Ministry of Finance (MOF) agrees that it is unfair to expect the suppliers to agree to unlimited changes in creative services.
The ministry had issued a statement through its Facebook page on Wednesday evening in response to the recent saga about the “unlimited changes” tender published in GeBiz.

On 15 February, Kelly Cheng, a designer, posted a Facebook post of a tender document on GeBiz which contained terms and conditions which seem somewhat unbelievable to industry professionals.
She wrote, “Multiple Demands for Unlimited Changes for Design Services on Gebiz.
As a designer, I Protest, Do you? Please share this post if you are against Unlimited Changes – Be the Change you want to see in the world.”
A friend of Cheng who was concerned about the matter, wrote to Ministry of Fiance (MOF) asking for their comments on the terms of contract for the bidder. MOF replied the friend by saying, “We agree that it is unfair to expect the suppliers to agree to unlimited changes. We would appreciate it if you could share with us the specific tender/quotation numbers and we will look into this matter.” and said that it is currently looking into the issue.
In its statement on Wednesday, MOF shared that it has verified that there indeed was such a requirement contained in the posted documents, sourced to a local school. The school in question is Whitley Secondary School as identified from GeBiz. (read more)
Ministry of Education is said to have agreed that the number of iterations should be reasonable and cannot be unlimited. The specification of “unlimited changes” has been removed from the school’s Invitation-to-Quote (ITQ).
MOF also stated that it will issue a circular to remind all government agencies of standing procurement principles, which includes ensuring that all procurement specifications are reasonable and fair.
The post went on to state that the DesignSingapore Council, which is tasked to develop the local design sector, is also working with MOF to advise government agencies on the guideline of best practices for government procurement of design services.
In regards to the removal of specifications, TOC visited the GeBiz system on Thursday morning and noticed that the ITQ has the same tender specifications as before. TOC has written to MOF to seek clarification on what did the ministry mean by the specifications being removed from the ITQ.
It is also to be noted that the ITQ has already closed by the time MOF is made aware of the issue.
Comments on MOF’s statement about tender specifications
Andrew Pang, a commenter on the MOF Facebook page wrote a heartfelt comment to beseech MOF to also look into the practice of asking for free pitch for creative work,

“Dear MOF, thank you for the long overdue review of your procurement procedures.
I’ll also like to propose to MOF to look into the practice of requesting for free pitch from creative agencies.
For a city that is a newly awarded Unesco Creative city of Design, it is also only right that the government leads by example by not seeking for free pitch.
Creative professionals too, have families to go home to and mouths to feed… Why should agencies be asked to do creative proposals for free? Are the agency’s portfolio not good enough to ascertain their quality of work? Pitching of idea take loads of time and effort, but most of all, they are Intellectual Property.
Would anyone ask a restaurant to prepare some sample dishes for them before actually placing their orders? Or will a lawyer be asked to represent for free for 1 court session before the accused signs him on? If it is not practised in the other professions, then why the creative industry?”

Another commenter, Cedric Lim gave a harsh lengthy reply to MOF’s statement.

The truth? The Design Singapore Council does nothing at all. All these board meetings, BOIs doesn’t do justice all these umpteen years the design agencies or production houses has to put up with. Well, the total number of amendments per deliverable is 5.
Government agencies? Nope, the top people have KPI to keep up, so cheap is the word. The reasonable of using an agency that is better but twice the amount? It’s called “cannot justify”, or simply put, “too much trouble”. Rather go through the motion like how it has not changed this many years since Gebiz. Ask these top management who’re made these decisions? Are they culpable? Review the procedures? Hey, do more.
Let me tell ya what to do. Launch this full board, and a potential pool of people you thought was productive might even be invited by CPIB for coffee. Talent/ model usage wise, Government agencies are the ones asking for perpetual copyright/ usage.
UNLIMITED COPYRIGHT FOR IMAGES. Shame on your guys for campaigning for IP and whatsoever you campaign for copyright, IPOS with your eyes shut wide. I don’t even understand how I should appreciate MOF for standing up after so MANY years. Thumbs up? Really??? Look through the tender again, it starts with the tender brief written without any tactfulness. “Not looking for printing company but creative design agencies”??? Unlimited Changes the government agencies demanded. Common sense, because common sense says is for anyone who has a brain that you don’t go to a chicken rice stall, ask for a plate of it, and reject until you see the perfect plate of chicken rice put together.
Oh yes, government agencies are made up of scholars for crying out loud. Take for example when it comes to choosing a design agency for your campaign… “You don’t have a relevant portfolio, and therefore I cannot task you the job”, and all of a sudden, we realise that the government agencies are asking for a EXACT replica of portfolio we have done. APPLE FOR APPLE.
Gordon Ramsay cooks Beef Ribeye when his other commercial depicts him making salad! Do you know why? Because it’s the same job! It’s an inconvenient truth. Print my comments, burn it into talisman and drink it, and hopefully with some supernatural power, government agencies will understand. If you leave it to some human species to understand, they just won’t. Why would you bother issuing a circular? Circular goes in circles and it won’t reach the people you want to reach.
Well, congrats to me actually, my only respect to government agencies is that through my lengthy post, I have not used a single vulgarity. Take it as my only form of respect. I suppose if you dare delete my post, you guys have secondary protocol.

[total-poll id=74473]
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

South Asian family suspected to have transmitted B1617 variant to airport worker, unlikely to be migrant workers

Yesterday (21 May), the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) and Changi…

若时光能倒流 杨莉明:最想知道客工群体感染何时开始

人力部长杨莉明,今午(25日)在《联合早报》主持的直播节目中,表示若时光能倒流,最想知道病毒什么时段开始在客工群体传播,那么或许阻断措施就能尽早开始,不是等到四月。 《联合早报》记者是在视频对谈中,询问回顾过去两个月,哪些措施可以做得更好或有改善空间,以及在大型客工宿舍和医疗上的探讨。 对此,杨莉明表示“我个人也在反复思考,尤其在夜深人静的时候。” 她说,疫情一开始初期,政府最担心的是从国外引进病毒,故此2月初期就要求回到新加坡的客工,需履行居家通知。但后来也要当心从世界各地返国的国人。 如果时光能倒流,她最希望知道病毒从哪个时段开始,感染已经侵入社区和客工群体。 ”如果当时病例已经开始扩散,我们或许推动阻断措施,不会等到四月。我个人估计,最起码可推前两周。” 她指出,从专家研究也得知客工之间感染不仅是宿舍问题,他们也有共同工作场所如建筑工地等,而工地中工友间共用工具也可能是传染渠道之一。而未落实阻断措施前,整个新加坡都还在活动,”我们又以什么理由要求客工留在宿舍别出来?毕竟他们还要出来工作。“ 疫情稳定后冀检讨客工待遇和住宿条件 她认为,宿舍里、工地和休闲场所落实的防疫措施,必须同时并行,才能阻断疫情扩散。 她也表示,待疫情稳定后,政府需全面检讨客工待遇和住宿条件,以及国家整体的医疗监测,负责任地面对问题。 杨莉明告知BBC:不完美惟尽力而为 早前,杨莉明在接受英国广播公司(BBC)采访时,也坦言“我们并不完美”(we’re…

香港今增43冠病确诊!狮城香港航空泡泡证实展延两周

香港今日新增43冠病确诊!有鉴于香港第四波疫情持续加重,香港商务及经济发展局长邱腾华今天(11月21日)召开记者会,证实将新加坡和香港两地的航空泡泡计划,延迟两周,12月初才公布起航日期。 他指双边政府商讨之后,延后两周是较负责任的安排。至于已购买了机票的乘客,航空公司也将会有所安排。 交通部长王乙康稍早前曾表示,计划实行首几天的航班将继续飞,若香港疫情恶化,计划很可能暂停。 他在脸书更新贴文,证实和邱腾华是在今天下午进一步讨论后,作出这项决定。 他称,理解参与计划的旅客会有多失望和沮丧,但从公共卫生的角度出发,这是最好的安排。 民航局今早文告称,香港过去七天日均无关联病例为2.14例。 根据两地协议,若新加坡或香港一周的无关联冠病确诊病例每日平均超过五起,“航空泡泡”将暂停至少两周,直至每日平均少于五起才会恢复。 本月20日,香港新增了26例确诊,是三个月以来的单日确诊最高记录,21例都是本土感染,涉及德士司机、家庭主妇、酒店度宅假和跳舞群组等,一些感染源头不明 然而,仅今日(21日)香港就新增43例确诊,其中多达36起属本土感染,包括13例源头不明的病例。