DOCSLIB.ORG

Speech by Mr Lawrence Wong, Minister for National Development and Second Minister for Finance, on Issue of the House at 38 Oxley Road

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Speech by Mr Lawrence Wong, Minister for National Development and Second Minister for Finance, on Issue of the House at 38 Oxley Road SPEECH BY MR LAWRENCE WONG, MINISTER FOR NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND SECOND MINISTER FOR FINANCE, ON ISSUE OF THE HOUSE AT 38 OXLEY ROAD Mdm Speaker, 1. I would like to speak on two matters in this debate. First, I will clarify the issue of the Deed of Gift between the executors of the estate of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew and the National Heritage Board, as I was then the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth. Second, I will elaborate on due processes for proposals on the conservation and preservation of properties. Deed of Gift 2. First, let me touch on the deed of gift. From early 2015 onwards, NHB started planning for a major SG50 exhibition on 6 August 2015 (just before the Jubilee Weekend) and the exhibition was on Singapore’s founding leaders. Following the passing of Mr Lee Kuan Yew in March 2015, NHB was also in discussion with executors of the estate about a donation of artefacts from 38 Oxley Road which could be incorporated into the exhibition. 3. The deed of gift was not based on NHB’s standard agreement. The executors of the estate, namely Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, insisted on several unusual conditions. These conditions included: - The right to buy back the items at $1 so long as the House was not demolished. - And the display of the wishes of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew to demolish the House. 4. And as Members would have heard just now, the deed of gift required NHB to display only part of the demolition clause in Mr Lee’s will. In other words, NHB was to display the first part which sets our Mr Lee’s wish to demolish the House, but not the second part which sets out his wish should the House not be demolished. At that time, NHB did not pick up the significance of this partial quote from the demolition clause. 5. Ms Lee Suet Fern, who was then a director on the board of NHB, was also involved in the discussions between NHB and the executors. She supported the conditions stipulated by the executors in the deed, and her law firm Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC helped in the process of finalising the deed. 6. The executors held firm to many of the terms that they had stipulated in the deed. For example, when NHB asked to amend the $1 buy-back provision, the lawyer for the executors stated that this clause was “non-negotiable”. 7. While the terms were unusual, NHB proceeded to sign the deed with the executors because it recognised the heritage significance of the artefacts and felt that it would be in the public interest for them to be exhibited. NHB also assessed that several of the objects were in a deteriorated condition and required immediate care and conservation. 8. So NHB signed the deed with the executors on 8 June 2015. At around the same time, I updated the Prime Minister on the plans for the exhibition and the inclusion of the Oxley Road artefacts in the exhibition, including the conditions stipulated in the deed. And I later shared with him a copy of the deed on 12 June. 9. As the Prime Minister shared earlier, he felt that the terms of the deed were onerous to NHB. He told me that as a beneficiary of the estate, his consent for the donation had not been sought. The executors had not informed him of the donation, nor the terms of the donation. 10. So NHB was caught in a difficult position. It had signed the deed and accepted the gifts. But it was not clear if the executors were properly empowered to enter into the deed without first consulting all beneficiaries. This also raises questions about the validity of the agreement. Moreover, the planned exhibition was just two months away, and NHB did not have much time left to resolve the issues and then properly prepare for the exhibition. 11. I discussed this with the CEO of NHB Ms Rosa Daniel to see what could be done about the matter. Given the circumstances, we agreed that it would be better to take a pause and not rush the Oxley Road items for the August exhibition; we could exhibit them at a later stage after the issues had been resolved. So I asked Ms Daniel to inform Mr Lee Hsien Yang that we would like to put off the display of the Oxley Road artefacts from the August exhibition, and do so at some time in the future. 12. Mr Lee Hsien Yang responded on 10 June that this request was “unacceptable” and would be a breach of a legally binding deed. In fact, NHB had no intention to breach any legal obligations, and Ms Daniel clarified this point in an email to Mr Lee Hsien Yang the next day. She said that the “Minister’s instructions are that NHB is not to breach its obligations if it has entered into valid agreements which are binding on it”. 13. While the executors were insistent that NHB had to follow through on the exhibition, NHB still had a duty to check whether the deed of gift was in order, in light of the different views of the beneficiaries. Hence NHB wrote to the lawyers of the executors to clarify whether probate had been granted for the will, whether there were any other beneficiaries entitled to the assets of the estate and if so, whether their consent had been obtained for the gift to NHB. 14. Before responding to these queries, the executors of the estate put out a media release on 11 June publicising their donation of items to NHB. This was a surprise to NHB because the queries had not been addressed, and so NHB issued a statement that same night to highlight that there remained some questions on the deed of gift which NHB was in the process of clarifying with the executors. 15. On 12 June, Mr Lee Hsien Yang replied to NHB that the executors had not obtained probate for the will, but that probate was not necessary for the executors to have the power and authority to enter into the deed of gift. He also said that NHB should not be concerned about the position of the beneficiaries under the will. 16. But this response still left open the question of whether there were indeed other beneficiaries and whether their consent had been sought for the donation of the items to NHB for the exhibition, under the stipulated conditions. 17. Throughout this period, I was discussing the matter with DPM Teo Chee Hean as the Prime Minister had said that he would leave it to DPM to handle the specific dealings between NHB and the executors on the deed of gift. 18. DPM Teo’s main concern with the conditions was that NHB was being asked to display a partial quote of the demolition clause, which did not fully reflect Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s wishes. He felt that NHB as a public institution, should remain neutral, and should not be drawn into a private disagreement, or be used to present a particular point of view which was incomplete. 19. Nevertheless, after weighing all the factors, and considering that NHB had already signed the deed, both DPM Teo and I agreed that the pluses of having the exhibition with the Oxley Road artefacts in accordance with the deed outweighed the potential controversy that was likely to arise. This was a major SG50 exhibition on our founding leaders. We had artefacts not just from the estate of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew, but also from the National Archives and the families of other founding leaders. And many of these artefacts had not been displayed before. The artefacts helped to enhance the story-line of the exhibition and to bring out the values of our founding leaders for Singaporeans. 20. Subsequently on 25 June, the Prime Minister informed me that he had written to the executors, in his capacity as beneficiary, indicating to them that notwithstanding his position on the deed of gift, he would not object to the exhibition, as he did not want to put NHB in a difficult position. 21. NHB was thus able to proceed with the exhibition, with agreement from all beneficiaries. But as NHB needed more time to prepare, it sought the consent of the executors to push back the exhibition date. Eventually the opening was shifted from 6 August to 21 September 2015. In fact, I attended the opening with Mr Lee Hsien Yang, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Ms Lee Suet Fern. The exhibition was very well received and it has been extended till now. 22. Madam, as I have explained, my discussion with the Prime Minister on the exhibition was in his official capacity and I shared the deed of gift with him on that basis. In response to the question from Associate Professor Daniel Goh, the deed of gift did not have a confidentiality clause. If Mr Lee Hsien Loong had asked for the deed of gift in his private capacity, NHB would have been entitled to give it to him, given his position as eldest son and beneficiary of the estate. 23. More generally, in a scenario where items are being donated to NHB from an Estate, and NHB becomes aware that one of the beneficiaries objects to the terms of the donation, it would be necessary for NHB to take steps to verify that there is agreement from all beneficiaries.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 170702Mindmap Copy
    Who said what Numerous allegations have been made in the ongoing feud between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings, from misuse of power to a conict Against Lee Hsien Loong of interest in preparing the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will. Insight charts the Against Teo Chee Hean • Allegation: PM Lee misused his claims and accusations in the dispute over the fate of 38, Oxley Road. • Allegation: Committee focused power to prevent the house from solely on challenging validity of being demolished demolition clause in Mr Lee’s will PM’s response: Denied the DPM Teo’s response: Not true that “baseless” allegations, will refute committee bent on preventing them in a ministerial statement in demolition of the house Parliament tomorrow • Allegation: Committee did not • Allegation: PM Lee made disclose options in prior exchanges, contradictory statements about only identied members and its their father’s wishes and the house terms of reference when “forced in public and private into the daylight” Ms Indranee Rajah’s DPM Teo’s response: Nothing response: Notes that secret about committee; it is like Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s numerous other committees last will specically Cabinet sets up to consider specic accepts and Against Ho Ching Against K. Shanmugam issues acknowledges that DPM Tharman Allegation: Has a pervasive Allegation: Conict of interest demolition may not take place. • • Shanmugaratnam’s inuence on government, well being on ministerial committee, response: Cabinet has beyond her job scope having advised the late Mr Lee and • Allegation: Did not challenge the numerous committees family about the house last will in court when probate was on whole range of granted • Allegation: Removed the late Mr Mr Shanmugam’s response: issues, to help think Lee’s items from house without PM’s response: Wanted to avoid a Calls the claim ridiculous; says through difcult choices approval; represented the Prime public ght that would tarnish the nothing he said precluded him from Minister’s Ofce despite not family name serving in committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Ministerial Committee on 38 Oxley Road
    REPORT OF THE MINISTERIAL COMMITTEE ON 38 OXLEY ROAD TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Background Chapter 2: Historical and heritage significance Chapter 3: Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s thinking and wishes on the property Chapter 4: Possible options for the property Chapter 5: Committee’s views 2 CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND 1. Founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s former home at 38 Oxley Road (henceforth referred to as the “Property”) is a single-storey bungalow surrounded by low-rise residential developments. 2. The issue of whether to preserve Mr Lee’s home after his passing, to demolish it, or some other option has become a matter of public interest. Shortly after Mr Lee’s passing on 23 March 2015, PM Lee Hsien Loong addressed this issue in Parliament on 13 April 2015, where he said that “there is no immediate issue of demolition of the house, and no need for the Government to make any decision now”, given that Dr Lee Wei Ling “intended to continue living in the Property”. He also stated that “if and when Dr Lee Wei Ling no longer lives in the House, Mr Lee has stated his wishes as to what then should be done…however, it will be up to the Government of the day to consider the matter”. 3. Though there is no immediate need for a decision, given the significant public interest in the Property, the Cabinet 1 approved setting up a Ministerial Committee (“Committee”) on 1 June 2016 to consider the various options. The Committee was asked to prepare drawer plans of various options and their implications, with the benefit of views of those who had directly discussed the matter with Mr Lee, so that a future Government can refer to these plans and make a considered and informed decision when the time came to decide on the matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Sektor Pelancongan Anggar Rugi RM105 Juta, Sektor Perniagaan
    Ex-PM: Hsien Loong’s siblings trying to bring him down Free Malaysia Today July 5, 2017 The former Singapore prime minister vouches for the integrity of Lee Hsien Loong in parliamentary debate over abuse of power accusations made against the prime minister. SINGAPORE: Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong says Lee Hsien Yang’s goal is to bring his elder brother, Lee Hsien Loong, down as prime minister. Channel NewsAsia quoted the former prime minister of Singapore as saying the family feud between Hsien Loong and his two siblings had tarnished Singapore’s reputation. He asked if the two siblings were whistle-blowing in an effort to save Singapore or waging a personal vendetta against Hsien Loong. “It is now no longer a cynical parlour game. If the Lee siblings choose to squander the good name and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew and tear their relationship apart, it is tragic but a private family affair. “But if in the process of their self-destruction, they destroy Singapore too, that is a public affair.” Goh was speaking on the second day of a parliamentary discussion over a public dispute between the children of Lee Kuan Yew, following allegations by Hsien Yang and his sister Lee Wei Ling that Hsien Loong was abusing his powers to block the demolition of their 38 Oxley Road family home. Channel NewsAsia quoted Goh as saying Singaporeans were getting sick and tired of all this. “There must be a clear conclusion at the end of this debate. Either we clear the PM over the allegation on his abuse of power, or we censure him,” he said.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-Sghc-255-Pdf.Pdf
    IN THE COURT OF THREE JUDGES OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2020] SGHC 255 Court of Three Judges/Originating Summons No 2 of 2020 In the matter of Sections 94(1) and 98(1) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) And In the matter of Lee Suet Fern (Lim Suet Fern), an Advocate and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Singapore Between Law Society of Singapore … Applicant And Lee Suet Fern (Lim Suet Fern) … Respondent JUDGMENT [Legal Profession] [Solicitor-client relationship] [Legal Profession] [Professional conduct] — [Breach] This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports. Law Society of Singapore v Lee Suet Fern (alias Lim Suet Fern) [2020] SGHC 255 Court of Three Judges — Originating Summons No 2 of 2020 Sundaresh Menon CJ, Judith Prakash JA and Woo Bih Li J 13 August 2020 20 November 2020 Judgment reserved. Sundaresh Menon CJ (delivering the judgment of the court): Introduction 1 This is an application by the Law Society of Singapore (“the Law Society”) for an order pursuant to s 98(1)(a) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) (“the LPA”) that the respondent, Mrs Lee Suet Fern (alias Lim Suet Fern) (“the Respondent”), be subject to the sanctions provided for under s 83(1) of that Act. At the time of the proceedings before the disciplinary tribunal (“the DT”), the Respondent was an advocate and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Singapore of 37 years’ standing and practised as a director of Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC, a law corporation.
    [Show full text]
  • Lee Kuan Yew Lee Kuan Yew Blazing the Freedom Trail Blazing the Freedom Trail Lee Kuanyew
    Anthony Oei Anthony For Review onlyLEE KUAN YEW LEE KUAN YEW BLAZING THE FREEDOM TRAIL BLAZING THE FREEDOM TRAIL YEW LEE KUAN It was the 1950s, a tumultuous time for post-war Singapore. Disgruntled with the British ruling power, anti-colonial forces were calling for independence. The main contenders were the People’s Action Party led by nationalist Lee Kuan Yew and the Communist Party of Malaya headed by Chin Peng. Displaying their political acumen, Lee and his team overcame all adversities to win the people’s mandate. Lee, who became Singapore’s first Prime Minister in 1959, orchestrated the movement to build a prosperous FREEDOM TRAI Singapore. When he stepped down in 1990, he left behind B L an efficient government, world-class infrastructure and a AZING THE thriving economy. When he died in 2015, he left behind a shining Singapore as his legacy. This book is an updated and revised edition of Days of Thunder: How Lee Kuan Yew Blazed the Freedom Trail (2005). It explores Lee’s leadership during Singapore’s early years and the question: Could Singapore have L achieved as much without Lee Kuan Yew, the founding father of modern Singapore? Marshall Cavendish Editions SINGAPORE/POLITICS ISBN 978-981-4677-77-6 Exploring the leadership of Singapore’s ,!7IJ8B4-ghhhhg! first Prime Minister from 1959 to 1990 Anthony Oei For Review only LEE KUAN YEW BLAZING THE FREEDOM TRAIL QUOTES BY LEE KUAN YEW For Review only The verdict of the people is a terrifying thing. To build a country, you need passion. You will trample over us, over our dead bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks by Esm Goh Chok Tong Parliamentary Debate on Pm’S Statement on Allegation of Abuse of Power – 4 July 2017
    REMARKS BY ESM GOH CHOK TONG PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE ON PM’S STATEMENT ON ALLEGATION OF ABUSE OF POWER – 4 JULY 2017 Mdm Speaker, 1. This sad public squabble between the Lee siblings is blown out of proportion. But it has embroiled all of us. It has tarnished the reputation of Singapore and distracted the Government from far more important work. 2. Because the allegations against PM have been made by members of the Lee family, they are given weight. The public is confused and concerned, even as Singaporeans continue to trust the PM and the Government. There is thus urgency to explain, restore trust and get back on track. It is our duty and responsibility to do this, to account to our voters. 3. My main concern is neither the fate of 38 Oxley Road nor the family feud. They are far removed from the daily concerns of Singaporeans. It is the wilful attack on the integrity of our leaders and the insidious corrosion of public faith in our institutions that I want to address. The nub of the issue for us in Parliament is integrity and trust – in the Prime Minister and our system of government. Absent these, Singapore will descend to a Third World country. 4. Incorruptibility of our Government is what distinguishes Singapore. The Prime Minister is central in upholding that incorruptibility. He holds the key levers of state power, entrusted by the people. When trust in the Prime Minister disappears, his moral authority and political capital shrivel. 1 Therefore, the constant self-policing, restraint and care of the Prime Minister in wielding the immense power at his disposal, is paramount.
    [Show full text]
  • Lee Kuan Yew's Thinking on 38, Oxley Road
    2011 PM Lee and his wife Ho Ching proposed to renovate the house without demolishing it. They suggested: Lee Kuan Yew’s thinking demolishing private living spaces to preserve the family’s privacy; keeping the historically signicant basement dining room; strengthening the decaying on 38, Oxley Road structure; creating a new living area. December 2011 Mr Lee accepted PM Lee’s proposal. He told the PM Lee: family it was best to redevelop the house straight away after he died, and do what PM Lee proposed. In December 2011, he In his ministerial statement, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong highlighted (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) key discussions on the family home when his father was alive, and what Dec 27, 2011 Mr Lee wrote to the Cabinet that if 38, Oxley Road told the family that it happened after Mr Lee died. was to be preserved, it needed to have its was “best to redevelop foundations reinforced and the whole building 38, Oxley Road refurbished. straight away”, after he PM Lee and Ms Ho proceeded along those lines, and kept the family fully informed. died, and do what we No one raised any objections to the plan. proposed. By redevelopment, he March 28, 2012 Oct 27, 2010 May 2011 means remove the Mr Lee signed the authorisation to submit Mr Lee wrote to the Cabinet to set on record his Mr Lee stepped down from the Cabinet a week the development application to the Urban private spaces, wish for his house to be demolished after his death. after the General Election on May 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Votes and Proceedings No. 47
    VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRTEENTH PARLIAMENT OF SINGAPORE First Session MONDAY, 3 JULY 2017 No. 47 11.00 am 1 PRESENT: SPEAKER Mdm SPEAKER (Mdm HALIMAH YACOB (Marsiling-Yew Tee)). Mr AMRIN AMIN (Sembawang), Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Health. Mr ANG HIN KEE (Ang Mo Kio). Mr ANG WEI NENG (Jurong). Mr AZMOON AHMAD (Nominated Member). Mr BAEY YAM KENG (Tampines), Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth. Miss CHERYL CHAN WEI LING (Fengshan). Mr CHAN CHUN SING (Tanjong Pagar), Minister, Prime Minister's Office and Government Whip. Mr CHEE HONG TAT (Bishan-Toa Payoh), Senior Minister of State, Ministry of Communications and Information and Ministry of Health. Mr CHEN SHOW MAO (Aljunied). Miss CHENG LI HUI (Tampines). Ms CHIA YONG YONG (Nominated Member). Mr CHARLES CHONG (Punggol East), Deputy Speaker. Mr CHONG KEE HIONG (Bishan-Toa Payoh). Mr DESMOND CHOO (Tampines). Mr THOMAS CHUA KEE SENG (Nominated Member). Mr DARRYL DAVID (Ang Mo Kio). No. 47 3 JULY 2017 2 Mr CHRISTOPHER DE SOUZA (Holland-Bukit Timah). Mr CEDRIC FOO CHEE KENG (Pioneer). Ms FOO MEE HAR (West Coast). Ms GRACE FU HAI YIEN (Yuhua), Minister for Culture, Community and Youth and Leader of the House. Mr GAN KIM YONG (Chua Chu Kang), Minister for Health. Mr GAN THIAM POH (Ang Mo Kio). Mr GANESH RAJARAM (Nominated Member). Mr GOH CHOK TONG (Marine Parade). Assoc Prof DANIEL GOH PEI SIONG (Non-Constituency Member). Mr HENG CHEE HOW (Jalan Besar), Senior Minister of State, Prime Minister's Office. Mr HENG SWEE KEAT (Tampines), Minister for Finance.
    [Show full text]
  • Contradictions and Compromises in Preserving Values at Lee Kuan Yew’S Oxley Road Home, Singapore
    “WHEN I’M DEAD, DEMOLISH IT”: CONTRADICTIONS AND COMPROMISES IN PRESERVING VALUES AT LEE KUAN YEW’S OXLEY ROAD HOME, SINGAPORE Cherie-Nicole Leo Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Historic Preservation Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation Columbia University (May, 2016) L e o | i Abstract Since the death of Singapore’s founding prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew, on March 23, 2015, the fate of his house at 38 Oxley Road remains in question. In spite of its association to this seminal political leader and the fact that historic meetings that led to Singapore’s independence from British rule in 1959 were held in its basement dining room, heritage authorities and the Singaporean public are faced with a dilemma because Lee Kuan Yew had, on multiple occasions, expressed his wish to have the more-than-a- century-old colonial bungalow demolished after his passing—and he had included this wish in his last will and testament. This thesis uses the ongoing debate surrounding 38 Oxley Road as a case study. It aims to address how decision-makers in the heritage conservation field might more effectively negotiate the multiplicity of competing values ascribed to heritage sites in working toward a future common good. Through a discourse analysis, the thesis examines how a values-based approach to heritage conservation can serve as a basis for exploring more robust tools for decision-making through the adoption of a more future-looking, scenario-focused framework. In this way, heritage decision-makers are challenged to look beyond some of the field’s traditional paradigms, as reflective of the broad shift from more expert-driven materials-based approaches to more participatory and contextually aware values-based approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Here Dr LWL Was to Live
    IN THE GENERAL DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2021] SGHC 87 Originating Summons No 916 of 2020 Between (1) Lee Wei Ling (2) Lee Hsien Yang … Plaintiffs And (1) Law Society of Singapore … Defendant JUDGMENT [Legal Profession] — [Disciplinary procedures] [Legal Profession] — [Disciplinary proceedings] [Legal Profession] — [Professional conduct] TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 FACTS...............................................................................................................2 THE WILLS.......................................................................................................2 THE BENEFICIARIES’ QUERIES AND MS KWA’S EMAILS IN RESPONSE ..............3 THE EXECUTORS’ REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS..................................................5 THE LETTER OF COMPLAINT AND THIS APPLICATION .......................................6 DECISION ........................................................................................................8 LEGAL CONTEXT OF APPLICATION .....................................................8 ROLE OF THE INQUIRY COMMITTEE...............................................................10 ROLE OF THE COUNCIL..................................................................................13 ROLE OF THE COURT IN S 96 APPLICATIONS...................................................15 THE FIRST COMPLAINT...........................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • A Special Exhibition on Singapore's Founding Leaders Opens at The
    Embargoed for release until 7pm, 21 September 2015 A Special Exhibition on Singapore’s Founding Leaders Opens at the National Museum of Singapore Highlights include artefacts from a major donation from the Estate of Lee Kuan Yew, as well as donations and loans from the families of other founding leaders. SINGAPORE, 21 September 2015 – For the first time, an exhibition that chronicles the contributions made by the nation’s founding team of leaders in the first 10 pivotal years (1965 to 1975) of Singapore’s independence, will open to the public from 22 September 2015. Entitled We Built A Nation, the exhibition seeks to provide a better understanding of this crucial period in Singapore’s history, and to pay tribute to our founding team of leaders who helped to build modern Singapore. Through eight sections, the exhibition brings visitors through the important roles played by our founding leaders in developing Singapore’s economy, foreign policy and diplomacy, security and defence, education and infrastructure. It also highlights the milestone events leading up to Singapore’s separation from Malaysia, as well as the first 10 years of nation building after independence. The exhibition showcases over 100 artefacts and items, many of which have never been seen before, such as private and official documents, archival images, state gifts and personal items. Many of the artefacts were donated by the Estate of Lee Kuan Yew. These bear testament to the simple and disciplined lifestyle of Mr Lee Kuan Yew and pay tribute to his legacy as Singapore’s founding Prime Minister. In addition, the exhibition features a recently de-classified secret document, the Albatross Separation File from Dr Goh Keng Swee, which offers a perspective of the negotiations leading up to separation.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNEX B Research Report on No. 38 Oxley Road National Heritage Board
    ANNEX B Research Report on No. 38 Oxley Road National Heritage Board 1 NO. 38 OXLEY ROAD 1. Basic Information Type: Residence Year of Construction: Circa 1898 Architect/Firm: Alfred William Lermit and Johannes Westerhout Architects and Surveyors Address: 38 Oxley Road Singapore 238629 a. History of Oxley Area The area was named after Dr Thomas Oxley (1805-1886), who was a surgeon and one of the early European planters in Singapore who placed his faith in nutmeg. In 1837, he bought 173 acres of uncleared jungle land from the East India Company and turned it into one of the finest nutmeg plantations, naming it Killiney Estate (or Oxley Estate). The estate was bounded by Orchard Road, Grange Road, Leonie Hill Road, River Valley Road and Tank Road. Dr Oxley’s European contemporaries in this era of plantations in Singapore were William Cuppage, who occupied Emerald Hill, and Charles Carnie, who built the first house in Cairnhill in 1840.1 1 Infopedia, “Killiney House (Belle Vue)”, eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_1129_2006-04-05.html; Singapore Medical Association, Insight, SMA News, May 2014, p.26. 2 Unfortunately, the nutmeg blight descended upon the plantations in 1855-56. As a result, Dr Oxley’s nutmeg enterprise folded and he sold his plantation lands.2 He left for England with his wife and five children on 23 February 1857.3 b. Early Development of Oxley and its Surroundings In the past, many wealthy plantation owners had built plantation-style bungalow-style houses in the area. Today, the area bordering Oxley has been largely redeveloped with condominiums, leaving No.
    [Show full text]