-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
“PAP Managing Agents mysteriously lower their rates”
- Thread starter tioliaohuat
- Start date
hoseh liao, huat ah!!!
since PAPigs TC get discounts from their contractors, then why the fuck the monthly TC fee never reduce? in fact some TC even increase the fee recently. KNN... PAPigs not honest, didnt offer to reduce TC fee to residents despite paying less to their contractors.:oIo:
Cope from TR EMERITUS
[h=1]TR EMERITUS[/h] The Voice of Singaporeans for Singapore
[h=2]PAP Managing Agents mysteriously lower their rates[/h]
February 14th, 2015 |
Author: Editorial
It was reported on ST today (‘PAP MPs seek answers on “missing public funds”‘, 14 Feb) that PAP MPs wanted WP to answer for the “overpayment” of town council management fees to FMSS, the managing agent of AHPETC.
Minister Shanmugam on Thursday (12 Feb) distributed a table showing that the Managing Agent (MA) fees AHPETC paid were nearly double the average fees at PAP town councils:
(ST graphics)
He charged that AHPETC had overpaid FMSS by $1.6 million a year over the past four years. This is calculated based on the what AHPETC would have paid using the average PAP rates from the table above.
Education Minister Heng further pressed WP, “Where did the money go? Why are you so protective of your expensive managing agent that messed up the town council’s work? Because they are the party supporters and friends?”
MP Hri Kumar Nair also said, “And as any person knows, loss does not only occur when money is stolen.” He was referring to “substantial overpayments” to FMSS.
However, do take note that accusations of “substantial overpayments” from AHPETC to FMSS came from after calculating from the numbers stated in the table above.
Problem with Minister Shanmugam’s table
TOC did a very good analysis of the numbers in the table and immediately spotted problems. TOC reported [Link]:
In fact, evidence has shown that the MAs of PAP TCs suddenly and mysteriously, lowered their MA rates only last year. That means to say, prior to last year, PAP MA rates were much higher than those shown in the table above.
A reader forwarded the following information to TRE today (14 Feb). It showed that for Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council, their residential MA rates (per unit per month) were:
Following is the letter confirming the rates from FY2011 to FY2013:
Now, from the table above, the residential and commercial MA rates for Pasir Ris-Punggol have both dropped to $5.50 starting from last year (i.e, 12% drop for residential and 52% for commercial).
That is to say, for the residential MA rates for Pasir Ris-Punggol, we have:
Presumably, one would expect that the MA rates would have dropped accordingly among all the PAP TCs last year, since they are all coordinated by PAP TC Chairman Teo Ho Pin.
So, what happened? With inflation going up every year, how is that the PAP MAs can suddenly cut their rates for PAP TCs? Perhaps the PAP MAs felt remorseful for the “substantial” profits they had made over the years and decided to make less last year?
Or could it be with the cut in MA rates, certain services will also be correspondingly removed and if the TCs want those services, they will have to pay extra to their MAs? For example, like the sales tactic used by Joven Chew to sell cheap mobile phones to tourists but make them pay dearly for other accessories?
Indeed, if we were to assume that the residential MA rate for Tanjong Pagar may have also dropped 12%, that means before 2014, its rate could be as high as $7.56, higher than AHPETC’s $7.43.
WP MP Sylvia Lim also said in Parliament, “It is possible that the (other) managing agents have reduced their rates since then. The information that we had in 2012, the rates were at a higher level than what was circulated in the table (on Thursday).”
In a statement yesterday (13 Feb), a MND spokesman confirmed that the rates were based on the latest contracts the town councils had signed, and were submitted to MND only last year.
What do you think is going on here?
Why did the PAP MAs suddenly decide to charge less?
[h=1]TR EMERITUS[/h] The Voice of Singaporeans for Singapore
[h=2]PAP Managing Agents mysteriously lower their rates[/h]
It was reported on ST today (‘PAP MPs seek answers on “missing public funds”‘, 14 Feb) that PAP MPs wanted WP to answer for the “overpayment” of town council management fees to FMSS, the managing agent of AHPETC.
Minister Shanmugam on Thursday (12 Feb) distributed a table showing that the Managing Agent (MA) fees AHPETC paid were nearly double the average fees at PAP town councils:
He charged that AHPETC had overpaid FMSS by $1.6 million a year over the past four years. This is calculated based on the what AHPETC would have paid using the average PAP rates from the table above.
Education Minister Heng further pressed WP, “Where did the money go? Why are you so protective of your expensive managing agent that messed up the town council’s work? Because they are the party supporters and friends?”
MP Hri Kumar Nair also said, “And as any person knows, loss does not only occur when money is stolen.” He was referring to “substantial overpayments” to FMSS.
However, do take note that accusations of “substantial overpayments” from AHPETC to FMSS came from after calculating from the numbers stated in the table above.
Problem with Minister Shanmugam’s table
TOC did a very good analysis of the numbers in the table and immediately spotted problems. TOC reported [Link]:
An apparent anomaly were the residential and commercial unit rates which Mr Shanmugam’s chart indicated were the same.
AHPETC’s chairman, SylviaLim noticed this and highlighted this to Mr Shanmugam.
“From what I know, MA rates are usually different from residential units and commercial units,” Ms Lim said. “But in your chart, they are all the same. So I would like minister to clarify that there has been no mistake in this chart and it is really the fact that all this MA are charging the same rates for commercial and residential units because from the data that I have, even the MA for PAP town councils, such as CPG, from the Aljunied town council records that we have, the MA rate for commercial units was 12 dollars and something. So I think minister may want to check his chart.”
Mr Shanmugam got up and replied to Ms Lim immediately, “I can answer your answer straight away. You should look at annex 3 and you will see in the first page that the MA rates once they are done on a weighted average basis, these figures are accurate, [I’m] told by MND.”
However Ms Lim was unconvinced.
She said, “Minister, I would still request it to be checked because I don’t think it is correct.”
WP’s secretary-general Low Thia Khiang also told Mr Shanmugam that the rates cannot be the same.
Mr Shanmugam replied that he would check the rates for accuracy.
Indeed, looking at the figures, one would come to wonder if the figures are correct.
A TRE reader, Melvin Tan, who was at the gallery observing the parliamentary proceeding also reported (‘Report from gallery: TC saga designed to damage WP‘):AHPETC’s chairman, SylviaLim noticed this and highlighted this to Mr Shanmugam.
“From what I know, MA rates are usually different from residential units and commercial units,” Ms Lim said. “But in your chart, they are all the same. So I would like minister to clarify that there has been no mistake in this chart and it is really the fact that all this MA are charging the same rates for commercial and residential units because from the data that I have, even the MA for PAP town councils, such as CPG, from the Aljunied town council records that we have, the MA rate for commercial units was 12 dollars and something. So I think minister may want to check his chart.”
Mr Shanmugam got up and replied to Ms Lim immediately, “I can answer your answer straight away. You should look at annex 3 and you will see in the first page that the MA rates once they are done on a weighted average basis, these figures are accurate, [I’m] told by MND.”
However Ms Lim was unconvinced.
She said, “Minister, I would still request it to be checked because I don’t think it is correct.”
WP’s secretary-general Low Thia Khiang also told Mr Shanmugam that the rates cannot be the same.
Mr Shanmugam replied that he would check the rates for accuracy.
Indeed, looking at the figures, one would come to wonder if the figures are correct.
Ms Lim added that of the three pages of appendices distributed by Mr Shanmugam, the one detailing various charges by town councils was wrong. The rates for all PAP town councils were residential rates except AHPETC had different rates for residential and commercial properties.
To me, the error was so obvious but Mr Shanmugam was adamant on his accuracy. Only later did he admit he was only told that the figures were correct and did not check them himself. On the second day of the debate, he did not address or correct this issue and no longer did.
The above incident brought a few points to my mind. Firstly, if I were shown a table where two columns were the same figures except for the one for AHPETC, I would instinctively check if the figures were correct before presenting them in Parliament.
Secondly, Mr Shanmugam had only to produce three appendices on a town council matter and one was already wrong. How would he expect AHPETC with several fronts to take care of to avoid even one mistake?
Thirdly, I noticed the MSM had downplayed or blotted out this incident.
PAP MA rates were suddenly lowered last yearTo me, the error was so obvious but Mr Shanmugam was adamant on his accuracy. Only later did he admit he was only told that the figures were correct and did not check them himself. On the second day of the debate, he did not address or correct this issue and no longer did.
The above incident brought a few points to my mind. Firstly, if I were shown a table where two columns were the same figures except for the one for AHPETC, I would instinctively check if the figures were correct before presenting them in Parliament.
Secondly, Mr Shanmugam had only to produce three appendices on a town council matter and one was already wrong. How would he expect AHPETC with several fronts to take care of to avoid even one mistake?
Thirdly, I noticed the MSM had downplayed or blotted out this incident.
In fact, evidence has shown that the MAs of PAP TCs suddenly and mysteriously, lowered their MA rates only last year. That means to say, prior to last year, PAP MA rates were much higher than those shown in the table above.
A reader forwarded the following information to TRE today (14 Feb). It showed that for Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council, their residential MA rates (per unit per month) were:
- FY2011 (ending Jan 2012) – $6.11
- FY2012 (ending Jan 2013) – $6.20
- FY2013 (ending Jan 2014) – $6.25
Following is the letter confirming the rates from FY2011 to FY2013:
Now, from the table above, the residential and commercial MA rates for Pasir Ris-Punggol have both dropped to $5.50 starting from last year (i.e, 12% drop for residential and 52% for commercial).
That is to say, for the residential MA rates for Pasir Ris-Punggol, we have:
Presumably, one would expect that the MA rates would have dropped accordingly among all the PAP TCs last year, since they are all coordinated by PAP TC Chairman Teo Ho Pin.
So, what happened? With inflation going up every year, how is that the PAP MAs can suddenly cut their rates for PAP TCs? Perhaps the PAP MAs felt remorseful for the “substantial” profits they had made over the years and decided to make less last year?
Or could it be with the cut in MA rates, certain services will also be correspondingly removed and if the TCs want those services, they will have to pay extra to their MAs? For example, like the sales tactic used by Joven Chew to sell cheap mobile phones to tourists but make them pay dearly for other accessories?
Indeed, if we were to assume that the residential MA rate for Tanjong Pagar may have also dropped 12%, that means before 2014, its rate could be as high as $7.56, higher than AHPETC’s $7.43.
WP MP Sylvia Lim also said in Parliament, “It is possible that the (other) managing agents have reduced their rates since then. The information that we had in 2012, the rates were at a higher level than what was circulated in the table (on Thursday).”
In a statement yesterday (13 Feb), a MND spokesman confirmed that the rates were based on the latest contracts the town councils had signed, and were submitted to MND only last year.
What do you think is going on here?
Why did the PAP MAs suddenly decide to charge less?
Spread the word then............these bunch of chobolans in lumparliament manipulate and cut and slice the figures like a bunch of newbies, yet think they're so smart when it is simple maths needed to know that no sensible MA will reduce rates, and if they do so, they must detail out why and also why previous years they charge a certain rates.
In the govt procurement process, it is always transparent. The process and procedures are there but people can manipulate them, like for example, some services are parked under optional and some are mandatory. So, it is very easy to show the rate for the mandatory services and hide the rates for optional services. But why they're able to do so and for what reason, only if we dig deeper in, we will know.
In the govt procurement process, it is always transparent. The process and procedures are there but people can manipulate them, like for example, some services are parked under optional and some are mandatory. So, it is very easy to show the rate for the mandatory services and hide the rates for optional services. But why they're able to do so and for what reason, only if we dig deeper in, we will know.
despite their millions $$ salary, they have no idea of covering their tracks when they want to fix their opponents. internet trails worse than paper trails.
50 shades of white, PAP government’s house needs cleaning
By Jentrified Citizen
There has been a firestorm in Parliament this past week with the ruling party lashing out at the Workers Party with exceptional venom and shockingly slanderous accusations. I am not going to add to the debate over the AHPETC town council matter as this has been covered in-depth online and it has been reported extensively by the mainstream media which devoted reams of pages to this over several days.
Instead, I am wondering about the sense of perspective over AHPETC, or rather the loss of perspective, by the ruling party and the MSM for them to have devoted so much time, energy, public resources and news space to it when there are many other bigger issues of concern to the citizens.
Let’s start with the 2013/2014 report by the Auditor-General (AGO) on the transgressions by the government. The contents list of this 64-page report was an eye-opener as it listed the numerous financial lapses and irregularities found to have been committed by EVERY Ministry in FY2013/2014.
The puzzling question is – Why didn’t the Ministers and MPs openly address in Parliament some of the major lapses (some repeated) committed by their agencies if they truly care about integrity, transparency and doing what is in the best interest of Singaporeans? Instead, the PAP MPS and several heavyweight Ministers like Khaw Boon Wan and Shanmugam spent a great deal of the entire Parliament time this past week harping on ONE lapse by the Workers Party – the management of AHPETC. Is it because the ruling party is gearing up for the looming General Elections which may take place this year?
Even though there were lapses in the management of AHPETC, one would have expected the MPs to at least allocate balanced time to the matter while spending precious Parliament time and resources debating and addressing other areas of great concern. This is what tax-payers expect their MPs to do and not to waste resources bombarding the opposition in Parliament in an astoundingly undignified manner.
It was shocking indeed to hear Khaw Boon Wan use the example of Japanese senior management who would resign and even commit hara-kiri (suicide) over wrongdoings. I doubt he was actually asking the WP MPs to kill themselves over AHPETC but Khaw was certainly playing to the gallery to exaggerate and sensationalise the lapses committed by WP during its learning curve of managing its first GRC.
Those who live in glass houses should be sure their homes are clean of filth before they lob accusations at others for not doing proper housekeeping. In the 2013/2014 report by the AGO, irregularities were found in various agencies under the Ministry of National Development headed by Minister Khaw who has been spearheading the Parliamentary attacks on WP.
The report said the National Parks Board’s transgressions included creating and backdating some documents relating to the development of Gardens by the Bay to give the impression that they existed at the time when the relevant transactions took place. The AGO said “creating and backdating documents to satisfy audit queries is a serious irregularity. It also casts doubts on the authenticity of other documents and information provided to AGO.”
Although MND conducted an inquiry into this, shouldn’t it still account openly to the people as to how such a lapse could have happened in the name of transparency and assure the public that such lapses will not happen again to any agency under its control? Instead it appears that its big chief has been busy expending energy on pontificating about his righteousness and taking WP to task over AHPETC.
Over at the the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA). which is also under the MND, the AGO found had grossly underutilized land, buildings and facilities at several places which is to quote the AGO “tantamount to a waste of public resources”. As an example, AGO found that of the 41 buildings at the Sembawang site, 15 buildings were left vacant for periods between 2 and 14 years. Another three buildings were partially occupied for periods between 8 and 11 years. The vacant areas in these 18 buildings formed 28.4 per cent of the gross floor area of all the 41 buildings.
AGO also noted that 112,294 m or 78.0 per cent of the site was vacant land. AGO also observed during its site visit that some of the vacant buildings were poorly maintained. For example, there were termites in one building and condemned furniture and other discarded items in other buildings, which could pose pest and fire hazard problems.
And at the Ministry of Social and Family Development, the AGO found serious lapses in the National Council of Social Service which repeatedly violated procurement procedures such as by not getting the mandatory three quotes and although NCSS implemented a set of improved procedures in April 2013, the procedures did not prohibit the same officer from being both the payment approving authority and the quotation approving authority.
NCSS procedures were also lacking in requirements for ensuring proper negotiations, such as having ample representation during the negotiations and keeping proper records of the negotiation meetings. AGO’s test checks of 45 purchases made directly from the vendors or where only one or a few selected vendors were invited to bid revealed that for 32 purchases (71.1 per cent) totalling $1.72 million, NCSS gave lame reasons for not procuring through open competition.
AGO also found that for 15 of these 32 cases at NCSS, the suppliers were awarded the contracts without competition for three or more consecutive years, and for one case, for 20 years.
Over at the Ministry of Home Affairs, the AGO’s test checks of 46 payments at the Singapore Civil Defence Force(SCDF) revealed lapses in financial control and instances where officers had approved purchases and contracts or certified invoices when they did not have the authority to do so.
Specifically, the SCDF approved two payments in March 2012 amounting to $217,100 for the maintenance of two IT systems before services were fully performed.
There are many more such appalling lapses where proper procedures were blatantly ignored, money was lost and public resources had been wasted. One need only read the contents page in the report to see the scale of the transgressions by the government bodies.
All these are matters involving public funds, trust and integrity and the Government must account to the people for the lapses and explain why some of these lapses have continued to recur despite them having been flagged by the AGO previously.
My point here is that there are many national issues of great importance and the MPs, who are elected and paid by the people to do a proper job, should not waste precious Parliament time fixated on slanderous attacks to fix opposition parties.
Read the full report by the AGO.
http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/02/50-shades-of-white-pap-governments-house-needs-cleaning/
Why you Stinkees like to make me look daft? *sob*sob*
This picture best captures the ku-niang imagery.
Knowing what we now know, it would seem that the PAP set up an elaborate trap for the WP to walk into - as evidenced by their cunning use of of 2014 data only.
WP should do similar exercise for two years prior to that - and expose the hypocrites.
so speaking on behalf of all singaporeans, we have been cheated by all MAs all this while. Aljunied is not an isolated case. why did the MAs suddenly drop price at the same time? is there collusion? where is the anti competition council?
i think it is time to call for a vote of no confidence in the FAP and WP for the mishandling of this issue. all to step down immediately and not participate in the next election until CAD, CPIB sought out this.
i think it is time to call for a vote of no confidence in the FAP and WP for the mishandling of this issue. all to step down immediately and not participate in the next election until CAD, CPIB sought out this.
That's why our foreign relations have suffered, we have rats problems etc ...the government has been busy working since last year on this attack on the WP TC.
The directive to the PAP TCs was to lower the rates so that the mythical comparison could be made.
After elections, if the PAP is still in power, the rates in PAP wards will go up.
PAP didn't know sinkees are so smart, after all? More expose, please.
The directive to the PAP TCs was to lower the rates so that the mythical comparison could be made.
After elections, if the PAP is still in power, the rates in PAP wards will go up.
PAP didn't know sinkees are so smart, after all? More expose, please.
agree.
but my question is if contractor could offer "discount" now with cost ever rising, dun that mean white scums have been blindly overpaying all these years?
or this is a case of robbing the people to benefit friends?
[h=2]theonlinecitizen[/h]News/Media Website
AGO report 2008/9 - Serious lase in procurement in Prime Minister's Office.
"This is tantamount to treating the Tender Board as a rubber stamp."
Source: http://www.ago.gov.sg/doc/ar-0809.pdf
https://www.facebook.com/theonlinec....184332.14440041382/10153172008131383/?type=1
theonlinecitizen
News/Media Website
Allegations against WP's NCMP - wild claims or fact?
"So, the question which should be asked of Mr Heng is: where did the anecdote come from?
"More importantly, how did Mr Heng ascertain that the story is factual, and not just hearsay worthy of being echoed in Parliament?
"One would expect that a minister would deal in facts and not hearsay, which is what Mr Heng seems to have engaged in, given that thus far there is no evidence at all that what he said had happened had actually taken place."
Heng Swee Keat’s allegations – wild claims or fact?
In Parliament on Friday, Education Minister Heng Swee Keat joined in the attacks on the Workers’ Party (WP) over the management of the WP town council, AHPETC. In particular, Mr Heng claimed how WP...
theonlinecitizen.com
theonlinecitizen
News/Media Website
Allegations against WP's NCMP - wild claims or fact?
"So, the question which should be asked of Mr Heng is: where did the anecdote come from?
"More importantly, how did Mr Heng ascertain that the story is factual, and not just hearsay worthy of being echoed in Parliament?
"One would expect that a minister would deal in facts and not hearsay, which is what Mr Heng seems to have engaged in, given that thus far there is no evidence at all that what he said had happened had actually taken place."
Heng Swee Keat’s allegations – wild claims or fact?
In Parliament on Friday, Education Minister Heng Swee Keat joined in the attacks on the Workers’ Party (WP) over the management of the WP town council, AHPETC. In particular, Mr Heng claimed how WP...
theonlinecitizen.com
These scums of a lifetime will grab at whatever will make them look like heroes in the eyes of their bosses.
Goldfish Heng was doing nothing but simple making the same points, helping the media to summarise the issues.
Similar threads
