• 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.

Stallholders in row with Workers Party town council

Hey! That's super fast response from NEA. I thought it takes like forever for them to come into the picture in the past..... Town Councils Act also come out. Does any of the Act says anything about losing Town Council funds? No? :rolleyes:

true. when the eunos hawker center resulted in death from eating contaminated rojak.. where were the NEA people publishing their warning to the Marine parade TC?
 
true. When the eunos hawker center resulted in death from eating contaminated rojak.. Where were the nea people publishing their warning to the marine parade tc?

ask goh mad seng, he knew ..
 
[h=1]Media Release - 1 June 2013[/h]NEA’S ADVISORY CONFIRMS AHPE TC POSITION ON HAWKER CENTRE CLEANING


We refer to NEA’s “Advisory on Maintenance of Hawker Centres” dated 31 May 2013 which was sent to the email address of our Managing Agent at 8.05 pm on the same day, and promptly reported in the Straits Times and Zaobao on 1 June 2013.

We are pleased that the NEA Advisory has finally clarified the following regarding hawker centres :-


1. Spring cleaning is expected to be carried out on a quarterly basis; and

2. The ceilings, beams and exhaust ducts are to be cleaned at least once a year.

It is clear from the Advisory that Town Councils do NOT need to clean the ceilings, beams and exhaust ducts at each spring cleaning exercise, but annually. It is also clear from the Straits Times’ article dated 1 June 2013 that the Town Council had carried out cleaning of the ceilings, beams and exhaust ducts last year. We reiterate that no authorized TC staff told any hawker or anyone of any additional charges to be imposed for the cleaning.


We hope this clarifies to the public that AHPE TC has duly carried out its responsibilities as required.


Since the beginning of the year, AHPE TC had been in discussions with NEA to work out arrangements on the cleaning of hawker centres in Bedok North. In fact AHPE TC had proposed a meeting on 31 May 2013 at 2.30 pm to resolve outstanding issues. However, NEA re-scheduled to 6 June 2013. There was no need for NEA to issue the Advisory of 31 May 2013 in the meantime.


AHPE TC is mindful of its responsibilities for the maintenance and cleanliness of common properties, including HDB-owned markets and hawker centres to safeguard public hygiene and safety. We will use our best endeavors to work with all stakeholders to bring any outstanding issues to an amicable resolution.


MR PRITAM SINGH
MP FOR ALJUNIED
VICE-CHAIRMAN, ALJUNIED-HOUGANG-PUNGGOL EAST TOWN COUNCIL

1 June 2013
 
Looks like someone got NEA to stir up trouble. The minister in charge should be called out in Parliament and given a tongue lashing. Do we pay taxes for our money to be used by the government to stir up troubles? If the minister can't provide a acceptable answer, he should do the honourable thing of resigning! Damn PAP.
 
Lies have been told and money is involved in the AHTC - Hawker Centre saga. AHTC claimed that no authorized persons from AHTC has told hawkers that they need to pay extra for scaffolding or washing of ceiling but hawkers in Hougang ST 21 claimed that they have been told to pay for the scaffolding else the contractors won't clean anything above 2.5m.

So, someone must be lying and money is involved. If the one who told the hawkers about paying for the scaffolding is not from AHTC, then who is he from? The contractor? NEA? This needs some investigation and we should get to the bottom of it. If it is told by AHTC staff (authorized or otherwise), then AHTC should take action against its staff or it he or she is autorized personal, then AHTC will have to apologize. If it is told by the contractor in the bid to save cost by passing the cost to the hawkers, then the contractor should be taken to task and banned from future work or contract. If it is by NEA, then NEA will have a lot of things to explain..... Just get to the bottom of it.

People who have done no wrong, will have absolutely nothing to fear... whether it is public investigation or interrogation.

Goh Meng Seng

Your falsehood is most nauseating. If you have something to say, say it. Make the allegations and then defend it in court. Nah, you don't dare coz your sole intent is to stir up crap ...one day, you are going to make a slip and I hope that the aggrieved party will be quick to sue you and make you pay through your nose. You are a disgrace for the hard working people of sinkapore.
 
Pritam have been caught lying

The National Environment Agency (NEA) yesterday accused the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) and its vice-chairman Pritam Singh of making "misleading and inaccurate" statements, as the war of words over the cleaning of hawker centres was taken up a notch.

The NEA also released a letter from a hawkers' association to show that hawkers had been told by a town council staff member that they would have to pay extra to clean the higher parts of their food centres, contrary to the council's previous claims that no such statement was made.

The NEA responded after Mr Singh, a Workers' Party MP for Aljunied GRC, put out a media release on behalf of the town council, saying it had "duly carried out its responsibilities as required" in the cleaning of hawker centres.

He also said there was no need for the NEA to have sent the town council a formal notice on Friday reminding it of its legal obligations.

Mr Singh reiterated that "no authorised town council staff told any hawker or anyone of any additional charges to be imposed for the cleaning".

Within hours, the NEA issued its statement refuting his claims....

The NEA released a letter dated May 8, written by the association representing stallholders at Block 511 Kaki Bukit Market and Food Centre. Addressed to the area's MP, Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, it said that stallholders were told by a Mr Tai from the town council that they would have to pay for cleaning of areas above 2.5m.

The NEA identified the man they referred to as Mr Tai Vie Shun, the town council's property manager.

Said NEA: "The sequence of events and documents clearly show that the AHPETC's claim that 'no authorised town council staff told any hawker or anyone of any additional charges to be imposed for the cleaning' is false."" ~ ST

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/cleaning-hawker-centres-nea-town-council-war-words-heats-20130602
 
Last edited:
Scaffolding not that expensive?? It is probably in the range of $30k+. Expensive or not?? I think for that amount can include simple cleaning.
 
Last edited:

So the mysterious hawker association has finally spoken..... with a letter that they had been told to pay extra for the scaffolding.

But is it just me or have NEA and this hawker association still not clarify if someone did tell AHPETC that the hawker association would provide the scaffolding?

Anyway why is everyone only saying who say what? Are we still so gullible to believe there is such thing as "1 word means gold"? Why no written memo, email, SMS, nothing?
 
hahaha......GMS as a politcian is finished......that part we can all agree.
but not verything he said are craps.....
putting polticking aside......the AHPE TC DGM and Property Manager ought to be sacked.....if they are not lying then they simply do not know their job....
Hawker Association and Merchant Association are loose organisations and many hawkers and merchants are not even members of such associations.
cow sense will tell them that it is unlikely that the hawker associations are responsible for arranging scafolds/scissor lifts for TC contractors to do cleaning......there is no cure for stupidity.
 
Last edited:
Ajunied (AHPETC) Town Council “BULLY” Bedok, Hougang’ Hawkers/ Stallholders ( saga)

sghardtruth.com

Cleaning of hawker centres:
NEA, town council war of words heats up

NEA slams ‘misleading, inaccurate’ statements – By Tessa Wong – ST 2 Jun 2013

The National Environment Agency (NEA) yesterday accused the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) and its vice-chairman Pritam Singh of making “misleading and inaccurate” statements, as the war of words over the cleaning of hawker centres was taken up a notch.

The NEA also released a letter from a hawkers’ association to show that hawkers had been told by a town council staff member that they would have to pay extra to clean the higher parts of their food centres, contrary to the council’s previous claims that no such statement was made.

The NEA responded after Mr Singh, a Workers’ Party MP for Aljunied GRC, put out a media release on behalf of the town council, saying it had “duly carried out its responsibilities as required” in the cleaning of hawker centres.

He also said there was no need for the NEA to have sent the town council a formal notice on Friday reminding it of its legal obligations.

The dispute follows a report in The Sunday Times last week about a row between several hawkers and the town council.

Stallholders from two food centres in Bedok had said they were told by the town council that they would have to pay extra for scaffolding to be erected for scheduled clean-ups, whereas they never had to pay in the past.

Hawkers from Block 538 Bedok North Street 3 Food Centre complained that its ceiling was not washed when it closed for a spring cleaning in early March.

The town council subsequently sent a letter to The Straits Times Forum Page saying it could not clean the ceiling because there was no scaffolding, which it had been told would be provided by the hawkers’ association.

Yesterday, Mr Singh said that the town council cleaned the high areas of hawker centres last year and so had fulfilled its duties.

He also noted that NEA’s notice on Friday had stipulated that the cleaning of high areas needed to be done annually, and not every quarter.

Mr Singh reiterated that “no authorised town council staff told any hawker or anyone of any additional charges to be imposed for the cleaning”.

Within hours, the NEA issued its statement refuting his claims.

• It said that the high areas at Block 538 were not cleaned because the town council wanted the hawkers’ association to separately pay the council’s contractor, ATL Maintenance, for putting up scaffolding.

• The hawkers refused, and referred ATL to the town council on Feb 19, less than two weeks before the spring cleaning was scheduled to begin on March 4.

• “Despite this being acknowledged by the town council at that point, the scaffolding was not put up on the day of the spring cleaning,” said the NEA.

“Mr Singh now says that, since the cleaning of high areas only needed to be done once a year, it did not plan to do so in March because such cleaning was already done last year. However, our record shows the town council also did not provide scaffolding for this centre’s cleaning last year.”

The NEA also released a letter dated May 8, written by the association representing stallholders at Block 511 Kaki Bukit Market and Food Centre. Addressed to the area’s MP, Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, it said that stallholders were told by a Mr Tai from the town council that they would have to pay for cleaning of areas above 2.5m.

• The NEA identified the man they referred to as Mr Tai Vie Shun, the town council’s property manager.

• Said NEA: “The sequence of events and documents clearly show that the AHPETC’s claim that ‘no authorised town council staff told any hawker or anyone of any additional charges to be imposed for the cleaning’ is false.”

The town council had also taken issue with NEA’s notice on Friday, reminding it of its legal obligations. Mr Singh said it had wanted to meet the NEA on Friday but the agency rescheduled the meeting to June 6.

• The NEA said yesterday it did not want to meet on May 31 as originally proposed by AHPETC because the council wanted to exclude hawkers from the meeting.

• “NEA strongly advises AHPETC not to compromise public hygiene and safety,” it added.

Last night, The Sunday Times learnt that market representatives of the Block 511 and Block 538 centres are preparing to petition against the charging of scaffolding fees for the spring cleaning of the centres by the town council.

They started collecting signatures from hawkers on Friday night and have about 70 signatures so far.

[email protected]
 
From http://sghardtruth.com/

3vNe0YN.jpg
 
Last edited:
Don't know who to believe, Workers Party or NEA?

Aljunied (AHPETC) Town council vs Stallholders at two food centres in Bedok (saga)

by Repost on SgHardtruth

ST_20130601_JYCLEAN01CK3L_3684719e.jpg


Stallholders at three food markets and centres in Aljunied GRC, including Block 511’s centre in Bedok North Street 3 (above), said they were told to pay for erection of scaffolding to clean high areas. NEA said town councils must bear the costs of cleaning, including the erection of scaffolding. — ST PHOTOS: AZIZ HUSSIN
*****************************************************

The Straits Times NEA sends Aljunied town council reminder on cleaning of common areas - 1 Jun 2013

THE National Environment Agency (NEA) has sent a formal notice to Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC), reminding it of its legal obligations, after it failed to do a thorough cleaning of a market and food centre in Bedok.

The advisory issued yesterday to the Workers’ Party (WP)-led town council stated that under Section 18 (1) of the Town Councils Act, town councils are responsible for the maintenance and cleanliness of all common property, including markets and hawker centres.

It noted that since the 2003 Sars outbreak, all town councils have been expected to do spring cleaning of Housing Board-owned markets and hawker centres under their charge.

The NEA, which has had a coordinating role in the spring cleaning of these hawker centres since 2004, said town councils must “carry out a thorough cleaning” of all common areas including drains, columns, floors and fans. “The ceilings, beams and exhaust ducts are to be cleaned at least once a year during major spring cleanings,” said the NEA note, released to the media.

The NEA reminded the town council that it must bear costs of the cleaning, including the erection of scaffolding, “without any additional charges” as it collects monthly service and conservancy fees from stallholders.

It added that the town council will be held accountable for any hygiene or public health lapses under the Environment and Public Health Act.

The agency’s reminder yesterday came after stallholders of Block 538, Bedok North Street 3 returned to their stalls after a five-day closure in March to find that ceiling and exhaust ducts had not been cleaned. Ten stallholders there said they each paid $140 to their committee chairman in March for canvas covers for their stalls during the clean-up.

They also said they were told by AHPETC that it was not responsible for the ceiling cleaning.

Stallholders at two other food markets and food centres in Aljunied GRC said they, too, were told by AHPETC that they must pay for the erection of scaffolding in order for AHPETC’s contracted cleaners to clean the high areas. These centres are at Blocks 511 of Bedok North Street 3 and Block 630 of Bedok Reservoir Road.

All three market and food centres are being maintained by FM Solutions and Services (FMSS), the AHPETC’s managing agent.

The row between the stallholders and AHPETC came amid a war of words between the WP and the People’s Action Party (PAP) in Parliament last month over managing agent rates.

In the case of the Block 538 centre, AHPETC admitted it had not cleaned the ceilings and exhaust ducts.

Mr Yeo Soon Fei, its deputy general manager, later wrote to The Straits Times Forum to say that it was told by the NEA in February that the hawker association there would be making the scaffolding arrangements.

But “for reasons unknown”, the structures were not provided for, said Mr Yeo.

The NEA responded, stating that “all town councils have always been responsible for paying contractors to erect scaffolding where required to clean walls”.

The NEA also noted yesterday that the cleaning contractor had provided scaffolding for Block 511 during last year’s spring cleaning exercise, while scissor lifts were used during the spring cleaning of Block 630, Bedok Reservoir Road.

Mr Wan Khow Wai, 62, who runs a cooked food stall at Block 511, said: “All this while, the town council would clean the ceilings and exhaust ducts and we never had to pay extra.”

At another food centre maintained by AHPETC – Block 209, Hougang Street 21 – its committee chairman Lau Meng Chye said that for its cleaning next week, AHPETC told him that stallholders must pay to erect scaffolding as its cleaners will not clean areas above 2.5m. But because it did not issue a letter stating this formally, the 53-year-old has cancelled the scaffolding plans.

The town council did not reply to The Straits Times’ queries last week.

A Straits Times check with 30 stallholders from markets and food centres managed by the other 15 town councils islandwide found all saying that they have never had to pay for the erection of scaffolding so that their town councils’ cleaners can clean the high areas.

Hawker Raymond Tan, 56, a snack seller at 50A Marine Terrace Market for more than 30 years, said: “Cleaning is carried out by the town council on a quarterly basis. Twice a year, the cleaners will clean the ceiling and fans. We’ve never had to pay any fees for such major cleaning.”

[email protected]
**************************************************************

(AHPETC ) Food centre cleaning: Town council replies – ST Forum – May 29, 2013


WITH regard to the cleaning exercise at the Block 538 Bedok North market in March, it was the National Environment Agency (NEA), (???) the coordinating agency, that informed us in February that the hawker association would be making the necessary arrangements for the scaffolding to clean the high areas (“Stallholders in row with WP town council”; Sunday).

However, for reasons unknown, (????) the scaffolding was not provided on the day designated for the cleaning, resulting in the town council’s cleaners being unable to carry out the work.

For the cleaning exercise at the Block 511 Bedok North market next month, discussions between our town council and the NEA are in progress to ensure a smooth exercise, including the scaffolding arrangements.

We stress that at no point in time did any of our authorised personnel advise hawkers or anyone that there would be additional charges imposed by the town council on the hawkers for the cleaning. (???)

Yeo Soon Fei
Deputy General Manager
Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council
**************************************************************

(The Straits Times) -Stallholders in row with WP town council – 26 May 2013 -By Joyce Lim


Stallholders at two food centres in Bedok are locked in a dispute with their town council over the top-to-bottom cleaning of the centres.

The disagreement is about whether stallholders should have to foot any of the bill for power washing the ceilings and ceiling fixtures, an exercise that is done twice a year and requires them to vacate the premises for five days.

The two food centres are in blocks 511 and 538 of Bedok North Street 3, in the Kaki Bukit ward of Aljunied GRC. They are managed by the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) of the Workers’ Party (WP).

Stallholders said they were informed they had to pay for the scaffolding that is erected for the washing, but said they never had to in the past.

A National Environment Agency (NEA) spokesman also told The Sunday Times that “pursuant to section 18(1) of the Town Councils Act, all town councils are responsible for maintaining and cleaning of all common areas, including hawker centres, in Housing Board towns”.

“Consequently AHPETC is supposed to conduct regular spring cleaning including the ceilings, exhaust systems, fans, lights and other fixtures. There should not be any additional charges since the town council collects service and conservancy charges from the hawkers on a monthly basis,” said the spokesman.

Each of the 42 cooked food stalls at Block 511 pays more than $120 for service and conservancy charges per month.

Some hawkers requested a meeting on the issue with town council officials on April 26 at which NEA officers were also present. The meeting ended in stalemate, said the stallholders.

The row comes just as the war of words between WP and the People’s Action Party (PAP) in Parliament two weeks ago over managing agent rates seemed to have calmed last week. But even as netizens continue to discuss the showdown online, the debate could be given fresh fuel with these hawkers’ concerns.

The latest dispute began after a scheduled cleaning of the market and food centre at Block 538. Ten stallholders said they had each paid $140 to their committee chairman in March for canvas covers to drape over their stalls during the clean-up.

But they returned after a five-day closure to find the ceiling and exhaust ducts had not been cleaned. “We were shocked when we returned to find the canvas covering our stalls still so clean, without dust and debris from the ceiling on it,” said Madam Yong Heng Ran, 54, a carrot-cake hawker.

AHPETC acknowledged the ceilings were not washed during the exercise. “For Block 538 market, cleaning was carried out from March 4 to 7, with the individual stallholders doing their individual cleaning on March 8,” said a spokesman.

“As for the cleaning of high areas, we were informed that scaffolding will be provided. However, on the day of cleaning, there was no scaffolding, hence our cleaners could only clean the reachable areas and not the ceiling and exhaust ducts.”

A check with another food centre managed by the same town council, at Block 209, Hougang Street 21, found it is not standard practice for the town council’s cleaners to wash those ceilings as well. But there will be a cleaning next month at the request of the hawkers there and each will have to pay $100 for canvas and scaffolding to facilitate the cleaning.

But the Bedok stallholders said scaffolding was always erected by the cleaning contractor, not the hawkers, in previous years.

“We were only told to cover our stalls with canvas and that the market would be closed for five days,” said Miss Tan Siok Tiang, 48, who runs a clothes alteration stall at the market.

“I was told the actual cleaning took only one day. I think it’s a joke played on us and we have to suffer loss of income for four extra days.”

Further queries to the town council from The Sunday Times about why there was no scaffolding went unanswered as did an e-mail to WP chairman Sylvia Lim.

But with the cleaning for Block 511 scheduled for June 24 to 28, hawkers there said they have been told by AHPETC they would have to pay extra for the contracted cleaners to clean the ceilings and exhaust ducts.

A stallholder representative, who wanted to be known only as Mr Chan, said: “We were told by the town council that its contracted cleaners do not cover areas that are more than 2.5m from the ground, so they will not clean the ceilings and exhaust ducts.”

The 55-year old drink stall owner, who was at the April 26 meeting, finds the extra charge “unreasonable” as he never had to pay it before. “We feel it is for the new town council to negotiate with the cleaners to include the cleaning of high areas.”

Mr Chan said the hawkers’ concerns had been raised with their MP Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, at Meet-the-People Sessions earlier this month.

NEA told The Sunday Times that it has formally reminded AHPETC of its statutory duties.

[email protected]

3905_509048899151123_29893683_n.png



945394_507999905922689_1909444046_n.png
 
It is only a matter of time the truth will be revealed. WP cannot act ignorance of the whole saga because a letter has been sent to their MP complaining about the additional charges.

Someone is not telling the truth and has basically screw up big time for WP in terms of Public Relationship management. Documented proofs once put up, all will be lost. WP people will have to face the hard truth, somebody within played them out and it is time to do the right thing... apologize and do spring cleaning from within.

Goh Meng Seng
 
It is only a matter of time the truth will be revealed. WP cannot act ignorance of the whole saga because a letter has been sent to their MP complaining about the additional charges.

Someone is not telling the truth and has basically screw up big time for WP in terms of Public Relationship management. Documented proofs once put up, all will be lost. WP people will have to face the hard truth, somebody within played them out and it is time to do the right thing... apologize and do spring cleaning from within.

Goh Meng Seng

It's good to have you back General Goh Meng Seng.......the PAP's representative in the Opposition......
 
It is a petty incident. WP stepped into this and do have to take the blame but not the way you painted it. The fact that NEA completely siamed an allegation is noteworthy. There are thousands other things that deserve your attention if it is your desire to help Singaporeans.

It is only a matter of time the truth will be revealed. WP cannot act ignorance of the whole saga because a letter has been sent to their MP complaining about the additional charges.

Goh Meng Seng
 
FYI I was never a PTI.

Either Pritam was lying, he cannot control his own pple or he don't even know what is going on. All 3 doesn't speak well of him.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top