Print

Mail

wiki links

Museum accused of bid-rigging

"We did everything according to the law and welcome any investigation."

Yuan Kuo-chuan, director of Taipei's Astronomical Museum

New Party City Councilor Chin Li-fang (秦儷舫) yesterday accused the Taipei Astronomical Museum (台北市立天文科學教育館) and the Central Trust of China (中信局) of bid rigging in the museum's NT$420 million construction project for a cosmic adventure facility.

Despite the museum's denial, Chin requested the city's Department of Anti-Corruption (政風處) conduct an investigation into whether the museum and the trust company had violated the Government Procurement Act (政府採購法).

The Government Procurement Act, which went into effect in May last year, stipulates that co-bidding is allowed only under three circumstances: when the product is patented or requires special skills to manufacture, when the bidder lacks competitiveness and needs the other partner to strengthen it, and when the authorizing party gives its consent.

Chin yesterday told reporters at a press conference at the City Council that there were three flaws in the bidding process.

"First of all, both the museum and the Central Trust of China -- which coordinated the bidding commissioned by the museum -- violated the Government Procurement Act by allowing one of the co-bidders -- Ride & Show Engineering Inc -- to enter the tender as the partner of three different bidders," Chin said.

The third and final tender of the project, which took place on Nov. 8 this year, attracted five groups of bidders. Ride & Show was a co-bidder to three of them -- the Taiwan-based Modern Design Group (今日美術建築股份有限公司), the Malaysia-based Pico International, and the Netherlands-based Gielissen Interior & Exhibitions.

"I'm curious to know why co-bidding was allowed, since the construction of the project doesn't require any special skills, nor is it patented," Chin said.

She also questioned the dubious relationship between the designing company that outlined the contract for the project and the winning bidder.

"I cannot help but suspect that the system was tailor-made by the designer -- the US-based KSA Design International -- to fit the bidder that won the contract -- Ride & Show -- because they're affiliated companies," Chin said.

Finally, she questioned the identity of the bidding examiner and his relationship to the company that won the contract.

Showing a photocopy of a business card, Chin pointed out that the vice president of the designing company -- John March -- was not only the examiner of the bidders but also the marketing and sales CEO of Ride & Show.

The Government Procurement Act specifies that the system designer, tender document drafter and bidding examiner are not allowed to participate in the tendering process.

Despite Chin's accusations, museum Director Yuan Kuo-chuan (阮國全) proclaimed the museum's innocence.

"We didn't violate the Government Procurement Act, nor did we favor any particular bidder," Yuan said. "We did everything according to the law and welcome any investigation."

According to Yuan, the museum had obtained approval from the Bureau of Education, regarding the co-bidders.

In addition, Yuan said they were not aware of the relationship between the designing company and the company that won the contract until last Saturday, when one of the Taiwanese bidders who participated in the second bidding complained about it to Chin.
This story has been viewed 3395 times.