not a single one.
Pathetic.
patriot
The lawyers are the winners. They profit every time there is mishappening.
ReplyDeleteVivian Balakrishnan haven't said anything on the Oxley feud!
ReplyDeleteOnly way to advoid confrontation(anger)
ReplyDeleteIs let one's mind free frm burden.by reminding
"I have nothing to worry anymore."short the cause of anger.
RB,
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think of this:
"The only way out of the stranglehold of the PAP's Absolute Aristocratic Power is for the daft Sinkies to now seize the opportunity to encourage, help, persuade and support LHY and LWL to form a political party to challenge their LHL and PAP.
This is the only chance to force a split in the PAP as well as for the 70% PAP voters to switch side.
Since WP has been unwilling to be ready to form a new government, and LTK has openly indicated in Parliament that he is in kind of greateful (beholden) to Supreme Justice Shamugam, then it is hopeless for Sinkies to rely on WP any more.
Name the new party:
Anti-Power-Abuse Party (APAP), or simply the New PAP (NPAP) - sounds like END PAP!
Any comment?
Forming new political party is easy but whether they will be able to defeat the Bayan Tree PAP is difficult, given the fixated and individualistic mentality of the majority of Singapore kiasu and kiasi voters.
ReplyDeleteRead my letter to editor in Financial Times June 23rd. This letter is partly reproduced in the Independent.
ReplyDeleteThnaks Frankie and welcome to the blog.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the title of your article, subject matter?
ReplyDeleteRead my letter to editor in Financial Times on June 23rd about Singapore.
ReplyDelete