Shocking!!! NEA BUYS 26 ah pek looking bikes for 2.2k Each

[Papsmearer]

Re: $8 Msian Cow defends NParks $2.2k Bike

It turns out that stupid penang Minister Cow believe what his Nparks staff tell him, hook line and sinker. He himself never verified the information they gave him. These bikes were purchased for the park connector staff to allow them to be more productive as they have to cover 40km a day? How were they accomplishing this before the bike purchase? Running? Jogging? Were the connector staff all former Kenyan long distance olympic runners? The fact is only one of the park connectors is 40 km long, the rest are mostly under 10km. e.g. Pasir ris park connector is only 2.4 km. Bedok connector is 8 km. There are also many bike kiosks around, specifically there for people to rent bikes to cycle the connectors.

WHY CAN'T NPARKS BUY NICE $200 BIKES AND STATION THEM AT THE KIOSKS? These bikes can be normal non foldable bikes, and They can leave them there locked for the night with the other rental bikes. When Nparks staff report to work, they just go to the kiosks and draw the bikes, and when they finish, they return the bikes there. Is this not possible? After all, the bike rental company is renting space from Nparks, such an agreement should be doable.

As well, if there is only one bid on the tender, shouldn't procedure be to cancel it and put it up again for tender? Trouble is that these people do not care that its the taxpayer's moneythat they are spending, and they have a duty to make sure that its used in the most cost effective manner. But of course, it starts from the top. When the top does not feel that it owes anything to the taxpayer and spends the tax payer's money like water, on expensive bikes, expensive office chairs, etc.the subordinates will follow his lead too. Just no respecting the public at all.

 

[Confuseous]

Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

Seeking clarity over $2,200-bike purchase

AS A taxpayer for the past 34 years and an avid cyclist, I find it hard to comprehend how the National Parks Board's (NParks) bulk bicycle purchase was value for money ('Khaw okay with NParks' purchase of $2,200 bikes'; Thursday).

I agree that NParks officers need bicycles for their field duties, which are demanding. However, to acquire foldable bicycles at $2,200 each may not reflect well on the Government's call for prudence and austerity.

I own four bicycles - a hybrid costing $420, two mountain bikes at about $200 each and a foldable 20-inch bicycle at $98. All were purchased from Carrefour supermarket.

I assume that NParks invited tenders for the 26 bicycles via GeBiz, the government procurement portal. This would have automatically factored in a cost of almost $2,700 per bicycle, at the least.

This is because a tender process is required if the estimated purchase exceeds $70,000.

If NParks had intended to buy cheaper bicycles, a simpler process - the request for quotation, in which only three quotations were needed - would have sufficed. So why resort to a tender process when a simpler one was available?

A bicycle marque like Brompton - which was one of the options offered by the vendor responding to the tender - must have met NParks' specifications.

What were these requirements that resulted in Brompton bicycles being the cheapest and most prudent purchase?

What was the process of scrutiny by senior management?

Perhaps the public could be shown a comparison of a similar purchase by the police, who recently acquired bicycles for their officers to patrol neighbourhoods. What was the cost of these bicycles?

Tan Buck Yam

 

[Orion]

Re: Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

Branded chairs, branded bicycles...now our government ministers love luxury brands....no need tender, just give them the best. They feel they deserve highest salary cos they are talents, yet with their peabrain, they can't even use facebook without help and need people to teach them...

 

[red amoeba]

Re: Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

Pls loh...even conduct tender can still close n re tendr if mgt not entirely satisfied w results. The reason of poor response is crap.

 

[cobragold]

Re: Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

For govt tenders above 3k, i believe that you must have 3 quotes otherwise cannot accept the tender. Why when they tender out hawker stalls HDB said 1 tender cannot give the shop need more then one tender, now when they buy even a single tender is allowed, Singaporeans are really screwed big time by the govt. Heads should roll and the CAD or CPIB should look into this as the govt tender system is not a fair tender system if such a tender can be awarded.

 

[fukyuman]

Re: Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

I think we should get one oppo hero to file in a police report so CPIB lan lan has to investigate.

 

[Unrepented]

Re: Why are Folding Bicycles so expensive in Singapore ?

So why don't nea get Aleoca

$700.00 you're shock? than means you are still new and very shallow!
The Tyrell Japanese Titanium 20 inches wheel with Durace will easily cost you
more than $5K!

A folding 20inch Bike Friday from US and Alex Moulton from UK easily cost more than $5K
too!!

So you want cheaper bike with basket infront go Carrefour or NTUC get Aleoca for $65.00/$99.00
you saved a TON! Your choice!

 

[Unrepented]

Re: $8 Msian Cow defends NParks $2.2k Bike

Just spec out competition even you have a tender.

Another possibility of course is that the vendor that sold the bikes to NParks is a relative/friend/lover of the NParks officer that did the procurement.

 

[Unrepented]

Re: Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

Frankly, the three quotes requirement is just a weak hogwash. It's only purpose is to ensure that purchaser has done his/her marketing for products. This three quotes bullshit can be easily circumvented, especially when due diligence by purchasers and committee is weak.

There are such things as "waiver of competition" just justify it, mgt approves it and home free.:p

60.1% will say: It's like that....

40 saying: we need a system of check and balance

If you want to make this place your "home"..........you choose.:o

For govt tenders above 3k, i believe that you must have 3 quotes otherwise cannot accept the tender. Why when they tender out hawker stalls HDB said 1 tender cannot give the shop need more then one tender, now when they buy even a single tender is allowed, Singaporeans are really screwed big time by the govt. Heads should roll and the CAD or CPIB should look into this as the govt tender system is not a fair tender system if such a tender can be awarded.

 

[Unrepented]

Re: Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

Still waiting for his step by step practical guide to have SGD8.00 heart operation............

 

[leakie]

Re: Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

the minister defended the case when it is so obvious that it is non-defensiveable. Why?

What do this tell you? Obviously the decision to buy comes from him... and everyone down the line just "yes sir" 3 bags full and initiated the tender....

If it is not him, then it would be the next person down the line and should be pretty senior and at the top... because the typical mid and low level civil servant have no balls to do this on their own... and if they did it, no one would defend them in a scandal situation like this...

There are sufficient rules to ensure proper governance. But it is not the rules, but people who choose to bypass or break these for their convenience or ego, especially for top level management, ranging from minister to top civil servant. They think they are smart or immune...

This case is actually not so bad since the low level workers benefitted from having really good bicycles. In another organisation, 300k was spent to renovation a top civil servant's office because she complained it is it too small... ( too small for her ego??? ) everyone down the line just follow and do it for her. Of cos, smart civil servants will always cover their ass...

Frankly, the three quotes requirement is just a weak hogwash. It's only purpose is to ensure that purchaser has done his/her marketing for products. This three quotes bullshit can be easily circumvented, especially when due diligence by purchasers and committee is weak.

There are such things as "waiver of competition" just justify it, mgt approves it and home free.:p

60.1% will say: It's like that....

40 saying: we need a system of check and balance

If you want to make this place your "home"..........you choose.:o

 

[ginfreely]

Re: Tan Buck Yam to $8 Cow - Your answer not good enough on $2.2k bikes

Seeking clarity over $2,200-bike purchase

AS A taxpayer for the past 34 years and an avid cyclist, I find it hard to comprehend how the National Parks Board's (NParks) bulk bicycle purchase was value for money ('Khaw okay with NParks' purchase of $2,200 bikes'; Thursday).

I agree that NParks officers need bicycles for their field duties, which are demanding. However, to acquire foldable bicycles at $2,200 each may not reflect well on the Government's call for prudence and austerity.

I own four bicycles - a hybrid costing $420, two mountain bikes at about $200 each and a foldable 20-inch bicycle at $98. All were purchased from Carrefour supermarket.

I assume that NParks invited tenders for the 26 bicycles via GeBiz, the government procurement portal. This would have automatically factored in a cost of almost $2,700 per bicycle, at the least.

This is because a tender process is required if the estimated purchase exceeds $70,000.

If NParks had intended to buy cheaper bicycles, a simpler process - the request for quotation, in which only three quotations were needed - would have sufficed. So why resort to a tender process when a simpler one was available?

A bicycle marque like Brompton - which was one of the options offered by the vendor responding to the tender - must have met NParks' specifications.

What were these requirements that resulted in Brompton bicycles being the cheapest and most prudent purchase?

What was the process of scrutiny by senior management?

Perhaps the public could be shown a comparison of a similar purchase by the police, who recently acquired bicycles for their officers to patrol neighbourhoods. What was the cost of these bicycles?

Tan Buck Yam

Yeah the issue is they as civil servants shouldn't be using taxpayers money to buy luxury brand stuff when normal brand stuff will do. Even I who is not a cycling enthusiast also noticed before Carrefour advertised folding bicycles at $200 or $300. The Npark purchaser and approver don't know or don't bother to find out?

How could govt agency buy bicycles at 10 times the price of normal bicycle using taxpayers money? Don't need the minister to say everyone also knows luxury stuff is better quality and less maintenance required, but like that can justify buying luxury brand for all their stuff?

Really no shame to spend on luxuries and generous to themselves while stingy on Singaporeans, no money for welfare for elderly, sick, and unemployed.

 

[Confuseous]

Do we pay ministers to defend $2.2k bicycles?

Who and where is the million dollar CEO who endorsed the decision?

Why is a minister yet again defending one of their highly paid CEO and the board?

 

[makapaaa]

Shocked by $2,200 price tag
Published on Jul 7, 2012

<iframe style="width: 55px; height: 62px;" class="twitter-share-button twitter-count-vertical" title="Twitter Tweet Button" src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.1340179658.html#_=1341675415590&count=vertical&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.straitstimes.com%2FSTForum%2FOnlineStory%2FSTIStory_819463.html&size=m&text=Shocked%20by%20%242%2C200%20price%20tag&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.straitstimes.com%2FSTForum%2FOnlineStory%2FSTIStory_819463.html" frameBorder="0" allowTransparency="true" scrolling="no"></iframe>
7Share

<g:plusone></g:plusone>

0
inShare​

<!--start of webspecial icon, if any-->
Purchase this article for republication

Buy SPH photos





<!--close .storyLeft-->I WAS shocked to read that the National Parks Board paid $2,200 each for 26 foldable bicycles ('Khaw okay with NParks' purchase of $2,200 bikes'; Thursday). It makes me wonder how the purchase was approved.
Did the officer who approved this purchase feel it was a reasonable price to pay, despite the fact that foldable bicycles are available at any hypermart for only 10 per cent of the price quoted?
The price puts this bicycle in the luxury segment. Most park visitors ride bicycles that cost only a few hundred dollars.
Thong Kok Kheong



Target price should have been less than $1,000
Published on Jul 7, 2012

<iframe style="width: 55px; height: 62px;" class="twitter-share-button twitter-count-vertical" title="Twitter Tweet Button" src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.1340179658.html#_=1341675525914&count=vertical&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.straitstimes.com%2FSTForum%2FOnlineStory%2FSTIStory_819466.html&size=m&text=Target%20price%20should%20have%20been%20less%20than%20%241%2C000&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.straitstimes.com%2FSTForum%2FOnlineStory%2FSTIStory_819466.html" frameBorder="0" allowTransparency="true" scrolling="no"></iframe>
8Share

<g:plusone></g:plusone>

0
inShare​

<!--start of webspecial icon, if any-->
Purchase this article for republication

Buy SPH photos





<!--close .storyLeft-->WHAT kind of tender process do civil servants adopt that would simply approve the buying of bicycles that border on the 'luxury' class range ('Khaw okay with NParks' purchase of $2,200 bikes'; Thursday)?
The National Parks Board's (NParks) explanation that because only one vendor had responded, and therefore Brompton bicycles (the cheaper of the two options offered) were chosen, is questionable. It is like saying that because only Porsche responded to a tender for sports cars, one has practically no choice but to accept it.
In Singapore, a decent work-horse bicycle, foldable or otherwise, is available for less than $1,000 - and NParks should have made this the target price for the tender. Therefore, if no vendor had submitted a bid close to that figure, a waiver could have been granted that would allow NParks to go for a reasonable and better deal.
Wong Kah Khoon

 

[Merl Haggard]

brompTon folding bicycles ARE made in the UK. I have one and bought it when I was on holiday in london.

It's amazing how self-righteous keyboard warriors post stuff without references or some basic googling.

Buying it in the UK does mean it has to be manufactured in the UK!

Good luck to the manufacturer if he doesn't take advantage of the lower production cost in China.

Anyway only amateurs or old uncles ride folding bikes which to me is no more than a market bike!

 

[wendychan]

Good luck to the manufacturer if he doesn't take advantage of the lower production cost in China.

as i said somewhere else.. bromptons are manufactured in the UK , hence part of the reason for high price plus the added snob appeal
the manufacturer is able to sell bikes made in the uk for the price they want to sell it at, again partly becoz of the snob appeal...

the nparks guy who mooted the idea for this purchase to begin with is possibly a keen cyclist himself already

bromptons are good bikes, BUT there are other choices out that , much cheaper, which will do a similar job for nparks purposes...

 

[Kuailan]

maintenance crew from the UK.... brompton UK sent over their mechanics????

gahmen Gebiz is a joke!! staff inside would have already fixed with suppliers! which bike to purchase, already discussed pre-agreed,
and they would call for tender minimum 3 tenders in the gebiz, just to show that they have called for tender, to save their ass!

No matters which excellent and cheaper bike u tender for you'll will not get it! they will find excuses to get their bike!

I personally have tried to tender many times even same/better quality and lower prices, you'll get a knock out! (not bicycle)
why? they already fixed with their regular suppliers,, this is one of the loop holes not covered! and can't be covered!

 

[Bigfuck]

gahmen Gebiz is a joke!! staff inside would have already fixed with suppliers! which bike to purchase, already discussed pre-agreed,
and they would call for tender minimum 3 tenders in the gebiz, just to show that they have called for tender, to save their ass!

No matters which excellent and cheaper bike u tender for you'll will not get it! they will find excuses to get their bike!

I personally have tried to tender many times even same/better quality and lower prices, you'll get a knock out! (not bicycle)
why? they already fixed with their regular suppliers,, this is one of the loop holes not covered! and can't be covered!

3 tender lanjiao. 3 company all same boss one.

 

[Bigfuck]

You think those fat asses inside NEA can ride 40km? meh i think 2 km NEA fuckers oredi piccha. Motorized foldable lah. cheaper some more. No pride to buy made in SGP one Born fuckers. Traitors. Got SGP one buy SGP one. Buy so non-standard means carrot one. Some more ex colonial leader one. Fucking chee hong cock suckers. No wonder it is go price. Can suck cock after paying. Do not beydey with taxpayer money you cheebyes.

 

[myfoot123]

How did we end up paying 2.2k? Parts are expensive too.

Because PAP think they are always right, trust them they never made mistake. They have statistics to prove the bike is cheap. Even if it doesn't, it is an honest mistake, let's move on. It has already happened, what to do? They promise to do better next time with stringent check. Singaporeans are so whinny they said. Without PAP and without that 2.2k bike, you will become maid of other countries, Singapore economy will collapse. Without the 2.2 bike, Singaporans will be jobless, people will suffer. Do you still want the $2.2K bike or not? you want quality, you have to pay a price otherwise you will get a dose of its incompetency. Nothing is equal, it is an elite bike with spur in its hind, not ordinary bike, a foreign talented bike. It can fly and travel few hundred miles within seconds and glowed in the dark to avoid accident. The world is envious we have such a 2.2K bike, branded and put Singapore on world map. Singaporeans don't want cheap bike and very choosy people. The bike also help increase fertility rate, anyone who sit on it will become fertile after riding on it for a distance and enjoying a good massage "down there". Overall it is value for money, if you don't get this 2.2K bike, you will repent for the rest of your life. As economy looms badly ahead, the bike can help Singapore leap forward and turned our recession around. This is a magical bike, a 2.2K per bike, where else can you match all its wonders and look at its provened history, used by old generations till now. Most importantly it helps to generate huge GDP for this cuntry.

Sound familiar every 5 years to justify a bad policies?