PM's office disputes former president's remarks

In the aftermath of Asiaweek's interview with former President Ong, the Prime Minister's Office has written to Asiaweek to clarify some points raised in the interview. This is the letter (as published in the Straits Times (March 10) that the Prime Minister's press secretary sent to the editor of the magazine.

IN Maverick Politician (March 10), based on an interview with Mr Ong Teng Cheong, Roger Mitton revived allegations that the Singapore government blocked the release of information to Mr Ong when he was president.

It also alleged that the government had opposed Mr Ong's standing for re-election not because of his health but because Mr Ong had been difficult and independent.

Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong and Minister for Finance Dr Richard Hu had addressed these allegations in two parliamentary statements on Aug 17 last year. Their statements set out fully the facts of the matter and the government's reasons for its actions. The government timed these statements to give Mr Ong an opportunity to respond while he was still in office and president. The president chose not to respond.

There the matter rested until his present interview with Asiaweek.

Mr Ong said that when he came into office (in 1993), he had asked for information on the reserves, which was given to him only three years later.

Mr Mitton also wrote that "Ong wanted to know how much the reserves were worth, (but) those who had the information stalled over okaying its release".

Dr Hu explained in parliament that this was not the case. The records show the president's office officially requested a listing of physical assets from the accountant general on June 18, 1996.

At a meeting with the president on Aug 14, 1996, that is, less than two months later, the accountant general provided a listing of state buildings, while the commissioner of lands provided a listing of state lands. Updates were sent subsequently to the president's office.

Regarding how much the reserves were worth, Mr Ong confirmed in his interview that the issue was that he and the auditor general wanted all the properties of the government to be valued when the government changed.

In the accountant general's view, this was unnecessary.

Valuing the entire stock of land and buildings owned by the government would be a tedious and unproductive exercise involving some 50,000 parcels of land, including miscellaneous parcels like roads, drains and even some reservoirs.

For the purposes of protecting reserves, it did not matter when the valuation was actually made. It could be at the point of sale.

For properties which were not being sold or transacted, a complete listing (but not valuation) would be sufficient. This was a more practical approach.

The attorney general's chambers was also consulted, and confirmed that a complete valuation of assets was unnecessary as a matter of law.

The auditor general thereupon revoked his directive to revalue all properties at changeover.

Mr Ong raised a new allegation in his interview: That "in April last year", the government had announced that it would allow the sale of the Post Office Savings Bank (POSB) to DBS Bank without informing him, and that he "came to know it from the newspaper. That's not right".

This is untrue. The cabinet decided on the sale of POSB to DBS Bank on June 3, 1998. As president, Mr Ong saw the cabinet paper.

On July 21, 1998, the Ministry of Finance wrote to inform the president's office that it would announce the privatisation of POSB on July 24, 1998.

The president's office has confirmed that Mr Ong saw and initialled the minute on July 22, 1998. He could therefore not have learnt about it from the newspaper.

Mr Mitton quotes Mr Ong as saying: "I have not told anybody that I wanted to stand again" for president. But as the prime minister informed parliament, Mr Ong had told him in February 1999 that he was thinking of standing again.

So, Mr Goh advised him to obtain medical reports on his condition from his doctors, to be published if he decided to stand for re-election. Mr Ong then saw Dr Saul Rosenberg of the Stanford University Medical Centre in March 1999.

Why else would Mr Goh have advised Mr Ong to see Dr Rosenberg, and why else would Mr Ong have done so, if not to confirm his fitness to stand?

Mr Ong said that Dr Rosenberg "checked that I was in complete remission. So I was fine after my treatment".

Mr Mitton says "his doctors have given him a clean bill of health after his debilitating bout of lymphatic cancer (he still wears a cap to cover the baldness caused by chemotherapy treatment)".

The fact that Mr Ong needed further chemotherapy treatment shortly after he stepped down as president on Sept 1 last year had been anticipated by his personal physician, Dr John Wong, who had accompanied him for the consultation with Dr Rosenberg.

Mr Ong had sent Dr Rosenberg's medical report to the prime minister, to help him and the cabinet decide on its position on Mr Ong's standing for re-election.

The cabinet met Dr Wong in April 1999; he explained in simple lay language Dr Rosenberg's medical report. A copy of the notes of the meeting was then sent to Mr Ong.

This was the basis of the cabinet's assessment that there was a strong likelihood that the president's health would affect the discharge of his duties should he serve a second term.

Mr Ong's health was the sole reason the cabinet decided that it could not support his re-election should he decide to stand again.