Yesterday, I went to the prime minister’s lawyers, Drew and Napier, after I was threatened that if the $29,000 was not paid, they would file an application to court to ask me to pay additional costs.
The $29,000 is what the court has asked me to pay to the lawyers of the prime minister for the summary judgment last year. Please note that this is different from the damages that I would have to pay the prime minister. The hearing for this will be held in June. The prime minister has filed for the defamation suit in the high court, which oversees cases of more than $250,000, which means that this is the least the prime minister wants me to pay him.
Yesterday, I went down to Drew and Napier but their lawyers refused to see me. I had to sit at their reception for 3 hours and their lawyers would rather speak to me through their receptionist. At one point, I even had to write down notes on pieces of paper just to convey the message. Eventually, when I made a call to an Angela Cheng, she put down my call halfway through.
Eventually, I was able to pay the payment at 8pm in the evening, after having to wait 3 hours.
After all that, the PAP continued to use state-controlled media to change the version of the story.
Both Channel NewsAsia and Today reported that I only paid after missing two deadlines. When I received the letter from Drew and Napier to pay on 22 January 2015, I had given the money to my lawyer to make the payment on the same day. Later, I even called Drew and Napier on 3 February to tell them that I could go down to pay them directly. But for 3 days, Drew and Napier never got back to me and later threatened to ask me to pay additional costs.
All this while, I acted quickly to try to hand the money over. However, the state-controlled media contorted the truth and make it look like I intentionally missed the deadlines.
The Straits Times also said that I tried to pin the blame. This is not true.
In my clarifications to the media, I had outlined clearly the steps that I had taken to try to get the money to to be paid to Drew and Napier. However, The Straits Times tried to twist the story.
Singaporeans, I hope that you can see for yourself how the PAP is trying to use state-controlled media to twist the story around.
I have always maintained a righteous and upright position. I am disappointed with the PAP’s antics and behaviour. I have been writing about the CPF since 2012. However, after I made several exposes about the CPF (you can read it here, here and here), the PAP decided to come down on me.
My stance has always been clear – a government’s responsibility is to take care of the people and protect the people.
If the PAP does not want to do that, then get out of government. If the PAP cannot stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen.
If the PAP is willing to take care of Singaporeans, would there be so many grouses among Singaporeans today? Yet, the PAP would instead clamp down on what I say so that they can protect their own power and themselves.
I am sorely disappointed. I have always written because I want to see a fair, just and more equal Singapore. But as it is, Singapore’s income inequality and poverty is the worst among the developed countries and every time the PAP increased their own salaries in 1984, 1994, 2000 and 2007, income inequality was also increased.
Look, Singaporeans, at the end of the day, it is up to us to decide what kind of future we want and how we want to protect ourselves.
You and I know that the PAP are just businessmen who have taken over control of government to further their business interests. Of course we can keep pretending that we don’t see this and deny this, but at the end of the day, it is your lives and your children’s lives which will suffer.
So, we either decide to face up to it and fight or we give up on our lives. It’s really up to you now.