Government Awarding of COVID-19 contracts to Cronies

[Dent]

My point being that the MSM are making out that this is a unique story and not using any context to the events.

First of all, who is claiming that this is "unique", and what difference does it make whether is is "unique" anyway? Why does something have to be "unique" before it can be a legitimate cause for concern?

Abhorrent as it may be to most of us, it’s not at all surprising that some people made a lot of money out of the chaos and desperation.

Again, what does whether something is "surprising" have to do with whether it is a cause for concern?

 

[Darandio]

Seems the response from Boris today was that he was 'proud' of the way these contracts were handled. I expect we'll all be told to move on now and forget about it.

 

[PHILIPE]

And yet another one reported by the Sun:

www.thesun.co.uk/news/13313328/matt-hancock-pub-landlord-covid-test-deal/

MATT Hancock's old pub landlord won a deal worth a reported £30million to supply the NHS with tens of millions of test tubes for coronavirus checks after sending the health secretary a personal WhatsApp message.
Alex Bourne, 36, had no previous experience in making medical supplies, but got to know Mr Hancock while running the Cock Inn in Thurlow, West Suffolk.
MATT Hancock's old pub landlord won a deal worth a reported £30million to supply the NHS with tens of millions of test tubes for coronavirus checks after sending the health secretary a personal WhatsApp message.

Alex Bourne, 36, had no previous experience in making medical supplies, but got to know Mr Hancock while running the Cock Inn in Thurlow, West Suffolk.

 

[Cowley]

And yet another one reported by the Sun:

www.thesun.co.uk/news/13313328/matt-hancock-pub-landlord-covid-test-deal/

That’s so blatant that it’s almost funny...

 

[david1212]

To quote my father ' as straight as a corkscrew '

 

[johnnychips]

It’s strange: I could describe a lot of politicians with adjectives like ‘self-serving’, ‘manipulative’, ‘populist’ and so on, but Matt Hancock has genuinely appeared to me as ‘thick’ so it’s not really his fault. I was absolutely surprised to find he had a degree from Oxford.

 

[Bantamzen]

It’s strange: I could describe a lot of politicians with adjectives like ‘self-serving’, ‘manipulative’, ‘populist’ and so on, but Matt Hancock has genuinely appeared to me as ‘thick’ so it’s not really his fault. I was absolutely surprised to find he had a degree from Oxford.

He probably bought it off someone....

 

[PHILIPE]

I noticed on the BBC COVID brief this evening led by Matt Hancock that he mentioned the excellent work done by Dido Harding.

 

[7 Ingleborough]

MSM at it again.
Today's story about intermediaries earning megabucks for the supply of PPE isn't unique to the UK.
Most western governments were involved in an almighty, desperate scramble to source PPE at the beginning of the pandemic.
They were all trying to obtain supplies through any channel that could deliver and that would have involved a lot of complex and sometimes shady business dealings, beyond the horizon of the end customer.

It's not as if there were many alternatives. How else were the various governments going to get their hands on the amount of PPE needed?
Ripe ground for dozens of trade intermediaries who were well connected and able to secure supplies before the governments realised what was happening.
There have been numerous stories across Europe about faulty or substandard PPE, or secured supplies being diverted to other customers etc.
Whether we approve or not, many slick operators were going to make a lot of money out of these tragic events.

We had PPE, thousands and thousands of containers full of it on military bases across the UK, but in 2010 the process of privatising the National Strategic Pandemic Reserve began, and the rot set in. Private contracts taking precedence over public safety.
Somebody will try and say Trenitalia, DB, NS and SNCF are Tory donors next, just because they have won rail franchises.
Or that Hitachi, Siemens and Alstom are Boris's "mates" for winning rolling stock contracts.
There may be underhand dealing somewhere, but that's why we have regulators, ombudsmen and MPs to hold them to account until the next election.
I supposed Labour never gave in to union pressure, at all? Plenty of MPs are sponsored by unions.
We are not run by a cleptocracy (yet).

By declaring these as emergency contracts the Govt. avoids scrutiny provided the contract is below a certain level. Given the large number of contracts are for around £108m, I suggest that scrutiny level is around £110m.

My point being that the MSM are making out that this is a unique story and not using any context to the events.


No irony any I’m not defending any behaviour, as there’s nothing to defend.
Worldwide shortages of supplies of PPE were well reported.
It was a desperate time for almost every nation and all those nations, including the U.K., were (and still are) just customers at the end of the day and had to pay the price, or go without.
The only way to urgently obtain enough supplies was on the international markets, using international traders and intermediaries. There were no other sources available. All well reported at the time across international press.

Abhorrent as it may be to most of us, it’s not at all surprising that some people made a lot of money out of the chaos and desperation.
Some clown mentioned on the radio this morning that there should have been competitive tendering. What, wait 6 months or more for urgently needed PPE?

Nothing to defend? The UK was probably among the best prepared nations for such an event with a properly equipped and managed National Strategic Pandemic Reserve on 15 military sites across the UK. My involvement was with the one at Bicester. But after nearly 20 years of success tested in various exercises, it was decided to privatise it. DHL, followed by Movianto. PPE was lost, contaminated, and allowed to go out of date rather than renewed. It was then the Govt. decided to lower the requirement, in effect lying to medical and care staff as to it's importance, and as the deaths mounted, the panic buying began.

 

[kristiang85]

The New York Times has done a special feature on this. It is long, and involves lots of graphics, so it's better to click the link and see it in it's entirety.

Waste, Negligence and Cronyism: Inside Britain’s Pandemic Spending (Published 2020)

In the desperate scramble for protective gear and other equipment, political insiders reaped billions.

www.nytimes.com

But here's the introduction:

When the pandemic exploded in March, British officials embarked on a desperate scramble to procure the personal protective equipment, ventilators, coronavirus tests and other supplies critical to containing the surge. In the months following those fevered days, the government handed out thousands of contracts to fight the virus, some of them in a secretive “V.I.P. lane” to a select few companies with connections to the governing Conservative Party.

To shine a light on one of the greatest spending sprees in Britain’s postwar era, The New York Times analyzed a large segment of it, the roughly 1,200 central government contracts that have been made public, together worth nearly $22 billion. Of that, about $11 billion went to companies either run by friends and associates of politicians in the Conservative Party, or with no prior experience or a history of controversy. Meanwhile, smaller firms without political clout got nowhere.

“The government had license to act fast because it was a pandemic, but we didn’t give them permission to act fast and loose with public money,” said Meg Hillier, a lawmaker with the opposition Labour Party and chair of the powerful Public Accounts Committee. “We’re talking billions of pounds, and it’s quite right that we ask questions about how that money was spent.”

The procurement system was cobbled together during a meeting of anxious bureaucrats in late March, and a wealthy former investment banker and Conservative Party grandee, Lord Paul Deighton, was later tapped to act as the government’s czar for personal protective equipment.

Eight months on, Lord Deighton has helped the government award billions of dollars in contracts –– including hundreds of millions to several companies where he has financial interests or personal connections.

The contracts that have been made public are only a part of the total. Citing the urgency of the pandemic, the government cast aside the usual transparency rules and awarded contracts worth billions of dollars without competitive bidding. To date, just over half of all of the contracts awarded in the first seven months remain concealed from the public, according to the National Audit Office, a watchdog agency.

 

[PHILIPE]

The New York Times has done a special feature on this. It is long, and involves lots of graphics, so it's better to click the link and see it in it's entirety.

Waste, Negligence and Cronyism: Inside Britain’s Pandemic Spending (Published 2020)

In the desperate scramble for protective gear and other equipment, political insiders reaped billions.

www.nytimes.com

But here's the introduction:

British MANUFACTURING companies were queuing up to offer their assistance but they were ignored. It wasn't just equipment provision but personal appointments picked out cronies as well such as a notable one who messed up at TalkTalk. Boris was asked about an Inquiry into the handling of the pandemic earlier in the crisis so that lessons could be learnt but he said that there would be one but not practical at that time. There never will be one if Boris has his way because he and his party would be found wanting.

 

[C J Snarzell]

I would say Serco are probably the most inept company to have any involvement in the Covid operations. One of my distant family members worked in a prison support role at a Serco run jail up until a couple of years ago. He was on barely more than minimum wage doing a quite stressful job coming into contact with some pretty dangerous inmates. He jumped ship and fortunately landed a decent job working for a local authority outreach programme. He said to me Serco is just plain rotten to the core and stands firm that some prisons in the UK should never have been privatised.

CJ

 

[Yew]

I would say Serco are probably the most inept company to have any involvement in the Covid operations. One of my distant family members worked in a prison support role at a Serco run jail up until a couple of years ago. He was on barely more than minimum wage doing a quite stressful job coming into contact with some pretty dangerous inmates. He jumped ship and fortunately landed a decent job working for a local authority outreach programme. He said to me Serco is just plain rotten to the core and stands firm that some prisons in the UK should never have been privatised.

CJ

At least they're consistent!

 

[brad465]

I think this whole quarantine hotel row is proof that Tory donors don't own hotel chains (given how much time they're taking trying to find suitable ones), as they might have utilised this concept much quicker otherwise.

 

[XAM2175]

Earlier this afternoon:

Government to spend up to £600,000 defending Covid contract

Good Law Project is challenging award of contract to firm run by associates of Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings

www.theguardian.com

The government has been criticised for spending up to £600,000 defending a legal challenge against its award of a contract to a company run by long-term associates of Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings.

The estimated costs could exceed the £550,000 the government spent on the contract with the company, Public First, to conduct focus groups on its Covid-19 messaging.

Public First is a policy and research company run by James Frayne and Rachel Wolf, a married couple who have both previously worked with Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, and Cummings, who was the prime minister’s chief adviser when the contract was agreed last March.

The contract was not put out to competitive tender, under emergency regulations that waived normal procurement procedures due to the pandemic.

 

[PHILIPE]

I won't quote anything in particular but just say in general that the proverbial is now starting to hit the fan so far as Mutt Hancock and his pals are concerned.

 

[SteveM70]

I won't quote anything in particular but just say in general that the proverbial is now starting to hit the fan so far as Mutt Hancock and his pals are concerned.

Do you honestly think they’ll be held to account?

 

[VauxhallandI]

His smarmy little face on Andrew Marr this morning had my blood boiling.

We had an NAO report and if our Senior management team responded like he has then th place would go pop.

 

[brad465]

Do you honestly think they’ll be held to account?

The media as a whole did a good job sensationalising the Harry and Meghan saga in its place for sure.

On a separate note the specific contract that went to a believed friend of Hancock is now being investigated by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), although I'm not sure what, if any consequences it's allowed to impose in the event of of finding wrongdoing:

Coronavirus: Medical regulator investigates £30m Covid contract firm

Hinpack, which makes test tubes, is run by the former landlord of a pub near Matt Hancock's old home.

www.bbc.co.uk

A firm is being investigated by the UK medical regulator after it was awarded a £30m contract during the pandemic.

Alex Bourne - who used to run a pub near Matt Hancock's old constituency home in West Suffolk - made vials for Covid testing through his firm Hinpack, which had no history of medical goods.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has confirmed it is now investigating the company.

Mr Hancock has previously said he had nothing to do with the contract.

The MHRA said it took "all reports of non-compliance very seriously".

A Department of Health spokesman said early in the UK's epidemic it asked "suppliers in multiple industries" to help to support the national effort to secure products needed for Covid tests.

All suppliers must pass through "a rigorous regulatory and validations process" to ensure they meet quality standards, he said.

"We continue to ensure all contracts are awarded in line with procurement regulations and transparency guidelines," he added.

 

[sheff1]

I won't quote anything in particular but just say in general that the proverbial is now starting to hit the fan so far as Mutt Hancock and his pals are concerned.

And Hancock has the gall to say that breaking the law "was the right thing to do" confirming (not that confirmation was needed) that he believes the law is for the plebs to follow, not him or his cronies.

In response Starmer says he will not call for Hancock to resign over the court ruling, as it was "not what the public really want to see". I do not know what 'public' he asked but I could easily point him in the direction of quite a few who certainly would like to see Hancock resign.

 

[Crossover]

I do not know what 'public' he asked but I could easily point him in the direction of quite a few who certainly would like to see Hancock resign.

Likewise!

 

[Cowley]

Likewise!

Yep. He just oozes incompetence to me and I’m sick of the sight of his floundering personally.
I know that this would have been impossibly difficult for anyone that had his role, but even so...

 

[kez19]

And Hancock has the gall to say that breaking the law "was the right thing to do" confirming (not that confirmation was needed) that he believes the law is for the plebs to follow, not him or his cronies.

In response Starmer says he will not call for Hancock to resign over the court ruling, as it was "not what the public really want to see". I do not know what 'public' he asked but I could easily point him in the direction of quite a few who certainly would like to see Hancock resign.

I thought the opposition parties are meant to be well.... opposition and ripping Hancock to pieces on this?, seems rather "off" to me or are the opposition parties playing a part in this too? (I bet that could be next.. all is just opinion)

 

[gnolife]

Yep. He just oozes incompetence to me and I’m sick of the sight of his floundering personally.
I know that this would have been impossibly difficult for anyone that had his role, but even so...

Is that referring to Starmer or Hancock?

 

[VauxhallandI]

You will also be unsurprised to hear that in the proposals for the new procurement rules for the UK the government want to limited the damages available when contracts are appointed outside of the rules

 

[greyman42]

In response Starmer says he will not call for Hancock to resign over the court ruling, as it was "not what the public really want to see". I do not know what 'public' he asked but I could easily point him in the direction of quite a few who certainly would like to see Hancock resign.

Correct. Starmer was interviewed on LBC radio this morning and it actually sounded like he was defending Hancock.

 

[kristiang85]

For all his faults, at least Corbyn asked Johnson if he was going to replace Hancock.

Starmer just danced around the issue, as usual.

 

[PHILIPE]

For all his faults, at least Corbyn asked Johnson if he was going to replace Hancock.

Starmer just danced around the issue, as usual.

Corby got the same response as the other 4 or 5 people who asked any questions about PPE Procurement but didn't, as expected, get an answer. Standard reply - Had to be done quickly..

 

[kristiang85]

Corby got the same response as the other 4 or 5 people who asked any questions about PPE Procurement but didn't, as expected, get an answer. Standard reply - Had to be done quickly..

Oh yes, indeed. It was quite infuriating that any question that didn't agree with Johnson didn't get an answer at all. But that's his modus operandi (as with most politicians, to be fair).

But ultimately it just meant the whole Q&A was a waste of time. At least it all goes on record.

 

[PHILIPE]

​

High court to rule on legality of Covid contracts for PM's 'chums'​

Claims that Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock acted unlawfully by appointing their “chums” to three top jobs in the fight against Covid-19 – without opening the processes to competition – are to be the subject of an official legal challenge in the high court.

Campaigners won an initial victory in the case last Thursday, when Mr Justice Swift granted their applications for a judicial review. In court, they will argue that the prime minister and the health secretary broke the rules and acted in a discriminatory way, running a “chumocracy” at the top of government.

The case, brought jointly by the Runnymede Trust, the UK’s leading race equality thinktank, and the Good Law Project, concerns three crucial appointments made at the height of the Covid-19 crisis. These were Dido Harding, the Tory peer, as the head of NHS Test and Trace, Kate Bingham as the head of the UK’s vaccine task force, and Mike Coupe as director of testing at NHS Test and Trace.

While the government is likely to say it made the appointments in great haste at time of national emergency, the claimants will counter that all three were installed at least partly because of their Tory connections, and not solely on merit.

Harding and Bingham are both married to Conservative MPs while Coupe is a former chief executive of Sainsbury’s, and was a colleague of Harding’s at the supermarket chain.

At the heart of the claimants’ case is the charge that the posts were not advertised in the way they normally are in the public sector, so those with wide experience in the field were not able to put themselves forward.

They also point out that because all are unpaid positions, the government was guilty of indirectly discriminating against others outside the well-off, predominantly white group from which the three were chosen.

In a separate case brought by the Good Law Project, the high court ruled last month that Hancock had acted unlawfully by failing to publish multibillion-pound Covid-19 government contracts within the 30-day period required by law.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/28/high-court-to-rule-on-legality-of-covid-contracts-for-pms-chums?

This is an extract from the Guardian which states how the Government have been taken to court in relation to the awarding of contracts and personal appointments.