SINGAPORE — Taking the stand for the first time on Thursday (Oct 25) at the ongoing trial for two multi-million-dollar lawsuits, Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh and Senior Counsel Davinder Singh tussled over what it means to be a responsible town councillor.

Cross-examined by the lawyer representing Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council (PRPTC), Mr Pritam Singh said that a responsible town councillor needs to understand the reality of the politicised town council space in Singapore and act accordingly.

This was why he did not question the “strategic direction” of other party leaders to go down a “specific route” after CPG Facilities Management — which works for a number of town councils run by the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) — was dismissed as the managing agent for the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) after WP won the Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC) in the 2011 General Election.

“The responsible town councillor needs to understand the difference between his town council, PAP town councils, and the reality of the politicised town council space in Singapore,” he told the court.

“After (going) through that process, they would understand why AHTC, as the first opposition GRC, had to take the decisions it (did).”

Mr Davinder Singh had asked the WP chief if a responsible town councillor would apply his mind to the implications of waiving a tender for a managing agent.

A waiver would affect vendors’ views of standing a chance to clinch a contract with AHTC under WP, the lawyer said.

Following the 2011 General Election, Mr Pritam Singh, party chairman Sylvia Lim, former party chief Low Thia Khiang and other town councillors decided to waive a tender and appoint FM Services and Solutions (FMSS), a new entity set up by party supporters, to take over from CPG.

Mr Pritam Singh said that the town council’s decision was “consistent with the political culture in Singapore”. The late founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew had warned Aljunied  GRC’s voters in 2011 that they will have five years to “repent” should they vote in the WP team, he added. Under those “uncertain” circumstances, he felt that a waiver of tender for the appointment of FMSS was allowed.

Mr Pritam Singh was testifying after a five-day cross-examination of Ms Lim wrapped up the day before. Both are among eight defendants sued by PRPTC and an independent panel acting on behalf of AHTC, which want them to account for alleged improper payments made to FMSS and other third-party service providers. The trial is into its 15th day.

MANAGING AGENT NEEDED, BUT AHTC RECEIVED NO BIDS

Asked if it was a matter of responsibility and duty for WP members to first consider directly managing AHTC since there would be substantial cost savings, Mr Pritam Singh said it would have been moot because town councillors from Hougang Town Council (which merged with Aljunied Town Council), made up the nucleus of appointed councillors at the newly formed AHTC.

“They would have known that the need to proceed with the managing agent model would have been more compelling. They would have intuitively understood that in Hougang, Mr Low had to do everything on his own,” he said, referring to the former WP chief.

However, Mr Davinder Singh noted that AHTC received no bids in its managing agent tender in 2012 because of the strong message sent to other managing agents — CPG, EM Services and Cushman & Wakefield — that they would not stand a chance against FMSS.

“What you are doing is effectively telling the world, ‘Don’t bother to come and try and get the contract from us. We will go on our own’,” the lawyer added.

Mr Davinder Singh also said that if Mr Pritam Singh felt there were good grounds for a waiver of tender, it would have been the “responsible thing” to do to lock in FMSS for three years, since it was ready to keep to the rates charged by CPG.

This would save AHTC from price negotiations, but instead the waiver of tender applied for just a year.

Disagreeing, Mr Pritam Singh said that since FMSS was willing to go with the prevailing rates of CPG, that had given him the “comfort” that nothing was done in the “shadow of darkness” to benefit FMSS.

Furthermore, he and his elected WP members were “labouring under” a need to “take over fast, stabilise operations, then move forward”, so as to avoid any disruption in services to residents, he added.

Mr Pritam Singh felt it was also a “better idea” to call a tender after a year, so that other players could stand a chance to bid. “The market has money to make from the managing agent contract (and so) they have to make the business calculation: ‘Do we go in knowing that it is an opposition’s town council?’”

DOING WHAT WAS DONE BY PAP-RUN TOWN COUNCILS

Mr Pritam Singh, who has been chairman of AHTC’s tenders and contracts committee from July 2012, was also cross-examined on his role in appointing a costlier consultant for seven construction projects, resulting in the town council having to pay close to S$2.8 million more than it should.

The chosen firm, LST Architects, was selected by FMSS, he testified.

Asked if the decision could have been done by AHTC itself in retrospect, he said that the town council was doing what had been done by Aljunied Town Council before: To call a tender for a panel and thereby have the managing agent appoint a consultant from the panel considering “relevant factors”.

AHTC thus had a panel made of LST Architects and Design Metabolists — the only two firms to submit tender bids — to provide architectural consultancy services.

He then left FMSS to pick the right consultant for the job as it would “be in the best position to understand”.

FMSS would, for instance, know the consultants’ schedules better, and whether a particular firm should be awarded a project based the length of works required, he added.

Mr Davinder Singh, though, pointed out that there was a “last step” which was not done: How town councillors had to eventually “satisfy” themselves that FMSS’ recommendation is the best party for the job.

He added that the town councillors did not follow the Town Council Financial Rules because they had assumed that “someone else” had done it that way and it would be right.

Disagreeing, Mr Pritam Singh said that town councillors should be given “flexibility” and “leeway” to delegate duties to individuals and appoint the right consultant as it deems fit.

Mr Davinder Singh then said: “If what you say is correct, then every tender process can be done in a way where decisions of rules expected of town councillors can be delegated.”

DID NOT ASK QUESTIONS

On Thursday, long-time Hougang resident volunteer Kenneth Foo Seck Guan, who was appointed a town councillor of AHTC on May 27, 2011, also took the stand as a defence witness.

The 41-year-old admitted that he did not ask any questions or make any clarifications with regards to FMSS’ appointment, and Mr Davinder Singh charged that he was “prepared to go along unquestioningly”.

Mr Foo explained that he evaluated the situation “independently” and agreed with AHTC’s leaders that it was too short a time frame to call for a tender. He assessed, too, that the elected MPs would have given “deep thought” to the matter.

The deputy director of community engagement from the Singapore Cancer Society added: “Based on my own experience from (working in an) organisation, tenders need two to three months or more… Some may stretch up to four months. I believe (timing) is a critical thing.”

Asked if he was contented to follow the lead of the elected MPs, he said he “ought to” take their lead and was prepared to go along with their decision to ensure a smooth transition.

The cross-examination of Mr Foo continues next Monday.