Christopher De Souza’s tough questions in Parliament

Responding to Hsien Loong’s call for tough questions in Parliament on the Lee Family feud, MP De Souza submitted 10 tough questions in Parliament. The questions below were from a post in TRE titled PAP MP put forth ‘tough questions’ on familee feud’.
 
Mr De Souza said that it was important to investigate whether the mission of the organs of state were subservient to the agenda of any personality, as alleged by PM Lee’s siblings.

He then put forth the following ten questions to the Prime Minister and to Parliament:
 
1. Is it true or false that organs of state are being used to target Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling?
 
2. Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang questioned whether “able leaders with independent political legitimacy will be sidelined to ensure Hsien Loong’s grip on power remains unchallenged.” Is it true that ensuring the Prime Minister’s power remains unchallenged trumps independent political legitimacy?
 
3. Mr Lee Hsien Yang said, “a few of the attacks we had to face in private are now public. False accusations, character assassination, the entire machinery of the Singapore press thrown against us.” Is it true or false that the Government uses Singapore press to target Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang?
 
4. The siblings have said that they see “many upright leaders of quality and integrity throughout public service who are constrained by Hsien Loong’s misuse of power at the very top.” Is it true that public service is constrained by the Prime Minister’s misuse of power at the top?
 
5. Is it true or false that the leadership and direction of the government is directed for personal purposes or any other improper purpose?
 
6. Is it true or false that organs of the state may be used for personal agendas?
 
7. Is it true or false that the ministerial committee is merely a facade that the Prime Minister is able to influence in one way or the other?
 
8. Is it true or false that the ministerial committee never told Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling about options they were exploring?
 
9. On 15 Jun 2017 at 9.25pm, Mr Lee Hsien Yang wrote, “Hsien Loong’s public statement contradicts the statutory declaration he made to his secret committee. It is wrong to lie to Parliament and it is wrong to lie under oath. Is it true or false that the Prime Minister lied to Parliament?
 
10. On 14 June 2017, Lee Hsien Yang said, “Hsien Loong has asserted to the committee that Lee Kuan Yew would accept any decision by the Government to preserve 38 Oxley Road. In doing this, Hsien Loong has deliberately misrepresented Lee Kuan Yew’s clear intentions for his own political benefit. He has also gone back on his own declarations that he would recuse himself from all government decisions involving 38 Oxley.” Is it true or false that the Prime Minister has misguided a ministerial committee to fulfill his own personal purposes?
 
The questions were tough alright. But De Souza put in all his experience as a lawyer to frame the questions in such a way like questioning or cross examining a witness and only allowed the witness to answer yes or no, in this case true or false. Hsien Loong would not be allowed to say but or if or maybe, just answer true or false. He also made it easy for the people reading the tough questions to come to a quick conclusion. 50% false answers, pass, 70% false answers, good, 90% and above false answers, distinction.
 
In a way the questions also made life easier for Hsien Loong, just tick true or false. So simple!
What would happen if Hsien Loong tick all as false or as yes? Who will be the judge, the Parliament, De Souza or the public? To me it is the public acting as the jury. It is anytime better than being the accused, the witness, and also the judge.