Stallholders in row with Workers Party town council

[Goh Meng Seng]

I do not think what you have written here is correct representation of the ground sentiments.

The key still lies with ATL's quotation and WP AHPeTC has refused to explain nor take responsibility of it.

I think it is time for you to walk out of SBF for a while to take a deep breath...

Goh Meng Seng

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.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

BTW, it is never about Moulmein... even if it is about being "political". It is about a sinking blue ship, on that blue sea blue sky.

Terry reported what he has gathered and heard, nothing more or less. That's the straight forward representation of facts finding from the ground.


As for Ng E-Jay, he has also come to the very conclusion that ATL's dishonest quotation is the key to the whole issue, just brush off all those noise and dust.

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.

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.

 

[tanwahp]

The key still lies with ATL's quotation and WP AHPeTC has refused to explain nor take responsibility of it.

When it comes to faulting, people will normally start from the biggest. The biggest fault GMS can find is the party's town council's managing agent's contractor has a few extra items up in the quotation.

With that distant light years away, I suppose WP have a better chance of controlling NSP.

That kind of argument is clutching at straws and indirectly WP critics are telling people that WP hasn't got much to fault.

 

[cBMouTh]

I do not think what you have written here is correct representation of the ground sentiments.

Goh Meng Seng

CB mouth GMS,

Your 'ground sentiments' so good then why only Tan Kin Lian get 5%? Yourself? Win how many election before?

 

[wMulew]

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.

Fucking retarded opposition supporting moron. The issue was drag on because fucking WP doesn't care about the hawkers and the hawkers needed to go to NEA for help. If WP had bothered to go down and spoke to the hawkers this would never have happened

 

[SgParent]

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

What kind of embarrassingly stupid and embarrassingly lame excuse is this?

Just because AHPETC appeared to not be doing everything perfectly you suddenly expect people to think Braddell Road Brothel publications are not biased?

Just like these few days suddenly got haze then you think people are going to be dizzy and start thinking you as anything but Rabid GohMS aka Mr I'm-always-correct aka I-always-have-the-last-word?

You better continue your job of painting yourself up the ceiling, out of the window and up the rooftop instead of replying and wasting my time to see which idiot replied me.

 

[SgParent]

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.

This is on my mind as well

 

[SgParent]

Your 'ground sentiments' so good then why only Tan Kin Lian get 5%? Yourself? Win how many election before?

This was on my mind for like split second

Then after realizing it was Rabid GohMS, trying his bestest to embarrass himself further while dragging TKL into the mess, I never expect the outcome to be anything but.

As I'd asked earlier, was it within TKL's expectation that it was within Rabid GohMS's expectation that TKL would lose his deposit.

 

[Debonerman]

I do not think what you have written here is correct representation of the ground sentiments.

The key still lies with ATL's quotation and WP AHPeTC has refused to explain nor take responsibility of it.

I think it is time for you to walk out of SBF for a while to take a deep breath...

Goh Meng Seng

If I were a sadistic serial killer and you are my captive and I give you..........



a choice of what I will remove from your body in the list below........

1) Your eyes.

2) Your ears. I will destroy your eardrums so that you can't hear.

3) Your mouth. I will pour bleach in to destroy your vocal chords so that you can't scream.

4) Your hands.

5) Your feet.

6) Your penis.

7) Your balls.

But the compassionate person that I am.........I will allow you to choose 2 from the above list for me to spare.

What will you choose?

I can answer for Goh Meng Seng.

He can't hear right so no use for ears.

He talks nonsense so mouth is useless.

There will be no more political parties to move on to. No one will accept him so his feet serves no purpose.

As far as I am concerned he has no penis and balls. A chao cheebye.

That leaves the eyes and hands.

With those, he can still remain the big political cheebye mouth on the Internet!

 

[wwabbit]

I do not think what you have written here is correct representation of the ground sentiments.

Do you really want to compare the correctness of past ground sentiment reading between yourself and Scroobal?

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

BTW, it is never about Moulmein... even if it is about being "political". It is about a sinking blue ship, on that blue sea blue sky.

Terry reported what he has gathered and heard, nothing more or less. That's the straight forward representation of facts finding from the ground.

I think according to TWP, the contractor ATL did say that the Hawker Association requested for a quotation. In which case all points are moot. It's ATL's words against the Tan-Ng duo.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

I think according to TWP, the contractor ATL did say that the Hawker Association requested for a quotation. In which case all points are moot. It's ATL's words against the Tan-Ng duo.

It is actually easy to determine who to believe... common sense will tell you that nobody will like,to,pay extra and if everybody, hawkers, NEA, WP,AHTC and ATL, has this basic understanding that for all cleaning will be paid for by AHTC contract to ATL, there is no reason to believe that hawkers asked for quotation.

The only concrete evidence here is ATL made a quotation which it shouldnt even mention to hawkers as it knew it is already paid for this cleaning. Worse still, refuse to clean and breach the contract, if we to believe WP SYLVIA LIM that the contract had included the high rise cleaning.

It is thus, without a single doubt and all possibility thay ATL is totally dishonest and alas, WP just condone such acts and behavior from ATL, shaking off its responsibility.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[tanwahp]

It is actually easy to determine who to believe... common sense will tell you that nobody will like,to,pay extra and if everybody, hawkers, NEA, WP,AHTC and ATL, has this basic understanding that for all cleaning will be paid for by AHTC contract to ATL, there is no reason to believe that hawkers asked for quotation.

The only concrete evidence here is ATL made a quotation which it shouldnt even mention to hawkers as it knew it is already paid for this cleaning. Worse still, refuse to clean and breach the contract, if we to believe WP SYLVIA LIM that the contract had included the high rise cleaning.

It is thus, without a single doubt and all possibility thay ATL is totally dishonest and alas, WP just condone such acts and behavior from ATL, shaking off its responsibility.

Goh Meng Seng

The person given the quotation was Ng Kok Khim, not "the hawkers".

Before the contractor gets a single cent, the quotation have to first be signed by Ng Kok Khim and before that it has to go through a meeting of the Hawkers Association committee/council of a few people and many pairs of eyes. The money will be paid from the Hawkers Association, not the pockets of hawkers.

If the quotation was signed, it's not the contractor but Ng Kok Khim and the Hawkers Association who are responsible as they are supposed to practice due diligence in procurement. The scaffoldings are not the only things an Association has to buy, they can't be that inexperienced to sign quotations blindly.

 

[mei mei]

Before the contractor gets a single cent, the quotation have to first be signed by Ng Kok Khim and before that it has to go through a meeting of the Hawkers Association committee/council of a few people and many pairs of eyes. The money will be paid from the Hawkers Association, not the pockets of hawkers.

If the quotation was signed, it's not the contractor but Ng Kok Khim and the Hawkers Association who are responsible as they are supposed to practice due diligence in procurement. The scaffoldings are not the only things an Association has to buy, they can't be that inexperienced to sign quotations blindly.

Why should a quotation be signed by Ng Kok Khim or the hawkers? I would expect Ng Kok Khim and the hawkers to issue a purchase order if they want to proceed with the quotation. Curiously though, if Ng Kok Khim and the hawkers did ask for a quotation, why did they not get quotations from several suppliers before deciding which quotation to shortlist.

 

[scroobal]

Companies that provides goods and services provide quotations upon request all the time. If your mother in law ask for one, a company will provide it without hesitation and they are not about to check if she is sane, insane, dead or alive. The checks come in when a purchase order is raised and it is to ensure the party has money to pay for it.

You got to ask Ng and his associates why the quotation carries his name and the quotation states in black and white that it was requested.

If Ng or his associates did not make the request, they should sue ATL. As Ng is a PAP cadre, he can consult fellow cadre Dr Vasoo who is highly qualified in this field have lodged a few legal suits over a period of 20 years including one as recent as last year. It will go towards exonerating him.

Why should a quotation be signed by Ng Kok Khim or the hawkers? I would expect Ng Kok Khim and the hawkers to issue a purchase order if they want to proceed with the quotation. Curiously though, if Ng Kok Khim and the hawkers did ask for a quotation, why did they not get quotations from several suppliers before deciding which quotation to shortlist.

 

[kingrant]

The PAPpees must be very happy with people like GMS around to sow discord and disunity among the anti-PAP camp. It doesnt need to take on the WP- just let GMS do the job.

 

[mei mei]

The question is why should a quotation be signed by Ng Kok Khim or the hawkers and not whether a quotation should be given. I enclosed the earlier postings below, of what tanwahp said. It seems like another smokebomb is attempted, the question is why a quotation should be signed at all?

Companies that provides goods and services provide quotations upon request all the time. If your mother in law ask for one, a company will provide it without hesitation and they are not about to check if she is sane, insane, dead or alive. The checks come in when a purchase order is raised and it is to ensure the party has money to pay for it.

You got to ask Ng and his associates why the quotation carries his name and the quotation states in black and white that it was requested.

If Ng or his associates did not make the request, they should sue ATL. As Ng is a PAP cadre, he can consult fellow cadre Dr Vasoo who is highly qualified in this field have lodged a few legal suits over a period of 20 years including one as recent as last year. It will go towards exonerating him.

Before the contractor gets a single cent, the quotation have to first be signed by Ng Kok Khim and before that it has to go through a meeting of the Hawkers Association committee/council of a few people and many pairs of eyes. The money will be paid from the Hawkers Association, not the pockets of hawkers.

Why should a quotation be signed by Ng Kok Khim or the hawkers? I would expect Ng Kok Khim and the hawkers to issue a purchase order if they want to proceed with the quotation. Curiously though, if Ng Kok Khim and the hawkers did ask for a quotation, why did they not get quotations from several suppliers before deciding which quotation to shortlist.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

The person given the quotation was Ng Kok Khim, not "the hawkers".

Before the contractor gets a single cent, the quotation have to first be signed by Ng Kok Khim and before that it has to go through a meeting of the Hawkers Association committee/council of a few people and many pairs of eyes. The money will be paid from the Hawkers Association, not the pockets of hawkers.

If the quotation was signed, it's not the contractor but Ng Kok Khim and the Hawkers Association who are responsible as they are supposed to practice due diligence in procurement. The scaffoldings are not the only things an Association has to buy, they can't be that inexperienced to sign quotations blindly.

That is a lame excuse. The quotation addressed to the Hawker Association and the service quoted is high rise cleaning for the March cleaning. There is no doubt about what the quotation is about, an attemp of dishonestly double charging the hawkers.

Seriously, I hope BSBS Brigade people should learn to read properly and completely. Dont always try to use twisted logic to,argue your way out just like what Pritam has done... that is,smart alec attitude which will make you look,real bad.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[tanwahp]

Why should a quotation be signed by Ng Kok Khim or the hawkers? I would expect Ng Kok Khim and the hawkers to issue a purchase order if they want to proceed with the quotation.

Quotations are signed if the buyer is satisfied that the conditions stated within are satisfactory. Purchase orders are issued if the buyer wants partial items in the quotation or wants to add more conditions. So either way is practised.

Curiously though, if Ng Kok Khim and the hawkers did ask for a quotation, why did they not get quotations from several suppliers before deciding which quotation to shortlist.

Maybe they did and found ATL gave the cheapest. The reason for asking for additional items was to find out ATL's entire pricing pattern.

 

[SgParent]

It is actually easy to determine who to believe... common sense will tell you that nobody will like,to,pay extra and if everybody, hawkers, NEA, WP,AHTC and ATL, has this basic understanding that for all cleaning will be paid for by AHTC contract to ATL, there is no reason to believe that hawkers asked for quotation.

The only concrete evidence here is ATL made a quotation which it shouldnt even mention to hawkers as it knew it is already paid for this cleaning. Worse still, refuse to clean and breach the contract, if we to believe WP SYLVIA LIM that the contract had included the high rise cleaning.

If your 2nd statement is also "common sense" then why does it contradict your 1st "common sense" statement?