International News Covid-19 .....

Want to know how the government spends your hard earned taxes?


Some people would rather we played by EU Procurement rules, went to tender and done everything by the book.

Those people would not have been in the front line or explaining why product had run out.

And for some deeper context, 8600 contracts worth circa £18bn were implemented during the initial phases of the pandemic.

"About one in 10 suppliers processed through the high priority lane (47 out of 493) obtained contracts, compared with less than one in 100 suppliers that came through the ordinary lane (104 of 14 892). The NAO also found that sources of referrals to the high priority lane were not always documented, with one supplier, PestFix, added in error without a referral."


The vast majority of which are in the public domain if you know where to look, and have been subject to NAO scrutiny.
 
Some people would rather we played by EU Procurement rules, went to tender and done everything by the book.

Those people would not have been in the front line or explaining why product had run out.

And for some deeper context, 8600 contracts worth circa £18bn were implemented during the initial phases of the pandemic.

"About one in 10 suppliers processed through the high priority lane (47 out of 493) obtained contracts, compared with less than one in 100 suppliers that came through the ordinary lane (104 of 14 892). The NAO also found that sources of referrals to the high priority lane were not always documented, with one supplier, PestFix, added in error without a referral."


The vast majority of which are in the public domain if you know where to look, and have been subject to NAO scrutiny.

You are still defending ineptitude/some would describe it as being a corrupt use of taxpayer money with the squirrel about EU procurement rules. It could have been done quickly outside of those rules by the Govt without giving their mates free cash.
 
You are still defending ineptitude/some would describe it as being a corrupt use of taxpayer money with the squirrel about EU procurement rules. It could have been done quickly outside of those rules by the Govt without giving their mates free cash.

Kindly provide the evidence of "giving their mates free cash".

I`m reasonably certain that would end in prosecution.

I would agree, as per the BMJ article, that haste led to errors....... but allegations of fraud seem to be just that with no evidence.
 
Why not all of them?

In pedants corner tonight.... they probably are, but as there is the best part of 9k of them I`m not looking them up. :)

And scrutinised by the NAO https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2020-0163/

The NAO concluded:

“In the months following the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 in the UK, government awarded around £18 billion of contracts using emergency procurement regulations to buy goods, services and works to support its response to the pandemic. Government was having to work at pace, with no experience of using emergency procurement on such a scale before and was developing its approach at the same time as procuring large quantities of goods and services quickly, frequently from suppliers it had not previously worked with, in a highly competitive international market. This procurement activity secured unprecedented volumes of essential supplies necessary to protect front-line workers. Our separate report on the supply of PPE looks in detail at the extent to which demand for that equipment was met and the value-for-money achieved.

“While government had the necessary legal framework in place to award contracts directly, it had to balance the need to procure large volumes of goods and services quickly, with the increased commercial and propriety risks associated with emergency procurement. We looked in detail at a sample of contracts selected on a risk basis. Although we found sufficient documentation for a number of procurements in our sample, we also found specific examples where there is insufficient documentation on key decisions, or how risks such as perceived or actual conflicts of interest have been identified or managed. In addition, a number of contracts were awarded retrospectively, or have not been published in a timely manner. This has diminished public transparency, and the lack of adequate documentation means we cannot give assurance that government has adequately mitigated the increased risks arising from emergency procurement or applied appropriate commercial practices in all cases. While we recognise that these were exceptional circumstances, there are standards that the public sector will always need to apply if it is to maintain public trust.”
 
Kindly provide the evidence of "giving their mates free cash".

I`m reasonably certain that would end in prosecution.

I would agree, as per the BMJ article, that haste led to errors....... but allegations of fraud seem to be just that with no evidence.

Next door neighbours with no knowledge or experience in said market etc.
 
Only slightly Covid related but.... politicians of the world watch and learn.


Assuming you have a pension and/or other investments?
Guess where such funds make money?

Business makes money shocker.

Twitter, also a business that makes a lot of money ($3.46 billion 2019) tends to encourage very myopic views as people "follow" others who reflect their own views..... and here is the evidence.
;)
 
Assuming you have a pension and/or other investments?
Guess where such funds make money?

Business makes money shocker.

Twitter, also a business that makes a lot of money ($3.46 billion 2019) tends to encourage very myopic views as people "follow" others who reflect their own views..... and here is the evidence.
;)
Double squirrel!

If you open your eyes just a little bit the piece didn't criticise the making of money per se it criticised the lying to hide the doubling of the price of the pharmaceuticals.

But anyway I posted it to show how effective the interrogating process was.
 
Last edited:
Double squirrel!

If you open your eyes just a little bit the piece didn't criticise the making of money per se it criticised the lying to hide the doubling of the price of the pharmaceuticals.

But anyway I posted it to show how effective the interrogating process was.

Just one squirrel in return.................. ever seen the price of a product in demand go down?

Thought not....
 
Just one squirrel in return.................. ever seen the price of a product in demand go down?

Thought not....
Irrespective of the topic I would have thought you'd like how a small white board, cut out circles of paper and doing ones homework beats flashy tec presentations hands-down.
 
Just one squirrel in return.................. ever seen the price of a product in demand go down?

Thought not....
Paracetemol :unsure:

Remember when the licence holders and were able to charge a fortune for their branded products....and you can now buy supermarket brand for about 20p a packet?

Thought not........
 
Paracetemol :unsure:

Remember when the licence holders and were able to charge a fortune for their branded products....and you can now buy supermarket brand for about 20p a packet?

Thought not........

Tesco/Aldi/Lidl Covid Vaccine anyone?

Thought not....

The money is made early on whilst under licence...
 
Tesco/Aldi/Lidl Covid Vaccine anyone?

Thought not....

The money is made early on whilst under licence...

More than 97% of the funding for the OAZ virus came from UK government departments, British and American scientific institutes, the European commission and charities including the Wellcome Trust. Grauniad.

Only fair AZ and Ox University should keep the profits.
 
Back
Top Bottom