Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) has issued a statement to urge Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to convene a Commission of Inquiry on the ongoing dispute between him and his siblings, Dr Lee Weiling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang instead of having the matter debated in Parliament.
The party states that the Parliament is hardly the appropriate forum to conduct an inquiry that will win public confidence in a matter of such national importance.
Highlighting the seriousness of the charges and counter-charges made by those involved – including cabinet ministers – and the grave implications the allegations hold for the future of Singapore, the party urges the PM to call for a forum that is beyond reproach in its service of truth and fairness.
Earlier today, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, a former People’s Action Party Member of Parliament also wrote that the Parliament is not the right place to settle family disputes.
“It is an institution to make laws and debate national issues.Family disputes should be settled in courts.In parliament MPs have no details of the case and only hear PM telling his side of the case. Wrong platform.” commented Dr Tan.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has earlier made a public statement on Monday evening (19 June) to apologise for the dispute between him and his siblings, Dr Lee Weiling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang.
Apart from apologising for the matter, he said that he will make a ministerial statement in Parliament 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.
On 14 June, PM Lee’s two siblings issued a public statement to express their non confidence in him and wrote that they are worried about Singapore’s future in his hands. They raised several issues in their six-page statement such as the handling of the 38 Oxley Road but most importantly, the two alleged that the PM had abused his official position for personal agenda.
Below is SDP’s statement in full

The matter of PM Lee Hsien Loong’s dispute with his siblings should be heard by a properly convened Commission of Inquiry (COI) rather than be debated in Parliament.
The SDP stated in our media release (15 June 2017) that “PM Lee must address the specific allegations of public concern in a clear and transparent manner. The only way that this can be satisfactorily done is through public hearings.”
Given that the PM is at the centre of the controversy, Parliament is hardly the appropriate forum to conduct an inquiry that will win public confidence in a matter of such national importance.
Instead, a COI like the one held to look into the circumstances surrounding the riot in Little India in 2013 should take place. In that hearing, lapses in the security system were identified and concrete recommendations made to improve it.
If the Government saw the need for a COI over the incident in Little India, what more this matter which has generated intense public angst.
Given the seriousness of the charges and counter-charges made by those involved – including cabinet ministers – and the grave implications the allegations hold for the future of our country, it behooves the PM to call for a forum that is beyond reproach in its service of truth and fairness.
Such an inquiry must necessarily include a body with the power to subpoena all actors and relevant witnesses where they can be questioned under oath. The composition of the panel must, of course, be consistent with the spirit and objective in which the inquiry is conducted.
It must be reiterated that the saga goes well beyond a private family quarrel and crosses into the realm which involves matters at the very heart of transparent and accountable governance.
It is in this light that the SDP urges PM Lee to do the right thing and convene a genuinely impartial hearing to get to the bottom of the incident and, in so doing, reform our nation’s governing process.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

MP accuses people of circulating online falsehood over ‘PAP’ chocolates he distributed

Mr Melvin Yong, Member of Parliament for Tanjong Pagar GRC, posted a…

Little chance of developing Singaporean core in industries as companies continue to hire FTs

An Indian national, Debayan Mukherjee, wrote on Quora early this month (Dec…

HRH Prince Harry learns about HIV/AIDS issues in Singapore

Prince Harry started his Singapore visit by seeing a rapid HIV test…

28年每月入息仅482元 读者申请缩短提领公积金年限遭拒

早前我国一民众分享,收到中央公积金来函,指若有意在65岁就开始提取入息,就必须另行通知当局,否则,就要等到70岁才能自动入息。 《网络公民》一读者Zol也投稿本社,反映在今年6月年满65岁的他,也同样收到上述信函。但令他惊讶和困惑的,是他的公积金退休存款入息延长达28年至93岁,致使每月只能领取482元的入息。 他质问,公积金局怎能随意决定会员该如何提取自己的存款? Zol指出,根据媒体报导,新加坡平均寿命约为85.4年,为此他致函该局,要求派息期限缩减到20年,以便增加每月入息。 然而公积金局拒绝了Zol的申请。在回函中公积金解释,到了55岁若符合全额退休存款(FRS)(约17万6000元),加上4巴仙利息,到了符合入息年龄,20年内每月可提取910元。但是无法达到全额退休存款者,则会按比例获得入息,最低为每月250元,而Zol的情况下是28年每月入息482元。 公积金在回函中表示若缩短入息年限到20年,可能Zol的退休退款会提早用完,为此拒绝了他的申请,除非他能增加退休存款储蓄,或者延后提取入息,才能享有较高的入息数额。 对此,Zol认为公积金局从未征询过会员们的意见,即便是公积金官网,也明言指出“会员可自行决定每月入息数额”: 膝下无子女 公积金无受益人 Zol表示虽已婚但膝下无子女,可能离世前都得自力更生。“如果在70岁前没有工作,那70岁入息前的五年,我要如何生存?” “再者,公积金四巴仙的利率也根本无助对抗现在的通货膨胀,更何况未来消费税会增加到九巴仙。如果要在65岁和70岁提取入息两者中做选择,我看最好的决定不如现在就把我的公积金储蓄提走。” 由于和妻子膝下无子女,意味着他们的存款没有继承/受益人,所以延长提取入息期限到28年是不合逻辑的。…