National News Greensill

Not necessarily. When much larger sums of money are involved the controls, checks and balances etc need to be greater.

Disagree.

This is tax payers money regardless of the amount. It is a question of principle and every contract and expense should be justified. The size of the sums are irrelevant.

As you said earlier, it is a question of paying a fair rate.

I doubt you go to the pub and happily pay £10 for one pint of beer but then question the cost when you are buy a round for six of your mates.
 
Disagree.

This is tax payers money regardless of the amount. It is a question of principle and every contract and expense should be justified. The size of the sums are irrelevant.

As you said earlier, it is a question of paying a fair rate.

I doubt you go to the pub and happily pay £10 for one pint of beer but then question the cost when you are buy a round for six of your mates.
Yes but only if you want to run the most ineffective organisation in the world.
 
Yes but only if you want to run the most ineffective organisation in the world.

So are you saying the government were efficient in fast tacking Covid contracts rather than going through usual protocols?

Bearing in mind this was a pandemic and time was critical.
 
So are you saying the government were efficient in fast tacking Covid contracts rather than going through usual protocols?

Bearing in mind this was a pandemic and time was critical.
Expediency was certainly needed. Corruption wasn't.
 
Expediency was certainly needed. Corruption wasn't.

I wasn’t aware anyone had been convicted of corruption (yet).

In the same way Jess Philips hasn’t been found to have done anything wrong (yet)
 
I wasn’t aware anyone had been convicted of corruption (yet).

In the same way Jess Philips hasn’t been found to have done anything wrong (yet)
You clearly have your concerns to add the word 'yet'.
 
You clearly have your concerns to add the word 'yet'.

Absolutely.

As i said, I believe everyone should be held accountable.

Which is why I don’t understand your stance that is somewhat defensive of Jess Philips when you are also very quick to use the word “corruption“ regarding government contracts.

Neither have been proven.

Maybe I am wrong but you appear to be showing bias based on Red or Blue?
 
Absolutely.

As i said, I believe everyone should be held accountable.

Which is why I don’t understand your stance that is somewhat defensive of Jess Philips when you are also very quick to use the word “corruption“ regarding government contracts.

Neither have been proven.

Maybe I am wrong but you appear to be showing bias based on Red or Blue?
It's simple really. Phillips is a bloody good, passionate MP who dedicates her life to helping others. Much of the Tory cabinet seem to be on the make for themselves.
 
It's simple really. Phillips is a bloody good, passionate MP who dedicates her life to helping others. Much of the Tory cabinet seem to be on the make for themselves.
White privilege? Career politician? ;)

Phillips is the daughter of Stewart Trainor, a teacher, and Jean Trainor (née Mackay), who was deputy chief executive of the NHS Federation.

She went to King Edward VI Camp Hill School for Girls which is a highly selective grammar school.

University of Leeds 2000-2003 and University of Birmingham 2011 - 2013

In the interim Phillips worked for a period for her parents at their company, Healthlinks Event Management Services.

I wonder why the former deputy chief executive of the NHS Fed set up a company called "Healthlinks Event Management Services"? Ah yes........... its all about who you know and can influence, or cronyism as it`s known.
 
She went to King Edward VI Camp Hill School for Girls which is a highly selective grammar school.

University of Leeds 2000-2003 and University of Birmingham 2011 - 2013
I don't disagree too much with your implication about the other items, but I don't think these are such a sign of privilege. I have a good uni mate who went to King Edwards, and he was from the shittest end of Walsall and definitely not privileged, but there on his wits. It is highly selective on ability, not on ability to pay. Going to University is hardly something unexpected of a politician either.
 
White privilege? Career politician? ;)

Phillips is the daughter of Stewart Trainor, a teacher, and Jean Trainor (née Mackay), who was deputy chief executive of the NHS Federation.

She went to King Edward VI Camp Hill School for Girls which is a highly selective grammar school.

University of Leeds 2000-2003 and University of Birmingham 2011 - 2013

In the interim Phillips worked for a period for her parents at their company, Healthlinks Event Management Services.

I wonder why the former deputy chief executive of the NHS Fed set up a company called "Healthlinks Event Management Services"? Ah yes........... its all about who you know and can influence, or cronyism as it`s known.
You miss the point by so much so often that your whataboutism is now entirely predictable.

Nowhere above had anyone questioned her upbringing and as to whether or not she had a 'privileged' one or not. The above debate is not even about their politics (on this one occasion). This is about the character of our politicians. Are they honest (not latter day saints), do they demonstrate integrity, are they working for their constituencies and the country or their party/themselves/their family, can they be trusted, DO THEY DEMONSTRABLE LIE?
 
You miss the point by so much so often that your whataboutism is now entirely predictable.

Nowhere above had anyone questioned her upbringing and as to whether or not she had a 'privileged' one or not. The above debate is not even about their politics (on this one occasion). This is about the character of our politicians. Are they honest (not latter day saints), do they demonstrate integrity, are they working for their constituencies and the country or their party/themselves/their family, can they be trusted, DO THEY DEMONSTRABLE LIE?

Or employ their families/spouses without influence?

Someone mentioned Hancock`s sister and the PPE contract, yet that is all declared as required so can`t be called out.

So we come back to matter of scale because, like it or not, that is how politics works.

Once you have "power and influence" you are open to counter allegations of wrongful influence no matter how disassociated from it you may actually be.

As for lying that is a difficult one to call especially with hindsight in the mix.

Someone makes a decision or statement at a moment in time based on the information available then they change their position when things change or more information becomes available......did they "lie" or did they just turn their sail to a more favourable wind?
 
This is about the character of our politicians
Are they honest (not latter day saints),
do they demonstrate integrity,
are they working for their constituencies and the country or their party/themselves/their family,
can they be trusted,
DO THEY DEMONSTRABLE LIE?
Bar a few exceptions, which I could probably count on my fingers, I'd go for
No​
No​
The later​
No​
Yes​
 
So how should this be viewed?

Johnson respond to lobbying for tax breaks because it's a national emergency or James Dyson won't 'do his bit' in a national emergency unless he gets tax breaks?

 
So how should this be viewed?

Johnson respond to lobbying for tax breaks because it's a national emergency or James Dyson won't 'do his bit' in a national emergency unless he gets tax breaks?


I thought this. My first thought was that he was being a selfish uncaring sod.

But it sounds more to do with his employees coming over and having double taxation issues with residence status etc.

I can quite understand he would have wanted clarification for them, and as it happens any other company sending over workers to help with the cause.
 
I thought this. My first thought was that he was being a selfish uncaring sod.

But it sounds more to do with his employees coming over and having double taxation issues with residence status etc.

I can quite understand he would have wanted clarification for them, and as it happens any other company sending over workers to help with the cause.
The tax implications were for employees and employer. Maybe be could have 'done his bit' and covered the losses of his employees?

Or if he hadn't have more his HQ to Singapore in the first place there wouldn't have been a problem!!
 
Last edited:
So how should this be viewed?

Johnson respond to lobbying for tax breaks because it's a national emergency or James Dyson won't 'do his bit' in a national emergency unless he gets tax breaks?


I believe the BBC article mentions that Sir James covered the £20 million development costs and the NHS never bought, used or required them.
His communication with Boris was looking out for his staff who could only have been in the UK for 90 days (IIRC) before becoming liable to a tax double hit.
The 90 day "rule" was scrapped for anyone involved in the national covid effort.

Did HMG "over cook" the needs considering the Nightingales barely took a Covid patient? Probably.
Would they get criticised either way? Definitely.
Have lots of lessons been learnt? Yes.
 
Back
Top Bottom