You mean, she’s still in her job?.. I’m lost for words.
3 Likes
Fully endorsed by Boris.
The “yes” people are unsackable, unless, I suspect that Carrie kicks up a stink about something.
3 Likes
If Carrie kicks up a stink about something… or most certainly, if she puts Boris on meagre rations to get her own way…! 
2 Likes
Ha quite possible. Rumor was she was in part behind Cummings leaving early.
Seems logical to me that there was a drive to address the concerns of several back benchers / newly elected Tory party MP’s. Just in time for next year. Perhaps she (and others) felt that Cummings was a real problem particularly after the eye test.
1 Like
2 Likes
4 Likes
2 Likes
Here’s a link to the tweet and the story in the Guardian
This doesn’t seem comparable to the other allegations of corruption. At all. This isn’t the landlord of a local pub, he owns a plastic tooling factory capable of producing medical vials which are in demand. Providing they’re of proper quality and he isn’t being overpaid for them, good luck to him…no?
3 Likes
For me it depends on a number of factors
a) has he done it before?
b) were companies that do produce this stuff also contacted?
c) how do we know that what he is producing is of value? price and product
d) What was specified by the government?
The last point is really important I think. We’ve already seen examples of the government buying stuff that wasn’t fit for purpose which leads me to believe that either they weren’t specific about what they needed (highly likely) or the supplier hasn’t fulfilled their contract.
I’ll admit I really don’t like it. In my mind when you’re in a crisis to reach out to existing resources first. Understand the capacity there before seeking alternatives. Going straight for the alternative because of a WhatsApp message is a bit broken. That doesn’t mean it’s wrong, it means it carries risk. So far that risk is being paid for by tax payers money and lives.
2 Likes
My issue is the following:
Hancock is a politician, he should have no role deciding who is, and is not, awarded contracts. Beyond say high level strategic thinking(eg I want to favour contracts to UK firms, we need to allocate X% of budget for PPE etc)
That process of selecting a vendor is a specalised role. Involving due dillengence, cost benefit analysis, legal risk, reviewing alternative options.
If you can Whatsapp Hancock to get preferential access it demonstrates a lack of independence and political interference, a system that can be exploited through croynism, and that likely proper analysis has not been performed. It shows the mechanism others with Tory links have exploited for thier own gain.
When placed into the context of the PPE company having the lay people off
It highlights the complete and utter failure.
4 Likes
Wasn’t Hancock’s response to simply send him a link to where he could contact the appropriate department who then made the assessment independently? Other than Hancock putting him in touch with the appropriate body organising procurement (and not making a personal introduction) there’s no evidence that he influenced the process, is there?
The pre-existing government contractor, Alpha Laboratories, said, “Although we were aware Alex Bourne had met Mr Hancock, this was irrelevant to our discussions as we were sourcing from Hinpack a price-competitive product for the NHS supply chain which fitted within our product range.”
Seriously, this is a good news story. Bloke shows initiative and responds to the nationwide call to arms and offers his help, producing much needed equipment at a time of crisis. He completes all the necessary regulatory tests and provides the equipment at a “price-competitive” level. I think we’re in danger of losing perspective and diluting the genuine cases of corruption and fraud on the public purse. This particular story ought ordinarily be commended.
In any other times this would be lauded but no, the Guardian disappears up its own arse again.
3 Likes
I haven’t read the article. Is your quote factually correct?
Plus, how is he able to leapfrog other companies that supply this stuff in he first place or is there a genuine shortage that those other firms cant meet?
Given what we’ve seen I think it’s 100% right to question it. If those questions are answered 100% satisfactorily then rock on.
2 Likes
Do read the article. Even from a paper trying to make a story out of this the details don’t seem particularly untoward. I pulled the quote from the article.
2 Likes
Interesting thread.
1 Like
The Tory acquaintances are directed to a different procurement channel where their chance of success is far greater (by the order of 10).
2 Likes
Another leak but no real surprises in this I think. pretty much anyone with an ounce of sense knew we’d be in trouble. It raises a point worthy of some discussion. This government’s view on risk. They seem to ignore it or refuse to appreciate it.
1 Like
You have to admit it does look highly suspect.
- He is 36, with less than 2 years of experience making plastic food containers/pizza boxes, before that ran a pub.
- He has no experience with medical-grade equipment
- He did not have the facilities to make medical-grade equipment
- 2-3 Weeks after first text message he is awarded a contract. (making £30M worth of equipment)
- Within 5 months of first contacting Hancock, is involved in meetings with the prime minister.
This is in a backdrop of specialized equipment suppliers being rejected.
Its all circumstantial evidence granted. There is no smoking gun. But I don’t believe for one minute its a good news story. A friend of the health secretary becoming seemingly one of the most important medical equipment suppliers in the UK (given meeting involving the PM) is too much of a coincidence.
6 Likes
Yeah that’s not passing the smell test is it.
Nicely framed by Kop Star, be nice to say he’s right… but… yknoe
2 Likes
having slept on it I think it stinks purely from the fact that as @JU97ICE states above. He’s likely to have been given preferential treatment despite having no real experience in delivering what is required.
1 Like
I have to wonder if people have actually read the article because what you’ve now twice presented is not an accurate reflection of what the article says.
Just taking your bullet points. I don’t see how his age and experience are relevant, if he is able to produce much needed medical equipment at a time of national crisis then good for him. If what he produced wasn’t good enough it would have been rejected.
Just like his company was not deemed suitable to produce drop-wells and pipette tips. That was the first interaction - an assessment was made to see if he could help manufacture a particular product and it was determined he couldn’t. If it was cronyism, wouldn’t he have been given it anyway?
As it was he was turned down. He was only engaged to supply a different product (the vials) when the procurement contractor was satisfied that his company was able to do so. Clearly he has done so satisfactorily and at a competitive price given what I previously quoted from the article.
The article also states that he “engaged the assistance of external advisers and regulatory experts”. Sounds like he’s done things by the book.
It doesn’t say when he was first awarded the contract to supply the medical vials (nor the plastic funnels) so I’m not sure where you get the 2-3 week period from. My impression from the article was that it was not before the end of May. The article says that by June, after engaging expertise, the company was able to produce large quantities of the medical vials (2m per week) and 500k funnels.
But the timescale is a bit of a weird thing to point to as a negative though, don’t you think? The government gets criticised for dragging its heels one moment and then accused of cronyism and not doing the proper checks when it responds with urgency. I think urgency was sort of called for back in April of this year, no?
The way you have presented his meetings with the Prime Minister is a bit loaded as well. He was on a zoom call. With numerous other companies involved in the supply of urgently needed products as part of the coronavirus response. Isn’t that the kind of thing we would hope was going on?
You’re right, specialist equipment suppliers were being rejected, as he was too at first (for the drop-wells and pipette tips). He was only engaged when he was able to produce satisfactory medical equipment for a competitive price. That’s reassuring, isn’t it?
I’ll happily join the outrage if this guy has indeed benefited from corruption and made an unreasonable and unjustifiable profit from this but so far there has been nothing to show that this is the case. Please present it!
2 Likes