Bolton Wanderers Football Club Fan Forum for all BWFC Supporters.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Wandering Minds » Nepotism/Cronyism Watch

Nepotism/Cronyism Watch

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 11, 12, 13  Next

Go down  Message [Page 4 of 13]

91Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 07:27

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
@Sluffy wrote:

I've made nothing up - it's all there if anybody wants to go and look.

As for "properly paid attention to the thread" who the fuck do you think you are?

I post as I am in real life, I've never seen any point in pretending to be who I'm not, and I've always been been straight and honest - I've always put legality first - even you go on about how I'm always talking about the law and don't focus on the morals instead.

I'm the one who has been saying if there's any proof of wrong doing then take it to the police - I been saying it about Anderson to - about anyone up to no good!

So don't come the bullshit.

You've had a right mare on this thread over the last few days, clearly you don't like that hence the crap you've posted above.

Yet another one who clearly thinks the internet is somehow an important place not to lose face on - just like Wanderlust - but it isn't, it means absolutely nothing.

That says more about the person than anything else.

I couldn't give a fuck if people believe me or not but I certainly wouldn't attempt to wriggle and deceive in an attempt not to look wrong - why would anyone even do that???

What about your self-esteem?

I'd rather lose the argument than ever lose mine.


Sluffy, you keep going on about me having a mare or embarrassing myself, yet you admit what I said is correct. I’m no expert on contract law, I promise you that doesn’t embarrass me, but clearly I knew enough to get by on this topic.

And what argument is there to lose? You agree with me.

If you want to play games to keep yourself entertained that’s fine and I can ignore that. But I come on here to debate things I find interesting not have insults thrown at me. Nice to see you’ve wound your neck in, but don’t try that with me again please.

92Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 08:24

xmiles

xmiles
Jay Jay Okocha
Jay Jay Okocha
@Sluffy wrote:

I post as I am in real life, I've never seen any point in pretending to be who I'm not


Yet another trolling dig!

Karly asked me and okocha to let it drop and we said we would but you can't stop can you. Every time you bring it up I am entitled to repeat that this is not a fake account and you have never provided any evidence that it is or even named who the "real" account holder is supposed to be. Rolling Eyes

93Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 09:15

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@T.R.O.Y. wrote:
@Sluffy wrote:

I've made nothing up - it's all there if anybody wants to go and look.

As for "properly paid attention to the thread" who the fuck do you think you are?

I post as I am in real life, I've never seen any point in pretending to be who I'm not, and I've always been been straight and honest - I've always put legality first - even you go on about how I'm always talking about the law and don't focus on the morals instead.

I'm the one who has been saying if there's any proof of wrong doing then take it to the police - I been saying it about Anderson to - about anyone up to no good!

So don't come the bullshit.

You've had a right mare on this thread over the last few days, clearly you don't like that hence the crap you've posted above.

Yet another one who clearly thinks the internet is somehow an important place not to lose face on - just like Wanderlust - but it isn't, it means absolutely nothing.

That says more about the person than anything else.

I couldn't give a fuck if people believe me or not but I certainly wouldn't attempt to wriggle and deceive in an attempt not to look wrong - why would anyone even do that???

What about your self-esteem?

I'd rather lose the argument than ever lose mine.


Sluffy, you keep going on about me having a mare or embarrassing myself, yet you admit what I said is correct. I’m no expert on contract law, I promise you that doesn’t embarrass me, but clearly I knew enough to get by on this topic.

And what argument is there to lose? You agree with me.

If you want to play games to keep yourself entertained that’s fine and I can ignore that. But I come on here to debate things I find interesting not have insults thrown at me. Nice to see you’ve wound your neck in, but don’t try that with me again please.

Hahaha!

Priceless!

I really must have missed the bit that you now accept that right from the start in MARCH I've been telling YOU that there would be a inquiry by the proper authority in to issues like this once the virus was more under control, that the issue is being driven by one person on social media with a previously existing grudge against the government over Brexit.  That people such as YOU should not believe such story's without fact checking them first .  That once you deconstruct these story's there is nothing actually there other than innuendo.  That if there were any proof of corruption that it should immediately be taken to the police for them to act upon.  

I similarly missed the bit where you knew enough about contract law to get by on where you were waiting on Hancock to tell the world if the contracts included terms for goods being fit for purpose for Christ sake!!!

And certainly missed the bit that you weren't embarrassed about this ignorance of basic knowledge with your many demands for me to confirm and state publicly on here that you were right and that I was somehow posturing about it to make you look bad!!!

Of course you looked bad!

Showing ones ignorance is never a good thing, even on here.

I definitely missed the part that there was no argument because what have we both been doing for the best part of a year if we both agreed with each other???

And if 'winding my neck in' is questioning why people have to " wriggle and deceive in an attempt not to look wrong" and to question their self-esteem in doing so, then I should 'wind my neck in' more often!

I'm pleased we both are on the same page now!

:rofl:

94Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 09:56

Ten Bobsworth


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
As Oscar Wilde might have put it, Sluffy, there's only one thing worse than a cove who knows nothing; a cove who knows something.

95Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 10:32

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Not sure how you managed to miss all of that Sluffy, dead clear really. Hope it’s entertained you for a few days though!

96Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 10:53

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@T.R.O.Y. wrote:Not sure how you managed to miss all of that Sluffy, dead clear really. Hope it’s entertained you for a few days though!

Certainly given me a few laughs, the one about Hancock not telling us and the world if our nations procurement contracts had remedies in them for faulty goods I found particularly jaw droopingly hilarious!!!

One of those 'what the fuck' moments!!!

Yes it certainly has kept me amused - thank you.

All meaningless good fun to me - no more than that really.

97Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 11:12

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Ha ye if you say so Sluffy!

98Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 11:20

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@T.R.O.Y. wrote:Ha ye if you say so Sluffy!

I do say so.

Up to you what you want to believe after that, I'll lose no sleep about it either way.

99Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 11:38

Ten Bobsworth


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Its a lot more fun following the money, Sluffy.

Here's another interesting one.

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11351758/filing-history

These balance sheets are not all that tricky to follow but too tricky for the Guardian's award-winning journo, or so it seems. Maybe they should put Marvellous Marvin Sordell on the case.



Last edited by Ten Bobsworth on Fri Nov 13 2020, 09:28; edited 1 time in total

100Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 12:29

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Nice visualisation of the flow of large government contracts connected to Tory MPs.



Put together by a Political Science PHD student at Harvard.

Or what Sluffy would call 'just another poorly educated, gullible idiot' no doubt.

Laughing

101Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 14:25

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
Somebody's posted something on social media - it must be true then!!!

Rolling Eyes

If she's got all these details of corruption then send them to the police - simple!

Get those who have done wrong sent to jail, use proceeds of crime powers to claim ever penny back.

If she (or anyone else) hasn't then isn't it just all innuendo when all said and done?

102Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 14:43

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Love how innuendo is your word of the week.

Nobody’s said corruption, please do try and read articles before commenting on them.

Laughing

103Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 15:09

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@T.R.O.Y. wrote:Love how innuendo is your word of the week.

Nobody’s said corruption, please do try and read articles before commenting on them.

Laughing

Innuendo is the correct word to use to describe what is happening here as no laws seemed to have been broken on the awarding of contracts or the appointment of jobs and it is not a crime to be awarded a contract or to be appointed to a post as long as a declaration of interest has been made and no one who has such an interest is involved in the process.

I mention 'corruption' specifically because that is the 'crime' that this lady, Maugham and others of their ilk are alluding to on their social media accounts and no one yet has provided any hard evidence to back up their 'innuendo's'.

Until someone does it is no more than social media hysteria and just because everyone might believe it to be true, it doesn't necessarily makes it so - and that's why we live by the rules of law and order and not by lynch mob mentality.

(Just as a random aside were you aware that Kate Bingham has been undertaking her role as Vaccine Chief in an unpaid capacity?)

104Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 15:48

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
I've lost faith in your ability to understand this issue. Every time cronyism is mentioned you read it as corruption and don't seem able to distinguish between the two.

It's a bit like the Anderson saga, actions don't have to be illegal to negatively affect the country or football club respectively.

105Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 16:40

okocha

okocha
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
@Sluffy wrote: no one yet has provided any hard evidence to back up .......

Until someone does it is no more than social media hysteria 

Not trying to cause trouble, Sluffy, but two things strike me:

1. Is this site not an example of social media requiring "hard evidence" to be provided, as you say? I'm thinking of allegations of some posters being "fake" without any concrete evidence being given.

2. You repeatedly say you don't give a **** what people write, as it's just a weedy fan site that is water off a duck's back for you.....yet you go to huge lengths to disprove others' posts, and in doing so, your increasingly bad language betrays a rage that clearly demonstrates that you do care. 

I wrote earlier on another thread that I admire what you provide for us all to enjoy, and that I'm sorry for the flak that you sometimes take. As a support for you, I suggested some ideas for you to consider so that the site would be less stressful for you and would allay any thoughts of your giving up the reins....which none of us would want you to do. I hope you did read what I wrote. You didn't acknowledge as such.

106Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 16:57

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Do what you keep asking others to do with regard to Bob, Sluffy. Just ignore it.

107Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 17:06

okocha

okocha
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
@boltonbonce wrote:Do what you keep asking others to do with regard to Bob, Sluffy. Just ignore it.

:clap:

108Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 17:25

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@T.R.O.Y. wrote:I've lost faith in your ability to understand this issue. Every time cronyism is mentioned you read it as corruption and don't seem able to distinguish between the two.

It's a bit like the Anderson saga, actions don't have to be illegal to negatively affect the country or football club respectively.

Could care less if you have faith in me or not the simple fact is you can DO something if it is ILLEGAL but you can't do anything if it is immoral.

Cronyism might be immoral, Anderson might have acted immorally but there's nothing you, me or anyone else can do about it but whinge and bitch endlessly whereas illegality CAN be stopped and dealt with.

It's a game, as long as you don't break the rules you can do what you like to win.

If you don't like the rules then either get them changed or simply don't play.

Do you think there's no cronyism in your beloved Labour Party - of course there is - look at the unions threatening to withdraw their funding if they don't get the people they want in power in the Party and voting the way they want them to - minimum wage in 1998 was introduced only because the unions got the Labour Party to vote it through to benefit their members - it was never going to be done under the Conservatives was it?

You just can seem to grasp that it is all a game - both sides do exactly the same things, they look to others to help them get power in return for 'favours' once they achieve power and work together to stay in power - the two rules of politics I keep banging on about.

As long as no laws are broken nothing can be done about it hence why I always bring everything back to reality ie if they've broke the law chuck them in jail if they haven't then what you going to do about it other then bitch?

Maugham's made it seem that large scale corruption has been going on with the way he's run his social media campaign (in my opinion - just to cover myself) but when you take apart all that he's said there is nothing there - company with links to someone in power awarded massive contracts legally and those with the links disclose their interest and have nothing to do with awarding of the contact.

How is that wrong especially when all contracts are legally enforceable if something goes wrong.

Or do you just go around with pitchforks and as soon as someone shouts witch you go and burn them!

The real word doesn't work that way and that's why Maugham isn't claiming anything illegal has gone on - he's far too smart to do that - he merely spins it in such a way that people think it must have, whilst Maugham instead is simply after a Judicial Review.

Now a Judicial Review is basically the court ruling if a public body - in this case the government, have exceeded their powers - should they have invoked Emergency Procurement Powers.

What is interesting (to me at least) is IF the courts do find that to be the case then what Remedies they have which are basically a -

1 - Quashing order - stop doing
2 - Prohibiting order - do it right from now on and not what you have been doing
3 - Mandatory Order - which if the government hasn't been doing something and they should have - to start doing so
4 - Declaration - basically a statement the government was right/wrong and allow in theory for legal action for any damages incurred by anyone
5 - Injunction - stop doing what you have been doing.
6 - Damages - a very limited definition of what claims that can be made such as negligence or breach of statutory duty
7 - Discretion - which means even if the judicial review finds in favour it does amount to anything that has happened being unreasonable by the government.

In short all that lot means is that when it eventually hits the court for review the government would have already stopped using Emergency Procurement, no company would have acted illegally by having been awarded contracts under Emergency powers and nothing much will be gained other than a ruling that government did/did not do the right thing at the time.

It all about putting a black mark about the government and nothing at all to do with if there's been any dodgy doings going on at all!

PAC will look more closely into that but unless evidence is provided of corruption or profiteering then they have no powers to take it any further and if there is no evidence then no laws have been broken.

The government has an 80 seat majority and the next General elections aren't until 2024, so they won't fall even if the judicial review goes against them - and fwiw issuing Emergency Powers in response to a worldwide pandemic engulfing the NHS at the time doesn't seem that unreasonable to me at least.

Johnson might go but he probably will be gone long before the judicial review anyway I suspect.

Not sure what anyone actually gains from all this apart from Maugham scoring brownie points against the government he clearly seems to despise?

109Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 17:34

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@boltonbonce wrote:Do what you keep asking others to do with regard to Bob, Sluffy. Just ignore it.

I'm having too much fun!

And to be honest I don't really have too much other stuff to do to pass the time away.

My ex has been informed by Track and Trace to self isolate so it's getting that bit closer to me and 33,500 new cases today, so I expect I'll be on here even more for the foreseeable future at this rate.

Thankfully I'm ok for toilet rolls at the moment!

110Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 17:42

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
@Sluffy wrote:
Could care less if you have faith in me or not the simple fact is you can DO something if it is ILLEGAL but you can't do anything if it is immoral.



Whether it's illegal or immoral is not irrelevant.

The current system was put in place to speed up contracts (correct decision).

If that is being abused and contracts are being awarded for any reason other than 'best qualified to do the job', then the regulations need to be changed.

It's about ensuring tax payers money is being spent wisely and we're in the best possible position to fight the virus.

So the exact same point you failed to grasp in March. If you are on the wind up, you're very good at it.

111Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 17:45

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
@Sluffy wrote:

I'm having too much fun!

And to be honest I don't really have too much other stuff to do to pass the time away.

My ex has been informed by Track and Trace to self isolate so it's getting that bit closer to me and 33,500 new cases today, so I expect I'll be on here even more for the foreseeable future at this rate.

Thankfully I'm ok for toilet rolls at the moment!

I've started to question the types of toilet rolls I should be buying. 

Scented? Cheap and cheerful? And what colour?

Anything but Izal. Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Icon_biggrin

112Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 18:06

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@boltonbonce wrote:
@Sluffy wrote:

I'm having too much fun!

And to be honest I don't really have too much other stuff to do to pass the time away.

My ex has been informed by Track and Trace to self isolate so it's getting that bit closer to me and 33,500 new cases today, so I expect I'll be on here even more for the foreseeable future at this rate.

Thankfully I'm ok for toilet rolls at the moment!

I've started to question the types of toilet rolls I should be buying. 


Scented? Cheap and cheerful? And what colour?

Anything but Izal. Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Icon_biggrin

Tesco's finest own brand, white and soft enough for my bum!

113Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 18:35

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@T.R.O.Y. wrote:
@Sluffy wrote:
Could care less if you have faith in me or not the simple fact is you can DO something if it is ILLEGAL but you can't do anything if it is immoral.

Whether it's illegal or immoral is not irrelevant.

The current system was put in place to speed up contracts (correct decision).

If that is being abused and contracts are being awarded for any reason other than 'best qualified to do the job', then the regulations need to be changed.

It's about ensuring tax payers money is being spent wisely and we're in the best possible position to fight the virus.

So the exact same point you failed to grasp in March. If you are on the wind up, you're very good at it.

It's the other way around mate - it's an emergency - time was of the essence - there wasn't time to dot the i's and cross the t's.

Do you really think there were any PPE suppliers anywhere in the world who hadn't got full order books at the time?

The requirement was to get PPE and that entailed people/companies who could manufacture them direct or more likely had existing contracts with foreign company's (many of which were Chinese I'm led to believe) who could deliver multi-million pound orders quickly.

That's the reality not the 'I know I'll give this £350m contract to my wife's sisters husbands uncle who owns a dairy in Westhoughton and has no knowledge or manufacturing capability for PPE's!

There's only a limited amount of people capable of taking on such contracts, all of them would be rich to start off with to take one million pound contracts, most I would predict would probably vote Conservative by inclination anyway and many would probably be known to at least the local MP where they live or where they have a factory if based in the UK.

We've done all this before.

You seem incapable of grasping reality and rather live in some form of idealistic world.

Nobody is saying everything was done correctly, nobody is saying some might well have exploited the situation but it wasn't about that at the time it was about getting PPE's at whatever the cost and however it takes to do so.

The bottom line is the NHS didn't fall over, PPE was delivered in time and in sufficient quantity in general to most/all of the NHS and there were/are systems in place to check back and recover any monies found to be corruptly gained from any fraud perpetrated.

Maybe I am very good at wind ups or maybe I know what I'm talking about, maybe even both - but that's up to you to decide as I'm just some random bloke on a social media site - just like Maugham is - and you seem to believe him.

My advise if you want it is don't trust what anyone on social media says - it's full of nutjobs - maybe I'm even one of them!

And if I might be one of them then Maugham might be one too!

Have a nice day.

114Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 18:53

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Your argument hinges on there being no other option than to use these suppliers and personnel.

And you don’t have the first idea whether that’s true or not. So drop the ‘I know better than anyone act’ because you don’t unless you have an unrivalled knowledge of the global PPE supply chain that you’re keeping very well hidden?

The only point of this campaign is to scrutinise what’s happening to improve future processes. Welcome to a functioning democracy.

Either tell me why you disagree with that or just drop it now for god’s sake.

115Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 20:04

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
I don't have the first idea whether that is true or not do I?

I've placed public sector contracts worth millions in my time and I know how limited the market is when I've invited tenders for certain work and/or contract value and this was under normal market conditions, not when the contractors can pick and choose what contracts they want and at what price they set.

I imagine it most have been a bit like the wild west at that time for those attempting to secure PPE's which I've read amounted to something like £14 billion, in the face of worldwide demand and finite manufacture capacity and turnaround.

And what does this bit you're trying to teach me about scrutiny, (evaluation and future implantation - which I assume you were trying to say) and welcome to a functioning democracy mean - don't you realise that was my role in the public sector for over 30 years?  That's why I know about it - and you don't!

Disagree with you about it - I've been one of those DOING it ffs!!!

You have made me laugh so much over the last few days though.

116Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 20:06

okocha

okocha
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
@Sluffy wrote:
Maybe I am very good at wind ups  

My advise if you want it is don't trust what anyone on social media says - it's full of nutjobs - maybe I'm even one of them!
These words plus your comment, "I'm having too much fun!"  suggest that you're the one who's "playing games."

117Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 20:56

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
@Sluffy wrote:I don't have the first idea whether that is true or not do I?

I've placed public sector contracts worth millions in my time and I know how limited the market is when I've invited tenders for certain work and/or contract value and this was under normal market conditions, not when the contractors can pick and choose what contracts they want and at what price they set.

I imagine it most have been a bit like the wild west at that time for those attempting to secure PPE's which I've read amounted to something like £14 billion, in the face of worldwide demand and finite manufacture capacity and turnaround.

And what does this bit you're trying to teach me about scrutiny, (evaluation and future implantation - which I assume you were trying to say) and welcome to a functioning democracy mean - don't you realise that was my role in the public sector for over 30 years?  That's why I know about it - and you don't!

Disagree with you about it - I've been one of those DOING it ffs!!!

You have made me laugh so much over the last few days though.


Sorry, just to clarify. You’re equating the contracts you worked on with this specific market the government found itself working in?

118Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 23:26

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@T.R.O.Y. wrote:
@Sluffy wrote:I don't have the first idea whether that is true or not do I?

I've placed public sector contracts worth millions in my time and I know how limited the market is when I've invited tenders for certain work and/or contract value and this was under normal market conditions, not when the contractors can pick and choose what contracts they want and at what price they set.

I imagine it most have been a bit like the wild west at that time for those attempting to secure PPE's which I've read amounted to something like £14 billion, in the face of worldwide demand and finite manufacture capacity and turnaround.

And what does this bit you're trying to teach me about scrutiny, (evaluation and future implantation - which I assume you were trying to say) and welcome to a functioning democracy mean - don't you realise that was my role in the public sector for over 30 years?  That's why I know about it - and you don't!

Disagree with you about it - I've been one of those DOING it ffs!!!

You have made me laugh so much over the last few days though.


Sorry, just to clarify. You’re equating the contracts you worked on with this specific market the government found itself working in?

Hahaha

Let me put it as simply as I can, the principles of procurement are broadly the same across all sectors, you work to a set of procedures and basically you put out an invite to tender in the relevant trade paper - a bit if you will how Companies House always advertises strike offs in the London Gazette - it is the place where the relevant 'buyers' and 'sellers' go to advertise work.

The companies then express an interest in tendering for the work and submit details of themselves for the client who is tendering out the work to undertake the relevant financial checks, establish their ability to undertake such work based on previous contracts they've delivered on and contact the clients of those contracts for references about the company, Banks are contacted in respect of the company's financial ability to complete the contact duration without going bust and all matter of other stuff to ensure that if they won the contract they could deliver on it.

Then after all that a 'long list' of company's are selected as being suitable and tender documents sent out to them for them to see if they want to put in a bid for the work and if so allow them to clarify the contents of what is required from the tender document and price up the work.

When I first started many years ago tenders used to specify everything down to the last nut and bolt but by the time I left tenders had gone virtually the other way and more or less state we want you to say run our Highways Department or our Human Resources and Accounts services, or we require a weekly refuse and recycling service for say 200,000 domestic properties and reduce waste to landfill by x amount of tonnes over a 15 year period - it could be anything really but the onus was on the contractor to come up with schemes that met the targets given and at a cost low enough to win the tender from other competitors.

Sometimes there used to be a 'two tender' approach in that the contractor had to meet a 'quality' threshold with their bids - any ones that didn't were rejected at that stage - then there 'quotes for their costs to provide the service were then opened - the idea being that you didn't end up with the cheapest bidder who only won because he cut so many corners the contract delivery was utter crap (which often happened when Compulsory Competitive Tendering was first introduced into the public service under Thatcher) but instead you got a decent service which was at the lowest price instead.

Fwiw I do know what I'm talking about but I don't expect you to take my word for it.

You may/may not be interested in the legal rebuttal letter that HM government sent to Maugham's Good Law Project in respect of their proposed Judicial Review in respect of PestFix.

It's eleven pages long and outlines the other side of the story to that what Maugham paints, the truth no doubt lies somewhere between the two and fwiw I say far closer to what the government says (particularly about the market for PPE's in light of a worldwide demand) that the which Maugham wishes us to perceive.

If you or he really believes the volume of required PPE's could have been achieved in the immediate timescales required and in competition with the rest of the world with adhering to a focus for value for money then I suggest you are both utterly barking mad.

And to finish off I would direct you to Paragraph 62 of the letter -

"Second, even if a challenge to the award of the Contract by way of judicial review were appropriate, GLP [Good Law Project] lacks the necessary direct interest. It is merely a campaigning group with no special interest in the health sector, far less the provision of PPE and, in particular, the means by which it is procured. No other more directly affected group has sought to challenge the arrangements put in place by the Secretary of State. There is no basis upon which GLP should be permitted to intervene in arrangements which have not
been challenged by any more directly affected party".



Not one single other directly effected group has had a problem with what went on other than that of Maugham!!!

So where are all these other people and company's that have lost out because of these supposedly dodgy contracts given to all these Tory cronies???

There are non - just Maugham with his axe to grind.

https://goodlawproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/200713-Letter-to-RIS-1.pdf

I can't find any trace of what's happened after this dated 13th July? The case reference is CO/2144/2020 - and it seems to be referred to TCC with a reference HT-2020-000226? Not sure what that is? TCC could be Technology and Construction Court but it doesn't sound correct to me?

Anyway I now see GLP has applied for a new one on the 11th October with Debbie Abrahams (Labour) Caroline Lucas (Green) and Layla Moran (Lib Dem)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fBQEpx5VK09woeYa9hL4xyo6a7G4C1Cg/view

...and this time it is in respect of not reporting the contracts on time to which the government already accepts 'technical breeches' and intend to comply with the law 'in due course' [they have been a bit busy really to be fair I would say!]

The document is over 400 pages long and I only managed to get through the first 80 or so but in a nutshell GLP says the government is wilfully not reporting contracts details as they should and the government case is that they've been overwhelmed by work - £15 billion worth of contracts awarded and once they get a break they will catch up on the paper work - they quote a previous judicial review whose outcome was that there was no point to bringing that particular case because the eventual outcome would have been the same if they had brought it or not - as would be the case if judicial review was pursued here too.

Namely there is every intent to report the contracts just that the people who are needed to complete the reports are the ones needed to continually require to secure the needed PPE's.

Sounds like a storm in a tea cup to me as up to date reports won't change anything particularly if it looks like Maugham's initial judicial review seems to have been downgraded(?).

If I'm correct I can't see this request for appeal getting very far either.

But what do I know eh!

119Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Thu Nov 12 2020, 23:35

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
@okocha wrote:
@Sluffy wrote:
Maybe I am very good at wind ups  

My advise if you want it is don't trust what anyone on social media says - it's full of nutjobs - maybe I'm even one of them!
These words plus your comment, "I'm having too much fun!"  suggest that you're the one who's "playing games."

I'm just some random bloke on social media.

Do you trust what I say or not?

My point being who DO you trust on social media - why trust what Maugham says and not me, or why trust me and not Maugham?

Isn't it simply better to trust no one and check things out for yourself?

That's what I do anyway.

Or do I - you only have my word for that...

I think you get my point.

120Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 4 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Fri Nov 13 2020, 14:00

T.R.O.Y.


Andy Walker
Andy Walker
Sluffy, im not denying you have knowledge of how tenders work I'm sure you do. 

But you having experience of tender processes is not the same as you knowing the state of global market for PPE procurement in March this year as this statement implies:

I've placed public sector contracts worth millions in my time and I know how limited the market is when I've invited tenders for certain work and/or contract value and this was under normal market conditions, not when the contractors can pick and choose what contracts they want and at what price they set.
I imagine it most have been a bit like the wild west at that time for those attempting to secure PPE's which I've read amounted to something like £14 billion, in the face of worldwide demand and finite manufacture capacity and turnaround.


Surely you can agree with that?

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 4 of 13]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 11, 12, 13  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum