Stallholders in row with Workers Party town council

[HTOLAS]

Vile propagangistic images.

View attachment 10659
this is very funny...

 

[zhihau]

Vile propagangistic images.

bro,
one of the reason why me thought the involved parties have to "show hand", draw a proper closure and then truly move on.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Questions that ATL Maintenance should answer
June 14, 2013 by Ng E-Jay
Filed under: Current Affairs and Politics

Written by Ng E-Jay
14 June 2013
ATL Maintenance Pte. Ltd., the cleaning contractor hired by AHPETC, should answer for its actions with regards to the cleaning for the Block 538 hawker centre at Bedok North, which was originally scheduled from 04 March to 08 March this year.
First and foremost, ATL Maintenance provided a full quotation for major spring cleaning, including provision of scaffolding for cleaning of high areas, to Mr Ng Kok Khim, PAP member and patron of the Block 538 Market Association. Mr Ng denied asking for such a quotation, and his statement was apparently corroborated by fellow PAP member Mr Tan Gin Xiong, who is the current chairman of Blk 538 Market Association.

Note that this does not rule out the possibility someone within Market Association could have asked for a quotation for another unrelated cleaning exercise, or the original intention was only to ask for a quotation for stall canvas coverings, but ATL Maintenance made an honest mistake and provided a comprehensive quotation for full cleaning for the exercise scheduled on 04 March to 08 March at Blk 538′s hawker centre.

ATL must therefore answer why it provided the comprehensive quotation to the Market Association. This is especially important because as ATL Maintenance is also the cleaning contractor hired by other government and PAP-related organizations, it should be well aware of the fact that hawkers never pay for spring cleaning, but only for their own canvas coverings to protect their stalls from falling debris and other dirt.

Secondly, it is clear that the hawkers had intended the cleaning of 04 March to 08 March to be a major spring cleaning involving the cleaning of high areas. That is why in their dealings with AHPETC and NEA, they had requested the allocation of a 5-day cleaning period, rather than a shorter 2-day cleaning period for quarterly spring cleaning which does not involve cleaning high areas. The hawkers had gone out their way to obtain canvas coverings, even bypassing AHPETC and ATL in the process. The last major spring cleaning was performed in March 2012, exactly one year prior.

All this goes to prove that hawkers had intended there was to be major spring cleaning in March, and that they regarded this spring cleaning as being mandated by NEA guidelines, not something over and above what is required.

ATL must have known about the hawker’s intention for major spring cleaning to be conducted, and should have ensured that proper scaffolding would be erected ahead of schedule, either done by itself or by a third party. If this is major spring cleaning mandated under NEA guidelines, ATL must also have known that it alone is responsible for erecting such scaffolding, as stated in their contract with the town council.

ATL however did not arrange for scaffolding to be erected, and they apparently did not check who would arrange for it, because they appeared to be caught off guard on the day of the cleaning itself when they discovered that there was no scaffolding present. ATL must have known that something was amiss, that the job had not been completed, and that the hawkers would realize the same. So why didn’t ATL take action to work the issue out with AHPETC and the hawkers?


ATL Maintenance has remained conspicuously silent throughout the saga. I believe it must be called upon to answer these questions.

 

[tanwahp]

Questions that ATL Maintenance should answer
June 14, 2013 by Ng E-Jay
Filed under: Current Affairs and Politics

Written by Ng E-Jay
14 June 2013
ATL Maintenance Pte. Ltd., the cleaning contractor hired by AHPETC, should answer for its actions with regards to the cleaning for the Block 538 hawker centre at Bedok North, which was originally scheduled from 04 March to 08 March this year.
First and foremost, ATL Maintenance provided a full quotation for major spring cleaning, including provision of scaffolding for cleaning of high areas, to Mr Ng Kok Khim, PAP member and patron of the Block 538 Market Association. Mr Ng denied asking for such a quotation, and his statement was apparently corroborated by fellow PAP member Mr Tan Gin Xiong, who is the current chairman of Blk 538 Market Association.

Note that this does not rule out the possibility someone within Market Association could have asked for a quotation for another unrelated cleaning exercise, or the original intention was only to ask for a quotation for stall canvas coverings, but ATL Maintenance made an honest mistake and provided a comprehensive quotation for full cleaning for the exercise scheduled on 04 March to 08 March at Blk 538′s hawker centre.

ATL must therefore answer why it provided the comprehensive quotation to the Market Association. This is especially important because as ATL Maintenance is also the cleaning contractor hired by other government and PAP-related organizations, it should be well aware of the fact that hawkers never pay for spring cleaning, but only for their own canvas coverings to protect their stalls from falling debris and other dirt.

Secondly, it is clear that the hawkers had intended the cleaning of 04 March to 08 March to be a major spring cleaning involving the cleaning of high areas. That is why in their dealings with AHPETC and NEA, they had requested the allocation of a 5-day cleaning period, rather than a shorter 2-day cleaning period for quarterly spring cleaning which does not involve cleaning high areas. The hawkers had gone out their way to obtain canvas coverings, even bypassing AHPETC and ATL in the process. The last major spring cleaning was performed in March 2012, exactly one year prior.

All this goes to prove that hawkers had intended there was to be major spring cleaning in March, and that they regarded this spring cleaning as being mandated by NEA guidelines, not something over and above what is required.

ATL must have known about the hawker’s intention for major spring cleaning to be conducted, and should have ensured that proper scaffolding would be erected ahead of schedule, either done by itself or by a third party. If this is major spring cleaning mandated under NEA guidelines, ATL must also have known that it alone is responsible for erecting such scaffolding, as stated in their contract with the town council.

ATL however did not arrange for scaffolding to be erected, and they apparently did not check who would arrange for it, because they appeared to be caught off guard on the day of the cleaning itself when they discovered that there was no scaffolding present. ATL must have known that something was amiss, that the job had not been completed, and that the hawkers would realize the same. So why didn’t ATL take action to work the issue out with AHPETC and the hawkers?


ATL Maintenance has remained conspicuously silent throughout the saga. I believe it must be called upon to answer these questions.

I agree that there are unanswered questions, but I can empathize with ATL's refusal to step into the public. It is a private company that reserves the right to make its money and mind its own business as long as it does not break the law. It is not a listed public company or GLC.

True, it has business dealings with a town council and not some privately owned building. But that does not change the fact that it is a private company. If it made a admin mistake that's its own business. I run my company I still need to answer to voters on an admin mistake that even politicians need not? That's asking too much.

If the mistake affects the estate, AHPE not ATL will have to answer as it's headed by an elected MP. (For now, AHPE has answered and it's up to voters to decide if the answers are enough or believable.)

If ATL broke the law, anyone is free to point them to the police. But GMS obviously knows the reason why he won't do that. If ATL breaks the law, they will go to jail but still do not need to answer to the public via some press conference like some minister.

 

[SgParent]

If ATL broke the law, anyone is free to point them to the police. But GMS obviously knows the reason why he won't do that. If ATL breaks the law, they will go to jail but still do not need to answer to the public via some press conference like some minister.

http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?154269-Beyond-the-Smokescreen-II&p=1557334#post1557334
Is that the same reason why Rabid GohMS dare not, could not reply my simple, straightforward question?

 

[tanwahp]

http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?154269-Beyond-the-Smokescreen-II&p=1557334#post1557334
Is that the same reason why Rabid GohMS dare not, could not reply my simple, straightforward question?

I don't know, but I just found out that ATL had sent a press release on 6 June to confirm that the HA had asked for the quotation for full cleaning, according to AHPETC on 9 June. The question is who to believe, but no one can say ATL kept silent.

Pai seh, too much info to read.

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

I don't know, but I just found out that ATL had sent a press release on 6 June to confirm that the HA had asked for the quotation for full cleaning, according to AHPETC on 9 June. The question is who to believe, but no one can say ATL kept silent.

Pai seh, too much info to read.

If those PAP chaps Ng and Tan had indeed asked for a quotation from ATL so as to "compare prices", then they have told an outright lie to the media. In which case, it is a clear case of sabotage and WP is in the clear.

 

[Silencer]

Been following the dings and the dongs.

Just an insight;

Quote was asked hence the thank you for the invitation and addressed to the Person.
Otherwise the wordings would read: "We take this opportunity to quote".

Why ATL is not coming to point fingers?
Look, Aljunied - Hougang Town Council is but One and Only opposition project they undertook.
Most likely from previous pass down contract or renewed.
Look at their portfolio all are from the Government stats or the ruling party wards.
How to offend the bigger piece of pie for the company.
They may infact prepared to lose AHTC !

http://atlmaintenance.com.sg/our-portfolio/current-projects/

You people can make your own reality decision.

 

[Huatchye]

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/06/toc-speaks-with-hawkers-at-bedok/

Thank you TOC for getting the story from the hawkers themselves. Yes, this has been overblown and unnecessarily so.
Miscom or not, all the WP needed to do was to do what TOC has just done - just go and talk to the hawkers directly and kautim (settle) the issue. Then you wont get hawkers sending petitions.. Instead Sylvia and Pritam decided to argue and argue and argue. What for? Bottom-line is - cleaning whether higher or lower than 2.5m is still the job of the TC and the hawkers have already paid for this in their SC & C charges. So just do the bloody cleaning and when the hawkers are satisfied, there is nothing for nobody to hantam you.
The lesson here for the WP young turks is to pick your fights. There are some where you just deal with the problem and move on. Thankfully, Mr Low TK has done just that and in so doing demonstrated the maturity of a real leader who cares for his people beyond politicking. Sylvia Lim and Pritam Singh should learn to curb their rapidly growing egos and follow humbly in the footsteps of their leader, Mr Low. That is unless they think they know better than him how to run the WP and that he should just be the mentor emeritius in the party

 

[leetahbah]

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/06/toc-speaks-with-hawkers-at-bedok/

He commented that it is disappointing that there had been more reporters dropping down to ask what the situation than the MPs from Workers’ Party dropping down to check on them. According to him, none has dropped down to speak with the hawkers yet. He also said that has been only one person from the town council who dropped down to ask about the issues surrounding the cleaning of the hawker centre.

Surprised that none of the MP showed up, or the hawker is lying (not another round of lying accusation )

 

[leetahbah]

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/06/toc-speaks-with-hawkers-at-bedok/

Perhaps the MP as assumed to carry on the practice from last year? Not so, according to another hawker who operates the minced pork noodle stall in the hawker centre. He revealed that because the hawker centre has just been upgraded and reopened in March 2011, there was no major spring-cleaning conducted last year. This somewhat contradicts AHPETC’s account about the cleaning works that was done to the ceilings, beams and exhaust pipe last year.

Hawker say no major spring-cleaning conducted last year, this statement is contradicting to AHPETC's account - which means what? AHPETC is lying?

Or is the hawker lying?

 

[leetahbah]

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/06/toc-speaks-with-hawkers-at-bedok/

Just recently, it has been revealed online that the chairman of the Block 538 Market Association, Mr Ng Kok Khim, was a recipient of the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) long service award as well as being highly likely a PA member given that he was part of the audit committee of Marine Parade. He was also the person whom the scaffolding company, ATL, submitted the quotation for the cleaning of the high ceilings.


Notwithstanding his political affiliation, his experience with the cleaning process of the hawker centre should have enabled him to advise AHPETC about their duty to erect the scaffolding for the cleaning. If the town council has been duly informed, it is reasonable to assume that they would have enough time to erect the scaffolding and still complete the cleaning within the stipulated.

Why Ng Kok Khim didn't advise AHPETC about their duty to erect the scaffolding for the cleaning? Is it because he wants to sabo AHPETC?

 

[winnipegjets]

This misunderstanding could have been resolved quietly but for the fact that the NEA decided that it was an opportunity to disparage the WP TC to score points with the PAP.

 

[SgParent]

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/06/toc-speaks-with-hawkers-at-bedok/




Surprised that none of the MP showed up, or the hawker is lying (not another round of lying accusation )

Ya. If so then I wonder what is going through the mind of the WP MPs.....

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It is a good wake up call to you and BSBS Brigade.

When SPH ST, Sin Min Wan Bao reported about it, you say they are biased, with political agenda etc etc. Now this is the first hand report from TOC. Time for you guys to wake WP up from their slumber land.


Goh Meng Seng

Ya. If so then I wonder what is going through the mind of the WP MPs.....

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

It is a good wake up call to you and BSBS Brigade.

When SPH ST, Sin Min Wan Bao reported about it, you say they are biased, with political agenda etc etc. Now this is the first hand report from TOC. Time for you guys to wake WP up from their slumber land.


Goh Meng Seng

The TOC article was shoddy. We all know the hawkers are unhappy that the work was not completed. What new things did TOC uncover that we did not know? TOC failed to ask certain key questions, like, did any hawker ask ATL for a quotation to cover their stalls, were any of them asked to pay for anything other than canvas sheets in the past, did they expect the March cleaning to be a major spring cleaning, who signed the petition or didn't sign it, and what were their reasons? So many questions to ask, but they did not.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It can always be better but at the very least, it confirms what has been reported in SPH.

Well, if you want to know the truth, just go down there and ask those questions lor... But I bet you will still be skeptical and take it as those peope are PAP people...etc.etc.


Goh Meng Seng

The TOC article was shoddy. We all know the hawkers are unhappy that the work was not completed. What new things did TOC uncover that we did not know? TOC failed to ask certain key questions, like, did any hawker ask ATL for a quotation to cover their stalls, were any of them asked to pay for anything other than canvas sheets in the past, did they expect the March cleaning to be a major spring cleaning, who signed the petition or didn't sign it, and what were their reasons? So many questions to ask, but they did not.

 

[cBMouTh]

It can always be better but at the very least, it confirms what has been reported in SPH.

Well, if you want to know the truth, just go down there and ask those questions lor... But I bet you will still be skeptical and take it as those peope are PAP people...etc.etc.


Goh Meng Seng

Goh Meng Seng the cheebye mouth still yakking nonstop. How many postings already since that 'last post' on this matter?

Your Cheebye mouth really wash with dettol also will stink like hell.

 

[tanwahp]

It can always be better but at the very least, it confirms what has been reported in SPH.

Well, if you want to know the truth, just go down there and ask those questions lor... But I bet you will still be skeptical and take it as those peope are PAP people...etc.etc.


Goh Meng Seng

The TOC writer himself is confused. AHPETC and NEA confirmed that last year, AHPETC cleaned Blks 511 and 630, NOT 538. TOC didn't ask the correct question and didn't ask the correct answer.

That leaves the absence of the MPs. I agree that the MPs need to walk and assure residents over this incident. The last time they did so was in Sep 2012.

The article doesn't show any wrongdoing by AHPETC. Wrongdoing refers to NEA's sending of a fake email and fake petitions.

I give credit that the TOC article is meant to be a neutral article and by neutral I mean neutral and not GMS kind of "neutral".

 

[scroobal]

Time, much debate, various versions and media releases by various parties have given us all a reasonable picture what could have transpired. Most people have come to a position that is vastly different from yours. And you have not presented anything different from what others have. You chose to interpret it differently.

This to you has nothing to with the hawkers or NEA or cleaning. This has everything to do with Moulmein.

Let face it everyone had paid a price for this silly episode. No one has been spared. If you cannot expect that it is no skin off anyone's back.

Well, if you want to know the truth, just go down there and ask those questions lor... But I bet you will still be skeptical and take it as those peope are PAP people...etc.etc.

Goh Meng Seng