Gangnam Teo Ho Pin rushing to award computer system tender BEFORE MND review

[aurvandil]

Gangnam Teo Ho Pin is rushing to award the tender for the Town Council computer system ahead of the MND Town Council review. Why leh?

No change in tender process for town councils' computer systems, says Dr Teo

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1255641/1/.html

SINGAPORE: The People's Action Party's (PAP's) Town Council Coordinating Chairman, Teo Ho Pin, has said there is no change to the tender process which was recently called for the town councils' computer systems.

He said the process is the same as that in 2010, when the ruling party-owned Action Information Management (AIM) won the bid.

"Open tenders are open tenders... normally, there is a procedure you must comply with, which is basically to put notice in the papers, to give at least 21 days to the tenderers to submit their bids," said Dr Teo.

He made the comments at the sidelines of a Lunar New Year event in North West District on Thursday.

Controversy arose when Aljunied-Hougang Town Council Chairman Sylvia Lim questioned why the computing and financial systems developed by PAP-managed town councils were sold to AIM.

AIM's contract with Aljunied-Hougang Town Council was terminated after the 2011 general election.

Dr Teo said the tender called then was to sell and lease back computer software to town councils.

This time round, it is for developing a new town council management system.

Dr Teo said normally, only interested parties would pick up the tender documents since there is a nominal fee involved.

He said the tender process is in compliance with the town councils' financial rules.

 

[aurvandil]

Two important points:

AIM apparently help craft the tender specs for the tender of the new computer system. Despite this giving AIM an obvious advantage, AIM is not disqualified from tendering. Ex PAP MP Chandra Das would not confirm or deny that AIM will be taking part in the tender it helped prepare.

Punggol-East is currently using the computer system that was sold to AIM. It is unclear at this point in time if AIM will be terminating as it did when WP won Aljunied GRC.

Aim saga part 2 has just begun?

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/02/aim-saga-part-2-begun/

New open tender called?

I refer to the articles “PAP town councils call open tender for IT system” (Straits Times, Feb 21) and “No change in tender process for town councils’ computer systems, says Dr Teo” (Channel NewsAsia, Feb 21).

Aim helped to prepare tender?

The former states that “Dr Teo Ho Pin, coordinating chairman of the 14 PAP-run town councils, would not say how many parties had picked up the tender documents or whether Aim was one of them, saying that he did not want to influence the ongoing tender process.

But, he revealed, Aim helped prepare the tender specifications.

Aim may tender again?

Aim chairman Chandra Das also did not want to reveal whether the IT company had – or would – put in a bid. “Wait and see,” he would only say.”

Conflict of interest?

Is there not a possible conflict of interest for the current and last successful tenderer, like Aim, to help “prepare the tender specifications”?

As indicated in the above remarks of both parties, is not the possible conflict of interest likely, when Aim or others associated with it, could also participate in the tender?

Maybe something is wrong with the town councils’ financial rules?

With regard to “He said the tender process is in compliance with the town councils’ financial rules”, shouldn’t a party like Aim which “helped prepare the tender specifications”, be barred from tendering?

Given the controversy of the subject matter, isn’t the possible conflict of interest even more significant and arguably unacceptable in respect of the principles of accountability and transparency?

Why not wait for review?

Also, since the review is not completed yet, why hold a tender now which will close on March 4?

As it was said that the review would take about one to two months, and about six weeks have lapsed, why not wait for the findings of the review?

Otherwise, how can we be satisfied that the open tender now is in line with the review’s findings on the subject matter?

For example, how can the possible conflict of interest described above make any sense at all, if the review addresses conflicts of interest?

Is the Ministry of National Development (MND) in concurrence with the calling of the open tender now? Was the MND informed about the subject open tender?

As an analogy, it may be akin to M being asked to investigate possible conflicts of interest, accountability and transparency, public funds, residents’ interest, etc, issues involving P and A – and yet P and A may be allowed to be possibly involved in a transaction now, before the investigation has been completed?

Why develop new system now?

With regard to “This time round, it is for developing a new town council management system” and “among other things, supply, develop and install a “fully operational integrated town council management system with operational support and maintenance”, given that a lot of money may have been used for the current system, shouldn’t more details be given to justify the need to develop “a new town council management system” now?

Moreover, why not wait for the review which is expected to be completed anytime soon?

Why is there an urgent need to develop a new system now?

In this connection, in respect of “as the controversial contract signed with Aim expires on April 30″, surely the expiry does not mean that the town councils can no longer use the software after April 30?

After all, by April 30, the review may already be out by March 8 – two months from the date it was announced that it would take about one to two months.

Termination again already?

As to “Yesterday, Ms Lim said WP hoped for an extension for the use of the software in Punggol East after the WP won the seat in the by-election last month.

She said the party has written to Aim, but did not reveal if this was to ask for an extension. Mr Chandra Das would only say the firm had received the letter, and did not elaborate on whether an extension would be granted. The WP plans to merge the new Punggol East town council with the existing AHTC”, what do all these mean?

That Aim intends to terminate or WP expects it to?

It may appear that everybody may be doing things as if the review and its findings may not matter at all, at least for now?

Finally, it may be somewhat ironic that “Teo Ho Pin, has said there is no change to the tender process which was recently called for the town councils’ computer systems” – because arguably, the current tender may have thrown up even more new questions than the questions about the last tender!

 

[batman1]

IF there is corruption,collusion or nepotism,the CPIB or CAD must step in to investigate.Taxpayers' money is involved.Why can't they arrange the tender process themselves or outsourced to an external independent party ? Why must AIM be involved again ? No conflict of interests ?Really no respect for laws in the Republic of Singapore.

 

[iamhere]

we had long been a welfare state for papees n cronies where they first claim that
they should be paid XXX amount of $$$ if not, they would be better off in private sector or in biz themselves.

By "default", since we do not have enough opposition to veto all these "claims", these leeches at the first split second
when they are elected or "elected" thru walkovers, commit FUNDAMENTAL BREACH of what they claim.

They hold tonnes of appointments, directorships and/or in biz themselves.

Having more than one appointment does not give one more than 24hrs per calendar day...

Question remains: WHO did they neglect?

Shareholders of public listed companies?

(Public) Stakeholders of GLC or statutory boards?

or???


We had long been providing WELFARE STATE facilities for PAPees n CRONIES....


MY FELLOW SINGAPOREANS PLEASE...

REMEMBER to

VOTE papees OUT


do yrself, yr forefathers and yr generations to come, a favor, a service and a long-awaited justice