• 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.

Chitchat Awaiting Shanmugam FB comment about Bin Cente Consultancy fee of $410k

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
25,132
Points
83
See the last para - consultancy fee $410k, cost to build it $470K. See if he "comes clean" and not give the usual "breezy" comments.

Also note that HDB not monitoring carpark and fees are avoided. Explains why they want to raise the charges despite their negligence.


http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/inadequate-financial/2987254.htmlSINGAPORE: The Auditor-General's report for Financial Year 2015/2016 was released on Tuesday (Jul 26), and it uncovered instances of inadequate financial controls over Government operations and weak governance.

In a media release, the Auditor-General's Office (AGO) said that, as a whole, it audited the Government Financial Statements - incorporating the accounts of all 16 Government ministries and eight organs of state - and the financial statements of three statutory boards, a Government fund, five Government-owned companies and three other accounts. Selective audits were also carried out on nine statutory boards and three Government funds.

The audit observations in this year's report relate to six ministries, including the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Defence, and six statutory boards such as the Housing and Development Board (HDB) and Nanyang Polytechnic, AGO said.

The Auditor-General observed a number of instances of inadequate financial controls over Government operations, including those outsourced to external operators. There were cases of inadequate controls resulting in loss of revenue to the Government, he added.

For example, the AGO found that HDB did not have adequate oversight of the operations of its car parks at industrial estates and residential estates, which were outsourced to commercial operators.

"There were many instances where vehicles were not charged parking fees and motorists had evaded payment by manipulating the car park system," the AGO report stated. "HDB could have detected these instances if it had examined the data from its car park system and the monthly reports from the operators of the car parks."

He also observed weak governance over the management of public funds in one public sector entity where the "principles of good governance and financial controls were disregarded in several areas".

Other areas of concern noted were inadequate oversight of external entities administering schemes and loans on behalf of the public sector entities, and lapses in the management of contracts including variations, according to the AGO.

For instance, in the audit of the National Arts Council (NAC), the Auditor-General found from its checks of contracts for the Victoria Theatre and Victoria Concert Hall Redevelopment project that 47 out of 164 variation works were carried out before approvals were given. The delays in obtaining approval were up to 3.5 years, it added.

"The large number of instances indicated a breakdown in the controls put in place to ensure that variations were properly justified and approved before works commenced," it added.

AGO also found that NAC had paid a consultancy fee of S$410,000 for the construction of a bin centre costing S$470,000. "There was inadequate assessment on the reasonableness of the exceptionally high consultancy fee, at 87.2 per cent of the cost of construction," it said.
 
AGO also found that NAC had paid a consultancy fee of S$410,000 for the construction of a bin centre costing S$470,000. "There was inadequate assessment on the reasonableness of the exceptionally high consultancy fee, at 87.2 per cent of the cost of construction," it said.

It'd be interesting to know the identity of the consultants.
 
Yes, and all the details that led to the engagement of this consultant, the scope details and report. Unless it is a virtual bin centre and hooks up to the space station, the fee is staggering. Shanmugam gave his Facebook sermon last week on WP AHTC management and called for transparency and made comments about needing enforcement. Lets see if he going to sing from the same hymn sheet as the victims are the residents again.

It'd be interesting to know the identity of the consultants.
 
Yes, and all the details that led to the engagement of this consultant, the scope details and report. Unless it is a virtual bin centre and hooks up to the space station, the fee is staggering. Shanmugam gave his Facebook sermon last week on WP AHTC management and called for transparency and made comments about needing enforcement. Lets see if he going to sing from the same hymn sheet as the victims are the residents again.

No, the MIW worship at a different church to a different God. All the rest of us are children of " Lesser Gods".

They already have there textbook " in the heart of a polling centre does not mean within X metres of such centre " move.
 
Nah. $410,000 for consultancy for a rubbish bin is a dame good deal for NAC. As for just a measly $10,000 more compared to $400,000 for consutltancy to rename Marina Bay, and all they got was a one-liner........<drum roll>.....Marina Bay, at least for $10,000 more they got a report how to build a rubbish bin better.

Ohhh, hope Sham do not steal me consultancy idea how to answer this lapse.
 
AGO also found that NAC had paid a consultancy fee of S$410,000 for the construction of a bin centre costing S$470,000. "There was inadequate assessment on the reasonableness of the exceptionally high consultancy fee, at 87.2 per cent of the cost of construction," it said.


could be a state of art Bin Centre where workers / cleaners

can also use it as a living quarters.




bin_centre_3423a.jpg
 
It'd be interesting to know the identity of the consultants.

It is either "ali" or "baba"....or "ali baba"...all ex-members, who created a $3 consultancy who was paid & consulted to build a $400,000+ state of the art bin centre...for the rubbish they throw out are of the highest quality...
 
It is either "ali" or "baba"....or "ali baba"...all ex-members, who created a $3 consultancy who was paid & consulted to build a $400,000+ state of the art bin centre...for the rubbish they throw out are of the highest quality...

I think you are spot on. For all you know, the consultancy co. is a $2 company. It's just a conduit for receiving "cash grant".
 
... AGO also found that NAC had paid a consultancy fee of S$410,000 for the construction of a bin centre costing S$470,000. "There was inadequate assessment on the reasonableness of the exceptionally high consultancy fee, at 87.2 per cent of the cost of construction," it said.
ok wat ...

last time oso pay n obscene fee 2 rename marina bay 2 marina bay ...
 
It is either "ali" or "baba"....or "ali baba"...all ex-members, who created a $3 consultancy who was paid & consulted to build a $400,000+ state of the art bin centre...for the rubbish they throw out are of the highest quality...


go google NEA and Bin Centre will throw out my Bin Centre design specs by NEA

free of charge and can copycat from .
 
It'd be interesting to know the identity of the consultants.


By some strange coincidence, Professor Chan Heng Chee (Chairman of the NAC) is married to Professor Tay Kheng Soon, adjunct professor of architecture. U would think that Prof Chan can simply ask her husband whether the consultancy fee is too excessive. If the consultancy fee is for the construction of the bin, then it must have gone towards architects, designers, structural engineers, etc. All of this is right up her husband's alley............ If you are married to one of the foremost architects in singapore, surely, you might have mentioned this cost to him. Unless of course, her husband was the one collecting the $410K fee.
 
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/05/daily-chart-2

Crony Capitalism is a form of legal corruption, it is protected within the frame work of law.

I'm sure in this case, the consultant did not break rule and regulation and was awarded the job above board. You can't fault it even if you try.

So what if he is a $2 company set up by ex-gov officials, grassroots relative and family members etc, it is still legal.

Crony Capitalism is so deeply entrenched in SG, Even when a new political party took over, they can easily ride on the same system, slot their own kakis in and swing the benefits to the new Cronies.

For this I blame the government as they are the one that adopt this damaging system by choice, which in long term weaken the country.

We are ranked world #4 in Crony Capitalism, But we will Never see our PM/Ministers/Media comment or let alone reflect on it.











I think you are spot on. For all you know, the consultancy co. is a $2 company. It's just a conduit for receiving "cash grant".
 
Nah. $410,000 for consultancy for a rubbish bin is a dame good deal for NAC. As for just a measly $10,000 more compared to $400,000 for consutltancy to rename Marina Bay, and all they got was a one-liner........<drum roll>.....Marina Bay, at least for $10,000 more they got a report how to build a rubbish bin better.

Ohhh, hope Sham do not steal me consultancy idea how to answer this lapse.

Pls lor dont b gullible. Its the NAC. Natural aristocrat council. For these l337 the amount is derisory. Nothing to explain.
 
NAC is under Grace Fu's ministry. Shan will arrow her to answer all these questions.
 
By some strange coincidence, Professor Chan Heng Chee (Chairman of the NAC) is married to Professor Tay Kheng Soon, adjunct professor of architecture. U would think that Prof Chan can simply ask her husband whether the consultancy fee is too excessive. If the consultancy fee is for the construction of the bin, then it must have gone towards architects, designers, structural engineers, etc. All of this is right up her husband's alley............ If you are married to one of the foremost architects in singapore, surely, you might have mentioned this cost to him. Unless of course, her husband was the one collecting the $410K fee.

Divorced ever so long ago. Decades , maybe.
 
Cheebai pap.

Close to 1m for a bin centre. Psf range machiam mid to luxury level apartment.
 
See the last para - consultancy fee $410k, cost to build it $470K. See if he "comes clean" and not give the usual "breezy" comments.

@ scroobal

Dream on.....

PAP only talked about "ownself check ownself" and they did via Auditor-General's audit.

PAP has never ever talked about "ownself explain ownself" in Parliament or General Elections. My point is: don't expect your ministars and natural aristocrats to explain this or that and if they do, they'll beat about the bush or simply go off tangent.
 
NAC is under Grace Fu's ministry. Shan will arrow her to answer all these questions.

I am still trying to figure out MIW"s man-to-man marking system during dead ball situation.

So far I know:

Kee Chiu mark Dr Chee
Sham mark WP
Boy Scout mark Png Eng Huat
 
Back
Top