WP's Managing Agent's issue

[scroobal]

This is another Chen Shao Mao like thread.

WP needs to careful and not follow the PAP's course when it comes to handling Managing Agents and the tendering of projects. If it does because of pressure and market isolation, it helps codify and make the PAP's practice acceptable. That is exactly what the PAP wants. We are all aware that same contractor in PAP TC will be painting the same stair rail 2 times a year whether it is warranted or not.

The reason the Cabinet and MND does not want HDB or any Public Body to act as Managing Agent or even appoint Managing agent is that they can't do what the PAP Town Councils are doing right now - giving jobs to their mates, allowing the non-elected PAP advisor in opposition to have access to state funds to buy loyalty and votes.

I am aware that a tender process can be undermined by those with evil intentions but it very much up to the committee to decide and it need not be the lowest tender. If there is a boycott by firms in this business, this can be turned into a media item and show how opposition TCs are treated by PAP friendly companies or by companies that fear the PAP.

The other point raised by Khaw is the higher price given to the AHTC MA when compared to a similar size TC under PAP. Though the residents are charged not as high and is a separate issue, these needs to explained. Why aren't the additional margin going back to the residents or into further investment.

We also need to careful in rushing thru the process of appointing MAs after an electoral win. Why the urgency. The residents and voters will understand the pain and complexity of transitional management. The Opposition TC can measure performance prior to and after a new MA which can be one year down the road and release it to the public even if it not within HDB template.

We chose WP over PAP for a reason or for a multitude of reasons amongst which cronyism must surely be top of the agenda. I totally get the point that we need like-minded people to help the opposition, we also must be careful that we do not end swimming in the same swill that is the PAP. Lets not trip over the mines that the PAP has laid and we have to careful when throwing stones at glasshouses.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Scroobal.

The question was raised by KBW, He did not however mention certain points which have bearing on the issue.

Firstly FMSS was appointed to take over the tender because the then agent of Aljunied resigned immediately after WP won. The reason being 'conflict of interest" as they "managed" "AMK".

The writing was clear, No one who manages a PAP town council will run an opposition town council on their behalf. So Who has the expertise in Singapore ? Well before Aljunied, there was only Hougang and PP with the sustained experience and institutional knowledge. We can of course forget abt one term Cheo Chai Chen. The rest CPG EMAS etc were all gov companies managing PAP town councils.

The choices were again limited. FMSS was related to the WP by virtue of its close working relationship with the party, but it was not owned by the party nor were its owners in anyway members.

The discrepancy in pricing for MA fee's was explained by AJTC in terms of not following previous quotes, and differing job scope. A case of apples being compared to an outlier orange.

The opposition will always face an opposition premium for doing business in Singapore for things as mundane as "printing" of party newsletters and importantly "party election materials. "


Locke

This is another Chen Shao Mao like thread.

WP needs to careful and not follow the PAP's course when it comes to handling Managing Agents and the tendering of projects. If it does because of pressure and market isolation, it helps codify and make the PAP's practice acceptable. That is exactly what the PAP wants. We are all aware that same contractor in PAP TC will be painting the same stair rail 2 times a year whether it is warranted or not.

The reason the Cabinet and MND does not want HDB or any Public Body to act as Managing Agent or even appoint Managing agent is that they can't do what the PAP Town Councils are doing right now - giving jobs to their mates, allowing the non-elected PAP advisor in opposition to have access to state funds to buy loyalty and votes.

I am aware that a tender process can be undermined by those with evil intentions but it very much up to the committee to decide and it need not be the lowest tender. If there is a boycott by firms in this business, this can be turned into a media item and show how opposition TCs are treated by PAP friendly companies or by companies that fear the PAP.

The other point raised by Khaw is the higher price given to the AHTC MA when compared to a similar size TC under PAP. Though the residents are charged not as high and is a separate issue, these needs to explained. Why aren't the additional margin going back to the residents or into further investment.

We also need to careful in rushing thru the process of appointing MAs after an electoral win. Why the urgency. The residents and voters will understand the pain and complexity of transitional management. The Opposition TC can measure performance prior to and after a new MA which can be one year down the road and release it to the public even if it not within HDB template.

We chose WP over PAP for a reason or for a multitude of reasons amongst which cronyism must surely be top of the agenda. I totally get the point that we need like-minded people to help the opposition, we also must be careful that we do not end swimming in the same swill that is the PAP. Lets not trip over the mines that the PAP has laid and we have to careful when throwing stones at glasshouses.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Locke,

You will have o face this flatly, WP is walking down the slippery slope of cronyism.

Just read this from SG Voice


The Parliament is not a place to settle old political scores by calling a truce

The parliament is a public institution and it is not a venue to play political hunger games. Sadly, to the disappointment of all political watchers in Singapore, our state of politics has degenerated into a sport of mudslinging and blood spills. On Monday 13th of May 2013, the Workers’ Party parliamentarians walked out with their noses bloodied, figuratively speaking, by the Minster for National Development Khaw Boon Wan.



Khaw pointed out that WP has been parceling off contracts to supporters of their own political party for a whopping figure of $25.9 million. Upon closer inspection, there appears to be lapses in governance in the way contracts were awarded.

But it was not a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Even if Khaw made any aspersions of poor governance, he was politically savvy enough to show WP a way out of their death trap. They reached a common ground; and it turns out, that it is perfectly okay for parliamentarians to do whatever they want with town councils. Khaw said, “As MPs, we are given a lot of latitude to run TCs.”

We must put our trust, wholeheartedly, in our politicians to wriggle out of a tight spot. And our parliament has become a place to cut deals, settle old political scores and forge new alliances:

“I call on all, including our WP colleagues, to work closely with my Ministry to improve our TCs, for the interests of our residents moving forward,” said Khaw.

There appears to be some kind of political brotherhood and it will be not too long before our dear beloved politicians turn our public institutions i.e TCs into their own political fortresses. At least for now, having a fortress seems like a good idea. Besides, it is a comfortable safe zone for both parties to fall back on.

WP in choppy Political Waters

WP has found itself in choppy political waters in the last two days. It has lost the moral high ground to argue that TCs are a public institution after farming out its own IT contract to a party insider.

However, according to some die hard WP supporters, it is a different kettle of fish when WP parcels out contracts to its supporters. Apparently, it is not favoritism; it is because of their distrust for anything not affiliated with WP.

Pritam Singh, at the parliamentary sitting, called for a ban of TC transactions on party-owned companies.

Khaw responding to Pritam said, “We must impose it across all TCs, and also not just narrowly for party-owned companies but companies owned by people in various forms of party affiliations, like ex-party members and party supporters and even their immediate families. If we do this, we would of course be prohibiting the appointment of FMSS by the AHTC as well.”

The slippery slope of TC contracts

TC deals are vital to the growth and survival of political parties. It provides party members with income, jobs and precious cash to organize their parties more effectively. Without these deals, parties will have to solely rely on donations and MP allowances to survive. For some, as distasteful as it seems, it is the reason why they sign up for politics in the first place.

One needs to lift the corporate veil in the case of FMSS. If the company was setup for the sole purpose of hiding the true ownership and in this case the Workers’ Party, then there is a serious lapse in governance.

While it may seem easy for Pritam to say that he can just ban all TC transactions by party-owned companies. In reality, we need to extend the notion of ownership to party-members, affiliates and supporters. In this case, WP can’t afford to throw this out of the window for practical financial reasons. In fact, they have gotten themselves into a nice little mess.

To be fair to WP, this fight was started by the bloggers. The battle lines were drawn digitally in the cloud by over-zealous supporters who thought they were doing WP a favour. But little did they know that they were doing them (WP) in, by kicking the dust on AIM.

What I fear most is the internal turmoil that WP would go through (or maybe not). So what happens to those who joined them to make a difference and those who argued for TCs to be a public institution? Where do they stand philosophically and ideologically in all these? So, what can WP offer?

It appears that a tactical withdrawal would be a nice respite for our WP warriors, especially after their passionate performances in their first world parliament.

Trust me, even if the warriors retreat, the foot soldiers will fight till the bitter end.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear GMS

If EMAS CPG and all the rest of the GLCs refuse to manage and tender who is left on the table as an option. One can have all sorts of high falutin ideals, but the services still have to be delivered. It was either FMSS or they do it all themselves. Your assumption is that managing a municipality is an idiot proof job. It is an assumption which they chose not to take


Locke

Locke,

You will have o face this flatly, WP is walking down the slippery slope of cronyism.

Just read this from SG Voice


The Parliament is not a place to settle old political scores by calling a truce

The parliament is a public institution and it is not a venue to play political hunger games. Sadly, to the disappointment of all political watchers in Singapore, our state of politics has degenerated into a sport of mudslinging and blood spills. On Monday 13th of May 2013, the Workers’ Party parliamentarians walked out with their noses bloodied, figuratively speaking, by the Minster for National Development Khaw Boon Wan.



Khaw pointed out that WP has been parceling off contracts to supporters of their own political party for a whopping figure of $25.9 million. Upon closer inspection, there appears to be lapses in governance in the way contracts were awarded.

But it was not a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Even if Khaw made any aspersions of poor governance, he was politically savvy enough to show WP a way out of their death trap. They reached a common ground; and it turns out, that it is perfectly okay for parliamentarians to do whatever they want with town councils. Khaw said, “As MPs, we are given a lot of latitude to run TCs.”

We must put our trust, wholeheartedly, in our politicians to wriggle out of a tight spot. And our parliament has become a place to cut deals, settle old political scores and forge new alliances:

“I call on all, including our WP colleagues, to work closely with my Ministry to improve our TCs, for the interests of our residents moving forward,” said Khaw.

There appears to be some kind of political brotherhood and it will be not too long before our dear beloved politicians turn our public institutions i.e TCs into their own political fortresses. At least for now, having a fortress seems like a good idea. Besides, it is a comfortable safe zone for both parties to fall back on.

WP in choppy Political Waters

WP has found itself in choppy political waters in the last two days. It has lost the moral high ground to argue that TCs are a public institution after farming out its own IT contract to a party insider.

However, according to some die hard WP supporters, it is a different kettle of fish when WP parcels out contracts to its supporters. Apparently, it is not favoritism; it is because of their distrust for anything not affiliated with WP.

Pritam Singh, at the parliamentary sitting, called for a ban of TC transactions on party-owned companies.

Khaw responding to Pritam said, “We must impose it across all TCs, and also not just narrowly for party-owned companies but companies owned by people in various forms of party affiliations, like ex-party members and party supporters and even their immediate families. If we do this, we would of course be prohibiting the appointment of FMSS by the AHTC as well.”

The slippery slope of TC contracts

TC deals are vital to the growth and survival of political parties. It provides party members with income, jobs and precious cash to organize their parties more effectively. Without these deals, parties will have to solely rely on donations and MP allowances to survive. For some, as distasteful as it seems, it is the reason why they sign up for politics in the first place.

One needs to lift the corporate veil in the case of FMSS. If the company was setup for the sole purpose of hiding the true ownership and in this case the Workers’ Party, then there is a serious lapse in governance.

While it may seem easy for Pritam to say that he can just ban all TC transactions by party-owned companies. In reality, we need to extend the notion of ownership to party-members, affiliates and supporters. In this case, WP can’t afford to throw this out of the window for practical financial reasons. In fact, they have gotten themselves into a nice little mess.

To be fair to WP, this fight was started by the bloggers. The battle lines were drawn digitally in the cloud by over-zealous supporters who thought they were doing WP a favour. But little did they know that they were doing them (WP) in, by kicking the dust on AIM.

What I fear most is the internal turmoil that WP would go through (or maybe not). So what happens to those who joined them to make a difference and those who argued for TCs to be a public institution? Where do they stand philosophically and ideologically in all these? So, what can WP offer?

It appears that a tactical withdrawal would be a nice respite for our WP warriors, especially after their passionate performances in their first world parliament.

Trust me, even if the warriors retreat, the foot soldiers will fight till the bitter end.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Dear Locke,

I think you have exaggerated the situation.

WP doesn't start from scratch. It has a backbone management staff in HGTC and I do not think it is that difficult to take over from there.

Goh Meng Seng

Dear GMS

If EMAS CPG and all the rest of the GLCs refuse to manage and tender who is left on the table as an option. One can have all sorts of high falutin ideals, but the services still have to be delivered. It was either FMSS or they do it all themselves. Your assumption is that managing a municipality is an idiot proof job. It is an assumption which they chose not to take


Locke

 

[commoner]

for general information

the primary town councils managing agent : EM Services (manly EX HDB people) and CPG (HDB & PUB people).

professional condominium managing agents like Colliers, Savills, Wakefield and many others will not even touch and/or tender for town councils management projects.

So for those uninformed, if CPG and EM Services do not want to tender or putting a high tender, what should the OPPOSITION party ward do? BEG? the 1st thing is to set up one that they can do.

Managing Agents are able to terminate contract giving short notices, or giving problems to the incoming new MPs,,,,, it may look like cronyism a his stage, but a necessary evil for oppositions,,,,,

PAP has the machinery to take over or handover town councils but opposition parties is a steep learning curve at the moment.

taking a SMC is easy,,,,,,

take over a GRC,,,, not that easy

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

The choices were again limited. FMSS was related to the WP by virtue of its close working relationship with the party, but it was not owned by the party nor were its owners in anyway members.

The discrepancy in pricing for MA fee's was explained by AJTC in terms of not following previous quotes, and differing job scope. A case of apples being compared to an outlier orange.

The opposition will always face an opposition premium for doing business in Singapore for things as mundane as "printing" of party newsletters and importantly "party election materials. "


Locke

I agree with you here, but please do not smoothen the issue by saying that the owners of FMSS were not WP members. They were WP supporters and election assentors and the husband was himself directly involved previously with WP town council.

Both sides are threading on a mine field here. However, WP still has the moral advantage because it is clearly working under severe constraint and unfair rules. The unfair playing field starts from PA all the way down to the grassroots, which have the ability to deny Opposition TCs much needed resources to run the show effectively.

In this respect, Lina Chiam's speech hit the right notes, as did Pritam Singh's.

 

[zhihau]

sounds like an abso-bloody-lutely great idea to start companies to provide TC management services :p:p:p

 

[WongMengMeng]

A bunch of PAP supporters and/or IBs talking to each other trying to justify the PAP’s dirty tricks. Please see the below 2 links and you will know to take what Scroobal, Locke(Liberal?) and Goh Meng Seng post here with a HUGE PINCH OF SALT.

http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?151207-Political-Implications-of-6-9-Protests/page5 - see from post #86 onwards

http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?...ockeLiberal-Case-FIXED!&p=1500569#post1500569

To cut a long story short, the job of an MP is to make laws and hold the Government to account and not to manage Town Councils. Municipal services are the job of the GOVERNMENT, to be executed through CIVIL SERVANTS who are supposed to be IMPARTIAL and not differentiate between Oppo and PAP wards. It is as simple as that.

This whole TC bullshit is nothing more than a scheme to sabotage Opposition MPs. AIM, Managing Agents, etc are the nuts and bolts of the sabotage. PAP IBs are part of the propaganda apparatus to make the sabotage look like something else. That job used to be done solely by Shit Times and MediaCock. They are still doing it, but Internet is coming up and they need these IBs to complement the brainwashing machine.

With Opposition MPs perpetually bogged down with municipal issues, which should be done by IMPARTIAL civil servants paid for with ALL voters’ tax money, the idea is to prevent the virtuous cycle referred to in this video from ever emerging. Opposition MPs will have no time or energy to scrutinise the PAP and its misguided policies – the first two functions of MPs mentioned in the video. Well, Sinkies, you got screwed because you voted for this in return for lift upgrading! Serve you right! I say lifts are supposed to stop on every floor in the first place and if they didn’t you should have voted the PAP out for not designing your HDB flats properly.

[video=youtube;-9Qz3-Alvd4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9Qz3-Alvd4[/video]

 

[scroobal]

Thanks, these are important.

These are material omission and coming from a cabinet minister and someone who claims to be fighting for the people for decades and wants to walk with the cloak of patriotism, its disgraceful.

WP needs to invest in quality media consultants so that these key points are addressed quickly and shine the light on the PAP as they attempt to cripple the work of duly elected representative of the people.

Also surprised that it took you to point it out. These things cannot remain unaddressed.

Dear Scroobal.

The question was raised by KBW, He did not however mention certain points which have bearing on the issue.

Firstly FMSS was appointed to take over the tender because the then agent of Aljunied resigned immediately after WP won. The reason being 'conflict of interest" as they "managed" "AMK".

The writing was clear, No one who manages a PAP town council will run an opposition town council on their behalf. So Who has the expertise in Singapore ? Well before Aljunied, there was only Hougang and PP with the sustained experience and institutional knowledge. We can of course forget abt one term Cheo Chai Chen. The rest CPG EMAS etc were all gov companies managing PAP town councils.

The choices were again limited. FMSS was related to the WP by virtue of its close working relationship with the party, but it was not owned by the party nor were its owners in anyway members.

The discrepancy in pricing for MA fee's was explained by AJTC in terms of not following previous quotes, and differing job scope. A case of apples being compared to an outlier orange.

The opposition will always face an opposition premium for doing business in Singapore for things as mundane as "printing" of party newsletters and importantly "party election materials. "


Locke

 

[scroobal]

They are first and foremost politicians not in the business of property management. You seriously think that the PAP is an expert at property management. The PSP relies on a whole swathe of govt linked and private property managers. WP does not have that breath and cannot be expected to have that level of leverage.

It is not like putting together a toy with lego bricks.

Dear Locke,

I think you have exaggerated the situation.

WP doesn't start from scratch. It has a backbone management staff in HGTC and I do not think it is that difficult to take over from there.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[scroobal]

Absolutely agree on these 2 points. Its has never been a level playing field from the word go. The point on SMC/GRC is spot on. As different as chalk and cheese.

for general information


So for those uninformed, if CPG and EM Services do not want to tender or putting a high tender, what should the OPPOSITION party ward do? BEG? the 1st thing is to set up one that they can do.

Managing Agents are able to terminate contract giving short notices, or giving problems to the incoming new MPs,,,,, it may look like cronyism a his stage, but a necessary evil for oppositions,,,,,

PAP has the machinery to take over or handover town councils but opposition parties is a steep learning curve at the moment.

taking a SMC is easy,,,,,,

take over a GRC,,,, not that easy

 

[WongMengMeng]

To cut a long story short, the job of an MP is to make laws and hold the Government to account and not to manage Town Councils. Municipal services are the job of the GOVERNMENT, to be executed through CIVIL SERVANTS who are supposed to be IMPARTIAL and not differentiate between Oppo and PAP wards. It is as simple as that.

See post #9 for more and a thought provoking video.

 

[scroobal]

No sane individual with a family is going to provide MA services to an opposition TC. The PAP will bring out how you had sex with your grandmother, your Dad is a well known cross dresser, your mother only passed home economics and your dick was reconstructed.

Khaw already started with husband-wife crap. After what he said, you think other MAs a going to step forward.

sounds like an abso-bloody-lutely great idea to start companies to provide TC management services :p:p:p

 

[scroobal]

Thats a double aged sword. I felt that SL should not have said that especially after he revealed their role at the time of nominations.

I agree with you here, but please do not smoothen the issue by saying that the owners of FMSS were not WP members. They were WP supporters and election assentors and the husband was himself directly involved previously with WP town council.

.

 

[scroobal]

I do agree with Prof Tey supporter that MPs main focus should be in the legislative chambers. They should not be burdened with property management and provision of municipal services. That should for reasons associated with economies of scale be best handled by the HDB or an entity contracted and governed by HBD or MND.

The MP should be screaming how dirty her constituency is in Parliament not how she handles the cleaning process.

This is PAP's way of crippling the institution of democracy.

 

[scroobal]

Frankly i wonder what the Govt will do if elected opposition refuse to handle TC issues. A boycott will send a clear message.

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

The thing that really gets me is that the playing field is so unfair. And the moment WP tries to argue against PAP practices on the basis of what should constitute good governance, the PAP bites back that WP seems equally guilty of the same.

The layman cannot be expected to know what has been revealed by commoner and Locke in this thread. They do not know the administrative hassles. KBW obviously knows that people out there don't know and, he is attacking below the belt.

 

[scroobal]

That is exactly what the PAP is doing. The silver lining is that the opposition should not go deeper into the PAP's sense of "ethical practices"

It also shows that the Prime Minister word and apology is meaningless. These are the structural issues that people are upset about even though they might understand or catch the nuances.

They also realise that WP tends to be cautious when highlighting such sharp practices except in parliament and they are taking advantage.

The layman cannot be expected to know what has been revealed by commoner and Locke in this thread. They do not know the administrative hassles. KBW obviously knows that people out there don't know and, he is attacking below the belt.

 

[wendychan]

A bunch of PAP supporters and/or IBs talking to each other trying to justify the PAP’s dirty tricks. Please see the below 2 links and you will know to take what Scroobal, Locke(Liberal?) and Goh Meng Seng post here with a HUGE PINCH OF SALT.

all BS. the same TS called the Todd family a "fucking family"... because he knows all.....'sounds like some pontificator lawyer i know