MND report on AIM

[GBC]

this is ridiculous, why should i answer your question about how to solve the mess they created? i can only offer my advice on how it should not have happened in the first place

If you cannot answer, then don't instead of beating around the bush and not contributing any useful inputs.

 

[NTB2DO]

this is ridiculous, why should i answer your question about how to solve the mess they created? i can only offer my advice on how it should not have happened in the first place

Alas, pray enlighten us, how to ensure "it should not have happened in the first place" leh?

NONE other experienced--ie with established track record ie those who had been running PAP constituencies--TC management companies DIDN"T bid for WP's AHTC tender, ONLY FMSS (with established track record running Hougang constituency) responded. PAP's TC management companies don't want to do business with WP, you mean you can force them to do so is it?

Perhaps the only way for this not to happen in the first place would be for WP not to win Aljunied GRC from PAP (and also for other opposition parties not to win any constituency from PAP) lor: Then WP wouldn't be stuck with the predicament of needing someone to maintain the estate and yet not supposed to engage their own business associate (and yet other experienced ones who are not their business associates--meaning then it has to be PAP's business associates eg EM Services--shun them).. Hehe I bet PAP would love that idea very much man!

 

[xdivider]

Alas, pray enlighten us, how to ensure "it should not have happened" in the first place leh?

NONE other experienced--ie with established track record ie those who had been running PAP constituencies--TC management companies DIDN"T bid for WP's AHTC tender, ONLY FMSS (with established track record running Hougang constituency) responded. PAP's estate management companies don't want to do business with WP, you mean you can force them to do so is it?

Set up 2 more $2 coys......

 

[NTB2DO]

Set up 2 more $2 coys......

Haha good idea!

I mean, if PAP can use its own $2 company to bid for tender (with success!) with MND's investigation asserting that there's nothing illegal about it, no reason why WP cannot follow suit mah, right?

 

[superman]

if the incumbent played punk and pulled out in say a month without a proper handover, then WP can take the moral high ground and the public can see and support that they had to resort to getting a close husband and wife team to keep the estate running.

Ya, they can do that and when AIM terminate the contract and the management of the estate grinds to a halt because WP have no system to take over, when residents comlain, they can start to blame PAP for that then people like you will say WP should have read the contract and do something about it so WP have themselves to blame. Well Done.

 

[sunzoner]

...

and your lack of comprehension is alarming...my rebuttal to you that opposition supporters do not regard estate management as their top priority as claimed by you because if its true, the opposition would not have won Hougang and Potong Pasir long ago before they had any experience managing the town councils.

Actually, this only proves that voter in Hougang and Potong Pasir do not egard estate management as their top priority.

 

[NTB2DO]

Actually, this only proves that voter in Hougang and Potong Pasir do not egard estate management as their top priority.

.. and voters of Hougang and Potong Pasir don't regard estate management as their top priority doesn't imply that other voters don't too.

So the question is, would the ruling party stop using TC as a political chip simply because voters of Hougang and Potong Pasir didn't fall for it?

Just like since stiff penalty/punishment had not deterred criminals from committing crime, would the authority stop imposing stiff penalty as deterrent simply because of that?

As I see it, the only reason for ruling party to stop using TC as a tool (to discourage voters from voting for opposition party) is when their scheme backfires--which happens to be the case now, hehe.

 

[swalk21]

so what if there is nothing wrong, it is serious to be a conflict of interest by aligning tc with politics.

 

[sunzoner]

...

So the question is, would the ruling party stop using TC as a political chip simply because voters of Hougang and Potong Pasir didn't fall for it?

Just like since stiff penalty/punishment had not deterred criminals from committing crime, would the authority stop imposing stiff penalty as deterrent simply because of that?

....

I would say wrong example. Punishment for crimes and for voting the "wrong" party is not the same...

 

[sunzoner]

Haha good idea!

I mean, if PAP can use its own $2 company to bid for tender (with success!) with MND's investigation asserting that there's nothing illegal about it, no reason why WP cannot follow suit mah, right?

Because it goes against the principles WP tries to uphold?

 

[NTB2DO]

I would say wrong example. Punishment for crimes and for voting the "wrong" party is not the same...

Hehe but hor, I bet in the eyes of the ruling party, opposition voters are just as deserving to be "punished" (as those who flouted law)..

 

[koxinga]

Because it goes against the principles WP tries to uphold?

Which principle? Is it in their constitution? Or is it just a perception?

I think it is a matter of perception and this is the issue clouding the whole saga. Sure, both sides gave their own reasons for doing what they did and probably, no laws were technically broken (so far). But political capital have been wasted nonetheless by both sides.