Mr Teo Chee Hean
Blk 738 Pasir Ris Drive 10
#01-21
Singapore 510738
Dear Sir,
Parliamentary Select Committee / Presidential Commission of Inquiry
1. At the closing address in Parliament on 38 Oxley Road dispute, PM said:
The accusers may not be in Parliament but that should not stop MPs from talking to them to get their story, nor would it stop the accusers from getting in touch with MPs, including opposition MPs, to tell their story so that the MPs can raise it on their behalf in Parliament. That is, in fact, how the MP system is meant to work. Those are the MP’s duties. That is one reason why Parliamentary Privilege exists. So that MPs who have heard troubling allegations or news, can make these allegations and raise the matters in the House even if they are not completely proven and may be defamatory, without fear of being sued for defamation. That is how Parliaments are supposed to function.
But none of this has happened over the last two days. No one says there is evidence of abuse of power. Even the Opposition is not accusing the Government of abuse of power. So it is not a case of oneself defend oneself. Why do we need in these circumstances, a Select Committee or COI, and drag this out for months? It would be another Korean drama full scale serial. Should we set up Select Committees to investigate every unsubstantiated allegation, every wild rumour? It is as Mr Low Thia Khiang says, “vague allegations,…based on scattered evidence centred on family displeasure”, as a basis for ordering a Select Committee or COI? That’s not a basis. But if there is evidence of wrongdoing that emerges or alleged evidence of wrongdoing which emerges, then I and the Government will consider what further steps to take. We can have a Select Committee, we can have a Commission of Inquiry, I may decide to sue for defamation or take some other legal action, but until then let’s get back to more important things that we should be working on.
2. Over the many years since 2007 that I wrote to HDB Branch Office, Meet-the-People Sessions, HDB Hub, Town Council, PSC, MOM, MND, SPF, CPIB, President, Prime Minister and, since 2009, in my blog, I basically asked for an inquiry. However, there was no reply that dealt directly with the complaint which was noise from the working of a trade from an upper floor neighbour. Noise was reduced substantially only after posting Standpoint (34) in 2012, which meant the neighbour had tormented me for five years. When I decided to sell my flat I found that estate agents were not honest and CEA did not give a reply after I officially submitted my complaint. Other instances where transactions were made difficult for me were at banks, hospital, government agencies, companies and shops. So long as I continue with the complaint, there is no end.
3. If indeed the neighbour had a) different persons worked inside their HDB flat, b) the flat changed hand after an eviction, c) the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour kept watch, d) officers on their side but insiders assisted me, then it would stand to reason such relationships can be traced with the evidence that I had provided. These included records that could prove my allegation. These evidence are in the various postings but the first post Report (1) about covers it. The other posts emanating from here are varied that include the situation I am in and extracts from books and articles to support my case.
4. Allowing the neighbour to carry on a trade in HDB flat is a crime. Not allowing refund to my CPF Account after selling my flat and setting for reduced payout in my CPF Life over two instances are outright misbehaviour. Of the first, a background check of the neighbour would have clear them if the evidence had been insubstantial. Of the second, a CPF director did not reply to the four questions as shown in CPF Life (78).
5. If these were not the case, why would the authorities not refute the evidence. And if there is truth, when will the authorities take action. There are procedure and rule of law. There are norm and reasoning. It is not that the government was unaware or had not done anything to alleviate the situation, but they were not dealing directly with the problem by prolonging the situation.
6. Mainstream media are muted. People in powerful positions are able to keep the problem low-key without much repercussion. The post Select Committee (27) that I submitted to the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods are on such issues.
7. At first I was asking for an inquiry from the authorities, then I was appealing to sentiment from the public, now I am asking for an investigation from Parliament. The problem could only be resolved in Parliament.
8. Please bring up the problem in Parliament.
Yours Sincerely,
hh
No comments:
Post a Comment