Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
mikeymo
Posts: 1163
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby mikeymo » 19 Jun 2020, 10:48am

philg wrote:I'll withhold my righteous indignation pending answers to these questions:

Did they supply the PPE to the contract spec?
Was it supplied on time?
What were the payment terms - upfront or staged to shipment?

If all above satisfactory (admittedly unlikely but innocent until.... etc) then unlikely to trouble most (impartial) peeps I would think.

From the FT 15.06

The Department of Health and Social Care declined to comment.

Dan England, co-founder of PestFix, said it had won the contract because it was small enough to be “dynamic” and had made a competitively priced commercial offer.
“We are a success story. We have not been sitting around on social media casting around for equipment; we had a thriving supply chain with China before the contract. We have nearly fulfilled our NHS contract and supplied over 67m pieces of equipment.”


Wait, what? You mean, they did what they were meant to do?

Of course, only having company assets of £18,000 means they are obviously fly-by-night spivs. The contract should have been given to somebody like Johnson & Johnson. Oh wait, no, that wouldn't work either - "PPE contract awarded to huge American mutlinational, big pharma wins again" etc. etc.

I wonder what the right size is for a company to supply PPE and get the approval of this forums.
Hilarious, pithy, or philosophical signature.

reohn2
Posts: 39427
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby reohn2 » 19 Jun 2020, 11:07am

mikeymo wrote: ....I wonder what the right size is for a company to supply PPE and get the approval of this forums.

Hang on,there's no proof they have fulfilled their contractual obligations just according to the company director claiming to have supplied 67m(million.?)pieces of equipement(I'm assuming they're PPE pieces).

Then there's the small point about them being awarded the contract without anyone else even having a chance to tender,or do you think that's normal practice for government?
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

mikeymo
Posts: 1163
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby mikeymo » 19 Jun 2020, 11:12am

kwackers wrote:I'm pretty sure I could have found someone in China prepared to do me a deal on facemasks - especially with 108 million to play with.


But you didn't. And they did.
Hilarious, pithy, or philosophical signature.

reohn2
Posts: 39427
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby reohn2 » 19 Jun 2020, 11:28am

Should we perhaps also remember that the Tory government of 2016(that the present PM was a member of)buried the Cygnus report which among other things hilighted that the UK was short of PPE and in the light that the biggest threat to the health of the nation was a Pandemic due to other Covid pandemics circulating at the time.
I understend that some scientists believe the current C19 pandemic begun as early as August 2019.
It was also down played by the current government as no real threat as late as late February,we were still allowing flights in without any restrictions from all over the globe as late as mid May.
The care home debacle.
The the Turkey PPE debacle.
The dithering and U turns on restrictions to public movement and lockdown.
Cummingsgate.

IMO not a government that you'd call a save pair of hands.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

mikeymo
Posts: 1163
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby mikeymo » 19 Jun 2020, 11:38am

reohn2 wrote:
mikeymo wrote: ....I wonder what the right size is for a company to supply PPE and get the approval of this forums.

Hang on,there's no proof they have fulfilled their contractual obligations just according to the company director claiming to have supplied 67m(million.?)pieces of equipement(I'm assuming they're PPE pieces).

Then there's the small point about them being awarded the contract without anyone else even having a chance to tender,or do you think that's normal practice for government?


Yes, you are absolutely correct. It is a complete disgrace.
Hilarious, pithy, or philosophical signature.

reohn2
Posts: 39427
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby reohn2 » 19 Jun 2020, 11:42am

mikeymo wrote:
reohn2 wrote:
mikeymo wrote: ....I wonder what the right size is for a company to supply PPE and get the approval of this forums.

Hang on,there's no proof they have fulfilled their contractual obligations just according to the company director claiming to have supplied 67m(million.?)pieces of equipement(I'm assuming they're PPE pieces).

Then there's the small point about them being awarded the contract without anyone else even having a chance to tender,or do you think that's normal practice for government?


Yes, you are absolutely correct. It is a complete disgrace.

Glad you agree :)
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

User avatar
philg
Posts: 509
Joined: 7 May 2009, 12:13pm
Location: Porlock, Somerset

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby philg » 19 Jun 2020, 11:52am

reohn2 wrote:Hang on,there's no proof they have fulfilled their contractual obligations

And there is no proof that they didn't, hence my point about withholding judgement pending - you might have missed that?

reohn2 wrote:Then there's the small point about them being awarded the contract without anyone else even having a chance to tender,or do you think that's normal practice for government?

ISTR there was some sort of urgent panic about PPE shortages at the time?

Perhaps they should have gone through the channels for tendering with delivery (probably in December) leading to even more shortages.
That might of course suit those keen for even more bitching I guess? YMMV

mikeymo
Posts: 1163
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby mikeymo » 19 Jun 2020, 1:23pm

philg wrote:
reohn2 wrote:That might of course suit those keen for even more bitching I guess? YMMV


For some people it's a fixed posture.
Hilarious, pithy, or philosophical signature.

reohn2
Posts: 39427
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby reohn2 » 19 Jun 2020, 1:34pm

philg wrote:
reohn2 wrote:Hang on,there's no proof they have fulfilled their contractual obligations

And there is no proof that they didn't, hence my point about withholding judgement pending - you might have missed that?

You'll have to forgive me but with a track record over a number of years(10)successive Tory governments have been suspect in their economy with the truth.

reohn2 wrote:Then there's the small point about them being awarded the contract without anyone else even having a chance to tender,or do you think that's normal practice for government?

ISTR there was some sort of urgent panic about PPE shortages at the time?

Perhaps they should have gone through the channels for tendering with delivery (probably in December) leading to even more shortages.
That might of course suit those keen for even more bitching I guess? YMMV

Perhaps they might have gone to a company with a good track in producing PPE in the UK,or even replenished stocks of PPE before the pandemic as the Cygnus report hilighted the need instead of sweeping it under the carpet and hoping it would go away!
When the NHS were running really short on PPE there were numerous reports of small companies producing PPE items face shields,masks and gowns that contacted the government but heard nothing back from them whilst having to furlough their workforce.

My 'bitching' about the government isn't unfounded,see my previous post on a few issues they've been totally inept and incompentent in handling.
TBH I don't think anyone gets it right all the time,and if I'm proved wrong in this instance I'll apologise,but looking at the failures of the present and previous governments since 2010 have been monumental in their ineptitude at governing this country,with the past six months being one debacle after another.
YVMV.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

reohn2
Posts: 39427
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby reohn2 » 19 Jun 2020, 1:36pm

mikeymo wrote:
philg wrote:
reohn2 wrote:That might of course suit those keen for even more bitching I guess? YMMV


For some people it's a fixed posture.


In some cases it's a posture borne out of TRUTH!
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

mikeymo
Posts: 1163
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby mikeymo » 19 Jun 2020, 1:39pm

reohn2 wrote:
mikeymo wrote:
philg wrote:


For some people it's a fixed posture.


In some cases it's a posture borne out of TRUTH!


Yes indeed. And truth is even more truer when it's in CAPITALS. WITH EXCLAMATION MARKS!!
Hilarious, pithy, or philosophical signature.

reohn2
Posts: 39427
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby reohn2 » 19 Jun 2020, 1:46pm

mikeymo wrote:
reohn2 wrote:
mikeymo wrote:
For some people it's a fixed posture.


In some cases it's a posture borne out of TRUTH!


Yes indeed. And truth is even more truer when it's in CAPITALS. WITH EXCLAMATION MARKS!!

TOO RIGHT :D
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

User avatar
philg
Posts: 509
Joined: 7 May 2009, 12:13pm
Location: Porlock, Somerset

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby philg » 19 Jun 2020, 2:32pm

There are no facts, only interpretations
Nietzsche

User avatar
philg
Posts: 509
Joined: 7 May 2009, 12:13pm
Location: Porlock, Somerset

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby philg » 19 Jun 2020, 2:40pm

reohn2 wrote:When the NHS were running really short on PPE there were numerous reports of small companies producing PPE items face shields,masks and gowns that contacted the government but heard nothing back from them whilst having to furlough their workforce.


Surely this was the initial responsibility of PHE?
As was the failure to use private and academic labs for CV19 testing?

The fault of the government was to create an inflexible bureaucratic dinsoaur in 2012 unable to cope with a novel, though entirely predictable, emergency

Wikipedia
Public Health England (PHE) is an executive agency of the Department of Health and Social Care in the United Kingdom that began operating on 1 April 2013. Its formation came as a result of reorganisation of the National Health Service (NHS) in England outlined in the Health and Social Care Act 2012. It took on the role of the Health Protection Agency, the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse and a number of other health bodies.It is an executive agency of the DHSC, and a distinct delivery organisation with operational autonomy.

reohn2 wrote:Perhaps they might have gone to a company with a good track in producing PPE in the UK

Do you know that they didn't then?

I await an independent review of this mess once it is finally over.

reohn2
Posts: 39427
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Remember the ferry contract given to the company without ships?

Postby reohn2 » 19 Jun 2020, 3:06pm

philg wrote:
reohn2 wrote:When the NHS were running really short on PPE there were numerous reports of small companies producing PPE items face shields,masks and gowns that contacted the government but heard nothing back from them whilst having to furlough their workforce.


Surely this was the initial responsibility of PHE?
As was the failure to use private and academic labs for CV19 testing?

The fault of the government was to create an inflexible bureaucratic dinsoaur in 2012 unable to cope with a novel, though entirely predictable, emergency

Wikipedia
Public Health England (PHE) is an executive agency of the Department of Health and Social Care in the United Kingdom that began operating on 1 April 2013. Its formation came as a result of reorganisation of the National Health Service (NHS) in England outlined in the Health and Social Care Act 2012. It took on the role of the Health Protection Agency, the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse and a number of other health bodies.It is an executive agency of the DHSC, and a distinct delivery organisation with operational autonomy.

Thank you so it is the Tory governments fault then?

reohn2 wrote:Perhaps they might have gone to a company with a good track in producing PPE in the UK

Do you know that they didn't then?

TBH no but do you know they did?
I'm merely illustrating what seems to be a dodgy contract by a government not noted for it's honesty and openness as per their ferries debacle,and many more...

I await an independent review of this mess once it is finally over.

Me too,but like the Cygnus report(buried),the Russia report(buried) and the proposed racial inquiry,which will be the third one,I won't be holding my breath on it pointing any fingers at government failings :?
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.