Photo from Esplanade.com

In the report released by the Auditor-General’s office on July 26, it is made known that the National Arts Council (NAC) which falls under the governance of Ministry of Community, Culture and Youth (MCCY) paid a considerable sum of consultation fees,$0.41 million on a bin centre that cost $0.47 million, without conducting a cost assessment to ascertain the reasonableness of the fee quoted.

In its audit for Financial Year 2015/2016, AGO carried out test checks on six contracts (total contract value of $139.17 million) for the redevelopment of Victoria Theatre and Victoria Concert Hall (VT/VCH) costing $142.86 million, and found two lapses in the management of contract variations.

Inadequate assessment on the reasonableness of the consultancy fee

AGO stated that there had been inadequate assessment on the reasonableness of the consultancy fee of $0.41 million quoted for the construction of a bin centre; the fee was exceptionally high at 87.2 per cent of the construction cost ($0.47 million). Hence, there was no assurance that the fee paid by NAC was reasonable.

AGO observed that NAC had directly engaged the VT/VCH consultants to provide additional consultancy services (amounting to $0.41 million) for the construction of a bin centre, without first conducting a cost assessment to ascertain the reasonableness of the fee quoted.

AGO is of the view that the consultancy fee, at 87.2 per cent of the construction cost of $0.47 million for the bin centre, was exceptionally high.

Based on the terms of reference for this project, NAC was responsible for seeking approval from its tender board for the engagement of consultants. Thereafter, NAC would seek approval for the drawdown of funds from its supervising ministry.

The project was started when NAC was under the then Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts (MICA) and taken over by the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) following a restructuring of MICA. AGO noted that when NAC sought approval for the engagement of consultants, it did not carry out due diligence to assess the reasonableness of the consultancy fee.

AGO’s further checks revealed that when approval was sought for the drawdown of funds, the assessment by the then MICA of the consultancy fee quoted was not robust. Instead of using the norm methodology (that is, percentage of the quoted fee over the construction cost of the works) to assess the reasonableness of the fee, MICA had benchmarked the fee for the construction of the bin centre against other more complex projects. Had the norm been used, it would have been clear that the consultancy fee quoted for the bin centre was exceptionally high.

NAC explained that it had worked with its supervising ministry on this project and relied on the ministry’s cost assessment. Going forward, NAC would ensure that the relevant cost assessments are included when seeking approval from its approving authorities for procurement.

MCCY informed AGO that the construction of the bin centre for this project was more complex and required significantly more design expertise, technical consultancy services and effort to coordinate with multiple parties and these were the reasons for the fee to be above the norm.

It acknowledged that the cost assessment could have been more robust.

However, AGO noted that these reasons were not cited in the approval paper for the drawdown of funds and that there was also no documentary evidence that these reasons were indeed considered at the material point in time.

MCCY also informed AGO that it would adopt the norm for cost assessment of consultancy fees for future development projects and provide justifications where there are good grounds for deviation from the norm.

No approval sought for variations (costing $4 million) under two construction contracts 

AGO’s review of 164 variations (amounting to $8.73 million) under two construction contracts revealed 47 variations (estimated at $4 million) that were carried out before approvals were obtained.

The delays in obtaining approval ranged from 12 days to 3.5 years.

In addition, AGO noted that for 38 variations, the approval papers did not highlight that the works had already commenced or were already completed and that covering approvals were being sought. The large number of covering approvals indicated a breakdown in the controls put in place to ensure that variations were properly justified and approved before works commenced. The role of the approving authority was also undermined.

AGO states that the role of the approving authority must not be regarded as perfunctory. If alerted on a timely basis, the approving authority can implement cost control measures to ensure that financial prudence and discipline is maintained. It is therefore important to seek approval on a timely basis and to disclose pertinent facts for approving authorities to make informed decisions.

NAC explained that the lapses were due to the external consultants’ delays in submitting the requests for variation works for NAC’s approval.

Going forward, NAC would put in place measures to ensure that consultants comply with the requirement to obtain approvals before variation works are carried out.

AGO in its remarks on the lapse, noted to NAC that it is accountable for the public funds spent and is responsible for maintaining adequate oversight of the project, including its consultants.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

指责入公寓没登记 妇女堵电梯门“困”送货员

一名妇女宣称送货员没登记就进入公寓内、送货员开门时也撞到他,对此感到不满,便堵住电梯门口,不准前者上楼。 据脸书群组OurSingapore上流传一段标题为“违法拘禁”视频,只见一名身穿黑白条纹的妇女,挡在电梯门口,不让电梯关闭,而电梯内是一名身穿紫色上衣的送货员。 视频相信是送货员拍摄,他解释自己来送货,还有很多地方要去,却被一名妇女堵住了电梯门口,不让他送货。他随后就要求妇女让开,否则会报警处理。 妇女当时并不理会送货员,还阻止其他要使用电梯的送餐员,更要求附近邻居帮忙召唤保安。妇女表示自己是公寓的管理层,要求另一名送餐员登记后才进入公寓。 妇女在保安抵达后才讲述事情经过,原来妇女在打开公寓的门时,送货员急忙冲进来,甚至无视妇女的“等一下”要求,也没有登记。妇女随后要求保安为送餐员安排另一个走道,也要求保安报警,他“非常粗鲁,报警叫警察来”。 看着有三名男子被妇女招来,但都没有对他伸出援手,送货员开始感到焦虑,大喊妇女“很有权威”,不认为自己很粗鲁,更指责妇女的行为也非常粗鲁。 视频在各社媒上流传,不少网民都认为妇女有点“反应过度”,类似滥权阻碍他人工作和监禁他人。有者则认为妇女其实只是不甘愿自己被“当做”开门人员,却说得自己是为了社区和公寓安全,实在难以接受。 然而,也有网民表示,这视频只有片面之词,不能说谁对谁错,一切应该交由警方处理。

港歌手何韵诗联合国发言 两度被中国代表打断

香港歌手何韵诗在昨日出席联合国人权理事会会议,针对香港目前“反送中”集会事件发言,指一国两制“几近死亡”,呼吁人权理事会保护香港民众,将不尊重人权的中国出名。 他的发言过程遭中国代表打断两次,中代表强调香港特别行政区是中华人民共和国组成的部分,“这位所谓NGO代表”发言将香港与中国并列,挑战了一个中国原则,违反联合国宪章,并指她无端攻击一国两制,中方表示坚决反对。 人权理事会(UNHRC)自6月24日至7月12日在瑞士日内瓦召开会议。 何韵诗是受非政府人权组织“联合国观察”(UN Watch)和“人权基金会”(Human Rights Foundation)邀请下,于昨日在当地时间下午2时,在会议上以英语向联合国作出呼吁。 她先是说明香港政府推动的《逃犯条例》修法草案,而引爆港民大规模反送中运动。她以坚定有力的语调表示有200万人上街反对修改条例,因为逃犯条例拆毁了让香港免受中国政府干预的防火墙,且警方对民众发射橡胶子弹。 强调已有四人为运动轻生 她表示,“反送中”运动已有多人遭捕,4人轻生,在北京的阻挠下香港至今仍未有普选, 书商及民运份子入狱,中国不计代价破坏香港民主自由,而在联合国登记注册“中英联合声明”已经遭中国否认,香港政府被中国控制,一国两制几近死亡。 她询问联合国是否应有紧急决议保护香港民众,由于中国是不尊重人权的国家,人权理事会是否应把中国自人权理事会除名。…

Resident says postman left letterbox open in Jurong East, SingPost claims lock was faulty

A letter box was apparently found opened in Jurong East on 25…

工人党市镇会风波:质疑AHTC决策 发展部要求解释

针对工人党主席林瑞莲与议员刘程强继续参与市镇会所有财务事务,国家发展部表示质疑,并指出会持续关切。 今年10月,林瑞莲与刘程强被指涉及在监管市镇会时雇用市镇会前管理代理公司FM Solutions and Services(FMSS)以不诚实、有违受托责任,使阿裕尼-后港市镇会蒙受损失。 对此,副总理兼财政部长王瑞杰在上月初的国会上提出“诚信动议”,要求二人回避所有AHTC相关财务事项。 直至11月30日,周六阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会(Aljunied-Hougang Town Council ,简称AHTC)发表声明,经投票后,以17票对1票的表决,宣布主席林瑞莲与议员刘程强无需回避市镇会所有财务事务。 国家发展部表示,尽管高院已判决刘程强和林瑞莲违反受托责任,但阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会仍宣布二人无需回避市镇会的财务事务。 该部门于周三致函至阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会,要求阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会解释二人无需回避市镇会财务事务的原因。…