I refer to the article “Committee studying options for Oxley house” (Straits Times, Jun 15).
It states that “The future of the house at the centre of a dispute between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings is being studied by a ministerial committee.
The existence of the committee was disclosed yesterday by Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, the PM’s younger siblings.
In a Facebook statement, both said they were told by National Development Minister Lawrence Wong last July that “a ministerial committee had been set up to consider options with respect to 38, Oxley Road and their implications”.
Cabinet Secretary Tan Kee Yong, who confirmed the establishment of the committee in a separate statement yesterday, said it was set up to consider options for the house and the implications of those options.”
Why is it that this ministerial committee set up in July last year was never disclosed to the public?
As to “”These included looking into various aspects, including the historical and heritage significance of the house, as well as to consider Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s thinking and wishes in relation to the house,” Mr Tan said in the statement.
He also said the committee has been looking at how the late Mr Lee’s will came to be made and the roles played in this by Mrs Lee Suet Fern – Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s wife – and the law firm that she heads” – since the will was made on 27 December, 2013 (note: Mr Lee Kuan Yew was continuously a Member of Parliament until his death on 23 March, 2015) and “2010-2011: Mr Lee Kuan Yew writes formally to the Cabinet twice to put his wishes to demolish his house at 38, Oxley Road on record” – why is there still a need to “has been looking at how the late Mr Lee’s will came to be made and the roles played in this by Mrs Lee Suet Fern – Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s wife – and the law firm that she heads”?
With regard to “The statement from the Cabinet Secretary was issued in response to claims by Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee in their statement that PM Lee made “extensive representations” to the committee and that he is in “a direct position of power over the committee” because the ministers in it report to him.
Mr Tan said: “The Prime Minister has not been involved in Cabinet’s discussions concerning this committee. As he had previously stated, he has recused himself from all government decisions concerning the house.”
He said the committee had sought the views of the Prime Minister, as well as those of his siblings, “to ask if they wished to say anything about the late Mr Lee’s thinking in respect of the house, beyond what has already been stated in public”.
“Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s views were sought in his personal capacity, given his position as Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s eldest son and his interest as a beneficiary of the estate,” Mr Tan noted” – does it mean that – “recused”, but also “views were sought in his personal capacity”?
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary – “recused” means “to disqualify (oneself) as judge in a particular case; broadly : to remove (oneself) from participation to avoid a conflict of interest”.
In respect of Lee Wei Ling and Lee Hsien Yang’s statement” – “We fear the use of the organs of state against us and Hsien Yang’s wife, Suet Fern” – what does “use of the organs of state” mean and what is it referring to?
Leong Sze Hian
