WP (AHPETC) VS NEA (And Hawkers of Bedok)

satan_gal · 07-06-2013, 10:31 AM

I'm amazed nobody bring this up yet.

Gist of story -

Hawkers buay song coz TC ask them pay extra for scaffolding to clean high areas, say last time no need pay.

NEA says must clean, TC tried to deflect responsibility.

TC say is NEA communication error.

=================================================

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...ng/700140.html

SINGAPORE: The parties involved in a dispute over the cleaning of hawker centres managed by the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) have finally come to some resolution after a meeting on Thursday among the town council, the National Environment Agency (NEA) and the affected hawkers.

The meeting lasted about an hour and was held at NEA's office.

Parties agreed that spring cleaning at the hawker centres at Block 511 in Bedok North Street 3 and Block 630 at Bedok Reservoir Road will be done within a month.

NEA's Director of the Hawker Centres Division, Richard Tan said: "We note that the town council is committed to ensuring that spring cleaning is done without any cost to the hawkers and without compromising public hygiene and safety, they will do the spring cleaning within a month."

Chan Kheng Heng, Secretary for the Block 511 Hawkers Association told reporters that the town council has proposed a new cleaning method that will not require the closure of the food centre.

He said he is satisfied with how the meeting turned out.

AHPETC property manager Tai Vie Shun, who emerged from the meeting, did not want to comment.

The dispute started after what appears to be a misunderstanding over who should bear the cost of the erection of scaffolding to clean high areas in the food centre.

Stallholders from the two food centres in Bedok had said they were told by the town council that they would have to pay extra for scaffolding which they never had to pay in the past.

The NEA stepped in to say that it was the town council's responsibility to pay for the spring cleaning.

The town council has since agreed to this.

The dispute then shifted to when the cleaning of the hawker centre at Block 511 Bedok North Street 3 should take place.

Hawkers there said it should take place as scheduled in June and not in November, as indicated by the town council.

The NEA has said that the cleaning of hawker centres should take place as scheduled to ensure public health and hygiene are not compromised.

The hawker centre at Block 511 was last cleaned exactly a year ago.

In a statement issued later Thursday, the NEA maintained that the sequence of events and documentation show that AHPETC was trying to get the hawkers to pay additional fees for cleaning.

An NEA spokesperson said: "When the hawkers refused to pay, an incomplete job was done, leaving the hawkers suffering business losses due to unnecessary closure. It then tried to deflect blame by claiming that the NEA email had confused the Town Council and everyone else."

In an earlier response, AHPETC Vice-Chairman Pritam Singh had referred to an email from the NEA dated February 7 this year which the agency had said that "the Hawkers' Association will make the necessary arrangements with their contractors on scaffolding erection/dismantling during the spring cleaning period from 4-8 March 2013".

Mr Pritam had said that the town council took NEA's email in good faith and left the arrangement of the scaffolding in the hands of the NEA and the hawkers' association.

The NEA on Thursday reiterated that its email referred to the individual stall scaffolding and not the main scaffold for cleaning of high areas.

The individual stall scaffolding is paid for by the hawkers while the main scaffold for cleaning of high areas should be paid for by the town council.

The NEA spokesperson said: "This is a long standing practice that AHPETC and its contractors should have understood perfectly. It is now clear that AHPETC's contractor, ATL Maintenance Pte Ltd, prepared a quotation dated 19 February, 2013 for the cleaning of the entire premises, including scaffolding, machinery and chemicals.

"This implies that AHPETC was aware of the full scope of work that its contractor was supposed to do, but tried to deflect costs of $7,200 to the hawkers instead of paying for the work itself."

- CNA/fa

globalcookie · 07-06-2013, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by satan_gal

In an earlier response, AHPETC Vice-Chairman Pritam Singh had referred to an email from the NEA dated February 7 this year which the agency had said that "the Hawkers' Association will make the necessary arrangements with their contractors on scaffolding erection/dismantling during the spring cleaning period from 4-8 March 2013".

Mr Pritam had said that the town council took NEA's email in good faith and left the arrangement of the scaffolding in the hands of the NEA and the hawkers' association.- CNA/fa

Since they hv TC and property manager, shdn't they just get the right pple to follow up and see thru? This one really doesn't reflect well on Pritam's claim of "good faith" and pushing e blame to NEA.

**jwhtan** · 07-06-2013, 12:32 PM

I'm surprised WP let this matter deteriorate to this level. Political parties, especially the opposition where ordinary folks are their main supporters, cannot afford to antagonise the commoners. They would have to do a lot to recover lost ground.

Reds · 07-06-2013, 02:21 PM

Just say sorry lo.. after that business as usual... lol
learn from ah looong ma...

07-06-2013, 02:35 PM

As a person who work in the line of dealing with multiple contractors, this kind of mistake very common, email not very clear, then finger pointing game start.

Being a WP supporter, i feel NEA's email was very misleading. I would have also told my contractor take out the scaffolding. In fact on my current job i faced a similar problem. Was promise scaffolding will be provided so i cancel my order on my side. Yesterday suddenly roti prata tell me no more have to rent from another contractor. Knn, it the end last min order from my side. Today short of 2small raillings and a platform, cannot work because of safety. But who to blame? Our side of cos want to save money, on their side wait until last min then tell us dun have.

Imo, just dun waste time. Things need to be done move on and find solution. I think wp should have just did that. I know i did.

satan_gal · 07-06-2013, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwhtan

I'm surprised WP let this matter deteriorate to this level. Political parties, especially the opposition where ordinary folks are their main supporters, cannot afford to antagonise the commoners. They would have to do a lot to recover lost ground.

You were not the only one.

I was pretty surprised when the news started to develop.

Where any association is concerned... it's a delicate issue.

They could have easily.. Look, NEA said this and this and this...
But NEVERMIND, WE CARE! So we absorb for you until NEA clarifies.

I'm now wonderin how the hawkers @ HG side get the cleaning done

Ah_ZhaN · 07-06-2013, 03:39 PM

AHPETC: NEA is Politically Motivated to Tarnish the Image of AHPETC

I find the conclusion of the NEA on 6 June 2013 that “AHPETC tried to get hawkers to pay extra cleaning costs, and when that failed it deflected the blame” puzzling and unprofessional as a government agency.

Has AHPETC Tried to Get Hawkers to Pay Extra?

The whole episode started with a Sunday Times report dated 26 May 2013 alluding that Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) is collecting money from stallholders for the cleaning of the market & hawker centre. Has any stallholder been approached by AHPETC staff or its contractors for the extra charges? If so, please make it public. AHPETC has investigated the claim and found the claim published in the press report to be baseless.

The latest attempt to substantiate this baseless claim was to show a quotation by the cleaning contractor ATL Maintenance Pte Ltd, who has clarified that it was in response to a separate request by the hawker association and not pursuant to its contractual obligation with the Town Council to do annual cleaning of the high areas at markets / hawker centres.

All cleaning contractors employed by AHPETC are well aware of its obligation under the contract to clean the high areas of all the markets under AHPETC management at least once a year. Anyone who is interested is welcome to inspect the contracts.

Why Town Council cleaning contactor did not clean the high areas of the market at Blk 538 Bedok North Street 3 in March 2013

NEA in its email dated 7 February 2013 categorically stated that “the Hawker Association will make the necessary arrangements with its contractors on the scaffold erection / dismantling during the spring cleaning from 4 – 8 March 2013”. It is ludicrous that a government agency would claim that its statement means anything else than what it says, and to change its position repeatedly.

AHPETC took the statement in good faith that NEA had arranged with the hawker association for the same. The scaffolding was not provided as indicated; hence the AHPETC cleaners were unable to carry out the work of the high areas.

AHPETC did not ask or impose any additional charges for cleaning.

The Scheduled Dates of Market Annual Cleaning

Based on the past experience of staff of our Managing Agent in managing the market in Hougang Constituency, annual cleaning of the market including ceiling and the high areas could be done without additional closure of the market and disruption of business to hawkers and customers. This can be done by taking advantage of the weekly one-day closures for markets and the hours when hawker stalls are closed.

AHPETC will set the date of annual cleaning and will inform stallholders nearer to the scheduled date and coordinate with the stallholders. AHPETC is prepared to consider any stallholders’ request on cleaning arrangements to ensure smooth operations and to minimize disruption to their business and inconvenience to customers.

Is NEA Playing Politics?

Being a responsible Town Council with the interest of residents and stallholders at heart, AHPETC is always prepared to work with the relevant government agencies for the benefit of the residents it serves. Even in cases where we may have disagreed with the approach of the agency, we are always prepared to compromise and to work together for common good, so long as the interest of residents is not jeopardised.

AHPETC positively responded to NEA’s advisory dated 31 May 2013 which was published by the press on 1 June 2013. AHPETC welcomed NEA’s clarification on the issue of hawker centre cleaning, and stated that “AHPETC 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.”

NEA’s stance regrettable

Therefore, it is regrettable that our attempts to resolve the issue amicably have not been reciprocated, with the government taking the opportunity to point fingers at AHPETC, alleging that it was AHPETC which was “deflecting blame”. Who is really the party deflecting blame? I set out the facts above and I believe that the public can judge for itself.

SYLVIA LIM
CHAIRMAN
ALJUNIED-HOUGANG-PUNGGOL EAST TOWN COUNCIL

7 June 2013

http://www.ahpetc.sg/media-release-7-june-2013/

globalcookie · 07-06-2013, 03:41 PM

Mistakes or not, it is tolerable mostly. BUT we seen how the white side like to take under e belt swipe at WP over every thing and try to score points. And when they themselves made the exact same mistake, it is totally forgivable.

Thus WP mishandled this issue. It could have been resolve without it going so public (news) and letting them hv e chance to strike under e belt again.

WP/Opposition have to work double or triple hard while e other side like to trumpet their little works. So such mistakes are really, avoidable and shd hv been better handled.

--------------------

Sylvia Lim's media release. Much as we have seen, she's really good at retaliating! Back to NEA

Gosh.... she's really good at turning e situation around. But some damage is still done.

loveikan · 07-06-2013, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by globalcookie

Mistakes or not, it is tolerable mostly. BUT we seen how the white side like to take under e belt swipe at WP over every thing and try to score points. And when they themselves made the exact same mistake, it is totally forgivable.

Thus WP mishandled this issue. It could have been resolve without it going so public (news) and letting them hv e chance to strike under e belt again.

WP/Opposition have to work double or triple hard while e other side like to trumpet their little works. So such mistakes are really, avoidable and shd hv been better handled.

--------------------

Sylvia Lim's media release. Much as we have seen, she's really good at retaliating! Back to NEA

Gosh.... she's really good at turning e situation around. But some damage is still done.

Agreed with GC and the purple dinosaur, WP has to work extra hard to regain the trust of the commoner lost and those who had wavered. In times to come, it will be worsens by various mechanisms used to take pot shots at their work and performance.

yeobt · 07-06-2013, 04:45 PM

I still believing in reVOTElution in GE2016, this small issue is juz like a child plays, it would not changed any opposition supporters.

07-06-2013, 10:31 AM	#1
satan_gal Dragon Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 1,714	WP (AHPETC) VS NEA (And Hawkers of Bedok) I'm amazed nobody bring this up yet. Gist of story - Hawkers buay song coz TC ask them pay extra for scaffolding to clean high areas, say last time no need pay. NEA says must clean, TC tried to deflect responsibility. TC say is NEA communication error. ================================================= http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...ng/700140.html SINGAPORE: The parties involved in a dispute over the cleaning of hawker centres managed by the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) have finally come to some resolution after a meeting on Thursday among the town council, the National Environment Agency (NEA) and the affected hawkers. The meeting lasted about an hour and was held at NEA's office. Parties agreed that spring cleaning at the hawker centres at Block 511 in Bedok North Street 3 and Block 630 at Bedok Reservoir Road will be done within a month. NEA's Director of the Hawker Centres Division, Richard Tan said: "We note that the town council is committed to ensuring that spring cleaning is done without any cost to the hawkers and without compromising public hygiene and safety, they will do the spring cleaning within a month." Chan Kheng Heng, Secretary for the Block 511 Hawkers Association told reporters that the town council has proposed a new cleaning method that will not require the closure of the food centre. He said he is satisfied with how the meeting turned out. AHPETC property manager Tai Vie Shun, who emerged from the meeting, did not want to comment. The dispute started after what appears to be a misunderstanding over who should bear the cost of the erection of scaffolding to clean high areas in the food centre. Stallholders from the two food centres in Bedok had said they were told by the town council that they would have to pay extra for scaffolding which they never had to pay in the past. The NEA stepped in to say that it was the town council's responsibility to pay for the spring cleaning. The town council has since agreed to this. The dispute then shifted to when the cleaning of the hawker centre at Block 511 Bedok North Street 3 should take place. Hawkers there said it should take place as scheduled in June and not in November, as indicated by the town council. The NEA has said that the cleaning of hawker centres should take place as scheduled to ensure public health and hygiene are not compromised. The hawker centre at Block 511 was last cleaned exactly a year ago. In a statement issued later Thursday, the NEA maintained that the sequence of events and documentation show that AHPETC was trying to get the hawkers to pay additional fees for cleaning. An NEA spokesperson said: "When the hawkers refused to pay, an incomplete job was done, leaving the hawkers suffering business losses due to unnecessary closure. It then tried to deflect blame by claiming that the NEA email had confused the Town Council and everyone else." In an earlier response, AHPETC Vice-Chairman Pritam Singh had referred to an email from the NEA dated February 7 this year which the agency had said that "the Hawkers' Association will make the necessary arrangements with their contractors on scaffolding erection/dismantling during the spring cleaning period from 4-8 March 2013". Mr Pritam had said that the town council took NEA's email in good faith and left the arrangement of the scaffolding in the hands of the NEA and the hawkers' association. The NEA on Thursday reiterated that its email referred to the individual stall scaffolding and not the main scaffold for cleaning of high areas. The individual stall scaffolding is paid for by the hawkers while the main scaffold for cleaning of high areas should be paid for by the town council. The NEA spokesperson said: "This is a long standing practice that AHPETC and its contractors should have understood perfectly. It is now clear that AHPETC's contractor, ATL Maintenance Pte Ltd, prepared a quotation dated 19 February, 2013 for the cleaning of the entire premises, including scaffolding, machinery and chemicals. "This implies that AHPETC was aware of the full scope of work that its contractor was supposed to do, but tried to deflect costs of $7,200 to the hawkers instead of paying for the work itself." - CNA/fa

07-06-2013, 03:41 PM	#8
globalcookie Dragon Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,446	Mistakes or not, it is tolerable mostly. BUT we seen how the white side like to take under e belt swipe at WP over every thing and try to score points. And when they themselves made the exact same mistake, it is totally forgivable. Thus WP mishandled this issue. It could have been resolve without it going so public (news) and letting them hv e chance to strike under e belt again. WP/Opposition have to work double or triple hard while e other side like to trumpet their little works. So such mistakes are really, avoidable and shd hv been better handled. -------------------- Sylvia Lim's media release. Much as we have seen, she's really good at retaliating! Back to NEA Gosh.... she's really good at turning e situation around. But some damage is still done. Last edited by globalcookie; 07-06-2013 at 03:46 PM.

07-06-2013, 12:32 PM	#3
jwhtan Barney Join Date: Sep 2000 Posts: 9,118	I'm surprised WP let this matter deteriorate to this level. Political parties, especially the opposition where ordinary folks are their main supporters, cannot afford to antagonise the commoners. They would have to do a lot to recover lost ground.

07-06-2013, 02:21 PM	#4
Reds Dragon Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 598	Just say sorry lo.. after that business as usual... lol learn from ah looong ma...

07-06-2013, 02:35 PM	#5
Nidd Guest Posts: n/a	As a person who work in the line of dealing with multiple contractors, this kind of mistake very common, email not very clear, then finger pointing game start. Being a WP supporter, i feel NEA's email was very misleading. I would have also told my contractor take out the scaffolding. In fact on my current job i faced a similar problem. Was promise scaffolding will be provided so i cancel my order on my side. Yesterday suddenly roti prata tell me no more have to rent from another contractor. Knn, it the end last min order from my side. Today short of 2small raillings and a platform, cannot work because of safety. But who to blame? Our side of cos want to save money, on their side wait until last min then tell us dun have. Imo, just dun waste time. Things need to be done move on and find solution. I think wp should have just did that. I know i did.

07-06-2013, 03:39 PM	#7
Ah_ZhaN Arofanatic Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 339	AHPETC: NEA is Politically Motivated to Tarnish the Image of AHPETC I find the conclusion of the NEA on 6 June 2013 that “AHPETC tried to get hawkers to pay extra cleaning costs, and when that failed it deflected the blame” puzzling and unprofessional as a government agency. Has AHPETC Tried to Get Hawkers to Pay Extra? The whole episode started with a Sunday Times report dated 26 May 2013 alluding that Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) is collecting money from stallholders for the cleaning of the market & hawker centre. Has any stallholder been approached by AHPETC staff or its contractors for the extra charges? If so, please make it public. AHPETC has investigated the claim and found the claim published in the press report to be baseless. The latest attempt to substantiate this baseless claim was to show a quotation by the cleaning contractor ATL Maintenance Pte Ltd, who has clarified that it was in response to a separate request by the hawker association and not pursuant to its contractual obligation with the Town Council to do annual cleaning of the high areas at markets / hawker centres. All cleaning contractors employed by AHPETC are well aware of its obligation under the contract to clean the high areas of all the markets under AHPETC management at least once a year. Anyone who is interested is welcome to inspect the contracts. Why Town Council cleaning contactor did not clean the high areas of the market at Blk 538 Bedok North Street 3 in March 2013 NEA in its email dated 7 February 2013 categorically stated that “the Hawker Association will make the necessary arrangements with its contractors on the scaffold erection / dismantling during the spring cleaning from 4 – 8 March 2013”. It is ludicrous that a government agency would claim that its statement means anything else than what it says, and to change its position repeatedly. AHPETC took the statement in good faith that NEA had arranged with the hawker association for the same. The scaffolding was not provided as indicated; hence the AHPETC cleaners were unable to carry out the work of the high areas. AHPETC did not ask or impose any additional charges for cleaning. The Scheduled Dates of Market Annual Cleaning Based on the past experience of staff of our Managing Agent in managing the market in Hougang Constituency, annual cleaning of the market including ceiling and the high areas could be done without additional closure of the market and disruption of business to hawkers and customers. This can be done by taking advantage of the weekly one-day closures for markets and the hours when hawker stalls are closed. AHPETC will set the date of annual cleaning and will inform stallholders nearer to the scheduled date and coordinate with the stallholders. AHPETC is prepared to consider any stallholders’ request on cleaning arrangements to ensure smooth operations and to minimize disruption to their business and inconvenience to customers. Is NEA Playing Politics? Being a responsible Town Council with the interest of residents and stallholders at heart, AHPETC is always prepared to work with the relevant government agencies for the benefit of the residents it serves. Even in cases where we may have disagreed with the approach of the agency, we are always prepared to compromise and to work together for common good, so long as the interest of residents is not jeopardised. AHPETC positively responded to NEA’s advisory dated 31 May 2013 which was published by the press on 1 June 2013. AHPETC welcomed NEA’s clarification on the issue of hawker centre cleaning, and stated that “AHPETC 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.” NEA’s stance regrettable Therefore, it is regrettable that our attempts to resolve the issue amicably have not been reciprocated, with the government taking the opportunity to point fingers at AHPETC, alleging that it was AHPETC which was “deflecting blame”. Who is really the party deflecting blame? I set out the facts above and I believe that the public can judge for itself. SYLVIA LIM CHAIRMAN ALJUNIED-HOUGANG-PUNGGOL EAST TOWN COUNCIL 7 June 2013 http://www.ahpetc.sg/media-release-7-june-2013/

07-06-2013, 04:45 PM	#10
yeobt Arofanatic Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 496	I still believing in reVOTElution in GE2016, this small issue is juz like a child plays, it would not changed any opposition supporters.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)