Friday, October 19, 2018

Sylvia Lim avoided calling for tender for new managing agent despite having time do so: Davinder Singh
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/ahtc-trial-sylvia-lim-avoided-calling-tender-davinder-singh-10843980

 (Updated: )

Ricky Lim
According to KPMG, whose audit report forms part of the basis for the lawsuits, "the tender process for FMSS' initial appointment was waived without proper justification".
KPMG alleges that the contract AHTC signed with FMSS after this waiver was "improperly entered into", as procedures in the Town Councils Financial Rules (TCFR) were not followed.
KPMG said the managing agent fees proposed under this contract amounted to S$4.2 million per year for Aljunied, a sum "significantly greater" than the S$70,000 threshold that makes it compulsory for town councils to call for tenders under the TCFR.
---

Posted on:-
17 Oct 2018 09:45PM (Updated: 17 Oct 2018 11:40PM)

Ricky Lim
Under the Government Instruction Manual (IM) for Procurement Process that govern Government contract of services (where Town Council will also come under this jurisdiction):-
(1) Quotations ($6,000 – up to < $70,000) - at least 3 quotations need to be called
(2) Tender (more than >$70,000). - Open tender or Closed tender (if the procurement is niche).

Looking at the Aljunied GRC town council - Maintenance Agent role, the following evaluation criteria to call the tender need to be examine :-
(1) Does the MA services exceed $70,000?
Ans :- Yes - a tender need to be called.

(2) Is the MA services so niche that only one and only 1 vendor can meet?
Ans :- No - CPG can meet and exceed, FMSS and 2 other vendors who come forward can meet. (In fact in the industry market, many other vendors have such expertise to provide FM services).
--- Thus an open tender is imperative.

(3) If open tender is called to provide MA consultancy services - the qualification must be a track record to manage between 40,000 to 50,000 residents in the estate.
Which vendor qualify?
a. CPG
b. FMSS
c. 2 other vendors

Ans :- CPG has such track record of managing 40,000 to 50,000 residents.
FMSS and 2 other vendors do not have such track record according to Mr Low.

Rightfully based on this evaluation criteria - only CPG qualified. But yet FMSS is selected and 2 other vendors were penalised based on this evaluation criteria.

Note :- This is a breach of the Government IM in awarding the tender.

(4) What is method of procurement by Aljunied GRC town council?
Ans :- Waiver of tender (this is against IM for not calling an open tender) - as waiver of tender is strictly restricted - only reserved for :_
- one and only one vendor can provide the services where no one can.
- in an emergency situation where services need to provide immediately - else it is a "life and death" situation.

Does Aljunied GRC fall under this 2 category to justified the "waiver of tender"?
- there are more than one vendor that can provide this service.
- is it a life and death situation - CPG, 2 other vendors can provide other than FMSS

Ans :- Aljunied GRC context doesn't qualify to exercise "waiver of tender" - and now the question is - how Aljunied GRC make representation to MND on how they justify "waiver of tender" to make MND agree to the "waiver of tender".

(5) By awarding FMSS the MA role - will it cause a "conflict of interest" if FMSS associate company bid for the project under Aljunied GRC contract in which FMSS is playing a MA role?
Ans :- Yes - FMSI is own by FMSS and indeed will cause a "conflict of interest" and breach the Town Council Act.

This is like what Mr Singh lawyer said :- "WP ex-chief Low Thia Khiang gave FMSS 'a gun to put to AHTC's head'".

This will allow FMSS to fleece AHTC big time - $33 million loss to FMSI.
Like · Reply · 1m

Ricky Lim
(1) The objective of the Government IM to guide the Government procurement process is to ensure :-
(a) select the vendor that can best do the job at the best price.
(b) ensure fair and unbias sourcing to prevent possibility of conflict of interest and weak internal control - which contribute to losing of public funds.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
LikeReply1m
Ricky Lim
Waiver of tender - are rarely allowed.

Even if it is allowed under very dire circumstances - "like life and death or emergency" or "only one and only one vendor can provide" ----- it will definitely come under the spotlight of :-
(1) approving Authorities
(2) "hell lot of justifications" and "exceptional supporting circumstances" as justifications.
(2) internal & external auditors going into all details and justifications.

Because "waiver of tender" ===== almost tantamount to a "kelong" - & "high chance of abuse" ---- which is demonstrated by this Aljunied GRC town council and FMSS case.
LikeReply1m

Ricky Lim
Mr Singh on day 11 of the trial proceeded to poke holes into the defence that there was not enough time to call for a tender. Ms Lim agreed that there was sufficient time.
“As of June, if you had decided to keep them until the end of August, you would have three months to do the tender, correct?” asked Mr Singh.
“In theory yes, but it would not be wise,” Ms Lim replied.
“My question is you would have had three months to do the tender. I’m not talking about theory. I’m talking about time needed for tender. Do you agree?”
To that, Ms Lim said: “I agree that the tender time would be about two months.”
When Mr Singh put it to Ms Lim that there was enough time to do a tender for companies to put in bids to provide managing agent services for AHTC, she agreed that there was. But this would be at the expense of “other critical works” and would jeopardise the town council’s interests, she said.
--

So the criteria of "waiver of tender" - "in an emergency situation where services need to provide immediately - else it is a "life and death" situation." --- fail in this critera.

---
Mr Singh also asked if there was any written note that showed CPG requesting to be released from its contract, to which Ms Lim said there was none.

And time not enough to call for tender - whereby CPG request to release from its contract --- also not true (the previous justification - that time is not enough and it is an emergency situation).
LikeReply1m

No comments:

Post a Comment