............
You should ask that MA question to all condo MA - why they dun hire their own sweeper, window cleaner, rubbish disposer, pool cleaner, security guards.............
Your desperation to nail the WP on imaginary crime is hilarious
............
Leong stated that he could not make any conclusion without all the details. I will be surprised if you can.
The fair thing to do is get an foreign independent body to make a finding based on all the facts available.
I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?
First you stated you do not want estate management to be done by MPs and then you claim that they should run the estate by themselves without a MA. You do realise that the positions are mutually exclusive.
So do you want sugar in your coffee or not?
Leong stated that he could not make any conclusion without all the details. I will be surprised if you can.
The fair thing to do is get an foreign independent body to make a finding based on all the facts available.
I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?
Bro, that was silky smooth. Did not even see the knife go in and go out until I read it again. Liked the part where you tied GD to Locke via CSJ and LTK. I rate you as top of the league. I suppose you can understand why people are cautious of SDP.
You either do it or you don't.
This is the PAP's problem. While it claims that the TC system will put MPs to the test but the fact is that most of PAP TCs employed MA and now, WP also followed suit. Thus, TC system has failed one of its most important aim of measuring "abilities" of MPs, be it PAP or opposition.
Granted, even if TCs are not run by MA, one could still employ good estate managers to do the job. The variations will lie in the distribution of resources in minor improvement.
The reason against MA running TCs is of economic values. For WP's case, apparently there is no competitive edge in employing a MA like FMSS and it will definitely cost more. Thus, in the interests of residents, it should not be done so.
Goh Meng Seng
If on the other hand you succeed in managing it better and directly than kudos, but until that point really all you have is theory.
I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?
In Page 25 of Aljunied-Hougang's TC report, the figure of $3,827,113 Managing Agent fee is derived. However, nothing indicates that the fee was for 8.5 months. The start of the AR clearly stated that the report includes the standing of its predecessor Aljunied TC .
http://www.ahpetc.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Annual-Report-2011-2012.pdf
We can't always trust information from "enemy sources". When it comes to that, the same kind of people who enjoys using such massaged figures to present a case against WP would turn a blind eye to PAP's treatment of Chee and SDP were fined for wrong healthcare figures.
You either do it or you don't.
This is the PAP's problem. While it claims that the TC system will put MPs to the test but the fact is that most of PAP TCs employed MA and now, WP also followed suit. Thus, TC system has failed one of its most important aim of measuring "abilities" of MPs, be it PAP or opposition.
Granted, even if TCs are not run by MA, one could still employ good estate managers to do the job. The variations will lie in the distribution of resources in minor improvement.
The reason against MA running TCs is of economic values. For WP's case, apparently there is no competitive edge in employing a MA like FMSS and it will definitely cost more. Thus, in the interests of residents, it should not be done so.
Goh Meng Seng
I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?
Dear GMS.
I believe all the PAP TC employ an MA through a contract like the ones with CPG. Footnote. All the condo's I have stayed in all my life have never employed a condo manager directly. They have a condo manager who is an employee of the condo management company which has won the contract from the Strata Title company. I would like to repeat that no one can force an employee to remain an employee if she choses to become an entrepreneur.
Your view is that it is easy to find an estate manager to RUN town council services and manage all the contracts under a town council as a paid employee for x amount. For some reason the WP and the PAP both disagree. Do remember that if and when NSP wins a GRC and they chose to run a GRC on the model proposed by you and the estate manger employed by you fucks it up and all the complaints built up, you might than acknowledge that appearances can be deceiving.
If on the other hand you succeed in managing it better and directly than kudos, but until that point really all you have is theory.
Locke
I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?
The topic was triggered by AIM and not FMSS. I am beginning to see what others mean when they spoke of proportion.
If one day, PAP in a Marcos fashion siphons $10 billion of Singapore's reserves to a private bank account of Lee family and the country is in the verge of bankruptcy, and Goh Meng Seng will insist that the most important issue of the nation right now is WP's town council awarding a 14th month bonus for staff that year. And you will expect to come out unscathed and unattacked from that argument.
Granted that WP shouldn't be emulating PAP in the wrong ways, but the importance of proportion seems lost on you.
Assuming I agree with you to have a better alternative to WP which reeks of cronyism, I look at NSP which has a husband-wife team in important positions in the CEC, I look at SPP which has a husband-wife team in even more important positions and I look at SDP which has a brother-sister sibling pair in the CEC. Which alternative do I look at?
If I don't have a solution to that, for now, I suggest we will go by proportion of scrutiny to proportion of crimes.
You must always remember WP is the choice you want to choose to replace PAP one day. Rotting started from small proportions.
Dear Locke,
I don't think PAP and WP disagree... WP used to run HGTC without MA and PAP still have Bishan TP running without MA.
Goh Meng Seng
Dear Locke,
I don't think PAP and WP disagree... WP used to run HGTC without MA and PAP still have Bishan TP running without MA.
Goh Meng Seng
Dear Aurvandil,
I too observe such discrepancy. However, this is not a good indicator. MA fees indicate how resources are used or profits transferred while S&C indicates cost to residents. One can be populist by reducing S&C but transferred most contracts to kaki while reducing spending on other places...
If AHTC as problem with S&C collections as reported while paying higher MA fees while reducing S&C charges, money must come from somewhere or some spending must be compromised or that, Sinking Fund affected... It may not be a good sign at all.
Goh Meng Seng