The Clown Circus

Quote:

---

Lee Cain: Johnson's senior aide resigns amid infighting at No 10

A row has broken out at the heart of Downing Street as one of Boris Johnson’s most senior aides – and a close ally of Dominic Cummings - resigned amid bitter infighting.

Lee Cain announced he would step down as director of communications on Wednesday night after ministers and advisers including Johnson’s fiancee, Carrie Symonds, are said to have protested over his planned promotion to chief of staff.

Cain’s resignation also threw into doubt the future of Cummings, Johnson’s most senior and high-profile adviser, with one insider telling the Guardian that he could depart No 10 alongside Cain.

Cummings was said to be furious that Cain, a fellow Vote Leave campaigner who was partly credited with bringing him into No 10, had in effect been forced out. There was also speculation about other potential departures from Johnson’s inner circle. Meanwhile some Tory MPs were buoyed by the turmoil, with one claiming it was a chance for Johnson to get “out of the grip of these people”.

The row appears to reflect internal turmoil and dysfunction in No 10 at a time when the UK surpassed 50,000 deaths from the coronavirus, according to official figures.

Critics of the government have repeatedly cited how tensions between senior members of Johnson’s team – and his refusal to sack Cummings earlier this year – have hindered the country’s efforts to get on top of the pandemic.

As the internal rows were thrown into the public spotlight on Wednesday, the extent of division and disagreement within Johnson’s senior team emerged.

...

---

Dimwit clowns throwing toys at each other while the UK registers the highest number of coronovirus deaths in Europe.

Way to go, clowns.

Cain was replaced by Stratton and threw his toys out of the pram as a result, now he's gone. No big deal.

Its not as if Downing Street Communications have been perfect during Cain's tenure. He won't be missed.

The "highest Covid deaths in Europe" stat is entirely disingenuous. We had the highest in Europe numerically (not per capita) in the first wave. We don't have the highest on either a per capita basis now, nor on a numerical weekly average basis now in the second wave - quite the opposite, so far *touch wood* the UK is doing much better than many other nations in Europe in the second wave, hopefully it stays that way though obviously take nothing for granted.

France this wave seems to be the worst hit by far. The statistics coming from France are scary and given the extraordinarily high positivity rate in France its almost certain (like in the first wave) that many cases are being missed.

Quote:

---

Dominic Cummings to leave Downing Street role by Christmas

Boris Johnson’s most senior adviser, Dominic Cummings, is to leave his Downing Street position by the end of this year in a signal of a major change of direction for the government.

---

Goodbye you lying dishonest irresponsible unaccountable little man.

...


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/...bHu2jJnT8.jpeg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EY4IrINWsAEGccX.jpg

https://i.imgflip.com/42rvrf.jpg

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05...0433174557.jpg

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05...0440419689.jpg


Now piss off. Loser. :o

Imagine investing all that political capital to protect the little fucker only to have him leave a few months later anyway.

I think it was always the plan for them to leave when Brexit kicks in. Johnson will be next. Won't be long.

So now Cummings is also out ?

Yeah, here's a picture of him leaving #10 with a box:

https://e3.365dm.com/20/11/768x432/s...20201113172527

A real 'steve bannon gets fired' moment. As in, the rat-fuckery will continue unabated for several more years.

It seems the ultimate cause of his departure was a dispute with Tory backbenchers though the substance of this dispute is unknown. Just as likely to be that he wasn't enough of a rat-bastard as too much of one. You never know with those guys.

Gove is next ?

Twitter Link

I don't have time to investigate, can anyone verify this? :o

I don't know about this specific case, but Johnson's government loves giving out contracts without tender to companies which, by a huge co-incidence, have connections to the Tory party. They have long meetings every day about how best to do this*.

In better times it would probably be quite a big scandal, but in the year of our lord 2020 it barely merits a mention alongside all the other bullshit we have going on.

I was going to make a post or a thread about it, but I couldn't be bothered.

*this part may not be true

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Twitter Link

I don't have time to investigate, can anyone verify this? :o

---

There's nothing dodgy there.

Share capital of £100 is bog standard for newly incorporated companies.

There's a global pandemic on where PPE demands have gone through the roof. At the start of the year we were using 2% of the PPE we are using now, and it was almost all imported. Now domestic demand of PPE has gone up over 50-fold and it's majority domestically produced. Domestic production of PPE has gone up by a factor of well over 10000%

A lot of companies now exist producing PPE that didn't at the start of the year. That's not sleeze it is capitalism.

As for tendering traditional tendering processes are slow and don't suit a fucking pandemic where speed is necessary.

Nurses and doctors lack PPE would be a bigger story than PPE was purchased by a new company set up to produce PPE as it's in high demand.

How can you be confident that it's -not- corruption when it wasn't offered to other bidders?

Proper capitalism about fostering competition.

It is offered to other bidders. The government literally said "if you can produce this we will buy it".

So someone set up a company to produce it ... And that's news how?

Anyone capable of setting up a company to produce PPE could do the same thing. The alternative is not having PPE.

According to the article the contract wasn't advertised to other bidders. Is it wrong?

I'm not concerned about who it went to or how long they've been going. What's important is that the contract was advertised and a transparent procurement process was followed; resulting in the best and most affordable company. If there's evidence that's the case then no biggy.

The contract wasn't advertised as it was part of the pandemic response. The government didn't say "we need X items of PPE if you can supply all of it then put in a tender" which was won by this company. The government said "we need billions of items of PPE, let us know what you can supply" and signed contracts accordingly.

Have you forgotten already all the stories of people worried they were going to run out of PPE?

Transparent procurement procedures aren't for emergencies. Emergencies need speed.

I've not forgotten at all and I'd argue that, given how important bit was, a transparent procurement process was even more important. Not less.

The process doesn't have to take long, but it is essential to ensure we get the best and that there's no corruption.

Speed was more important.

There is an old saying: You can have something good, cheap and fast - but only two out of three.

When we were told to wear face coverings it was cheap and fast. Pretty much anything even home made was viable just get something covering your face. But PPE has to be medical grade, it needs to be good quality so the choice then is cheap or fast.

Normal procurement rules suit normal times. It is about taking a bit longer to save some money. It may take a few weeks extra to sign the contract but if it saves pennies per item it adds up.

In May though it wasn't about saving pennies it was about saving lives. PPE was needed and needed fast, from whoever could supply it. And every nation was in the same boat so anything that could be produced was getting sold. Taking longer to sign the contract could mean it going elsewhere. Speed was more crucial and the alternative would have been a lack of PPE and even more dead bodies.

I agree that speed is important. A sensible, agile leadership would have adjusted the procurement process to suit the emergency, whilst adhering to an underlying principle of openness and competition.

They did. They openly and transparently informed everyone that could manufacture this that they wanted to buy it.

Anyone could apply for contracts. It is disingenuous to say it wasn't advertised. Hancock went on TV and literally asked manufacturers to help!

Thread with more context:

Twitter Link

There's been a number of stories all over the west about govts awarding large contracts for PPE to newly formed, unproven companies, with disappointing results. What's particularly distasteful is that this particular contract (like some other high profile govt. contracts during the pandemic) reeks of cronyism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

They did. They openly and transparently informed everyone that could manufacture this that they wanted to buy it.

Anyone could apply for contracts. It is disingenuous to say it wasn't advertised. Hancock went on TV and literally asked manufacturers to help!

---

Ah yes, I remember that. But then I also remember reports and journalist questions at the daily briefings about companies who answered the call to arms but consistently heard nothing back from the government.

Ultimately we don't know. I don't believe there's enough evidence bro support your claim of "there's nothing dodgy here". Neither do I agree that the way it's been handled is simply "capitalism".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Thread with more context:

Twitter Link

There's been a number of stories all over the west about govts awarding large contracts for PPE to newly formed, unproven companies, with disappointing results. What's particularly distasteful is that this particular contract (like some other high profile govt. contracts during the pandemic) reeks of cronyism.

---

A company that was offering 25 million gowns was given higher priority than one offering 40,000 gowns?

I wonder why that could be?

40,000 is an order of magnitude different to 25 million.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

A company that was offering 25 million gowns was given higher priority than one offering 40,000 gowns?

I wonder why that could be?

40,000 is an order of magnitude different to 25 million.

---

The story directly contradicts your claim re. "if you can produce this we will buy it". These decisions are concerning, esp. in light of the extremely costly Ayanda fiasco, who offered 50 million masks that apparently won't/can't be used as intended. What's 0% of 50 million? It's zero. Contracts must be awarded to companies with relevant experience and a decent track record—not hastily incorporated scam operations that will, at best, offer to sell equipment at a several hundred percent markup to an incompetent govt. plagued by cronyism.

Coronavirus: Safety officials had 'political' pressure to approve PPE

Quote:

---

By September, the legal wrangling was still going on, the emails show, even though the suits had, by then, been released to the NHS.

"We are being drawn into the legalities", one official wrote, saying they'd been asked to provide a statement that PestFix's products had had the right safety documents.

"I have been contacted by [name redacted] today requesting a statement to the effect that HSE were provided with the required documentation by Pestfix… This is not factually correct," the safety regulator wrote.

The following day, another email reveals: "…various colleagues in DHSC are contacting those involved in the assessment of the Pestfix products requesting statements to the effect that HSE assessed the products and they were compliant - not factually correct".

An email, dated 25 June, said Pestfix was worried news its equipment had not completed necessary testing might leak to the public.

"We are very concerned about whom we speak to with regard to getting these suits tested as we do not want it to be made public knowledge that PPE from Pestfix has not passed HSE inspection," it read.

The firm added that, with the legal challenge looming, it hoped that new tests could be done quickly. This was so that "we and the DHSC can confirm that the product… has been certified and accepted".

The isolation suits were ultimately tested to the required standard, and on 6 August the regulator allowed them to be used for staff treating Covid-19 in hospitals.

But it insisted the products were relabelled because the description was incorrect. The decision says: "The product refers to itself as an isolation gown, but it is clearly a disposable coverall".

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

The story directly contradicts your claim re. "if you can produce this we will buy it". These decisions are concerning, esp. in light of the extremely costly Ayanda fiasco, who offered 50 million masks that apparently won't/can't be used as intended. What's 0% of 50 million? It's zero. Contracts must be awarded to companies with relevant experience and a decent track record—not hastily incorporated scam operations that will, at best, offer to sell equipment at a several hundred percent markup to an incompetent govt. plagued by cronyism.

---

That's not a contradiction.

If the company who got the contract had offered to sell only thousands or if the company who didn't get it had offered to sell millions then that would be the same comparable. But it's not true.

Companies with relevant experience don't exist at the volume required. The only way to get the billions of items needed was to rely upon new companies too.

Any scams shouldn't be paid and should be prosecuted if fraud occured but that doesn't seem to be alleged here. They offered millions of goods that were needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

They did. They openly and transparently informed everyone that could manufacture this that they wanted to buy it.

Anyone could apply for contracts. It is disingenuous to say it wasn't advertised. Hancock went on TV and literally asked manufacturers to help!

---

Dude, you still need an open tender. And no, it does not need to be overly long.

I just did something like that myself. The time between tendering and accepting an offer was a mere two weeks.

Granted, it was only for stuff worth 25,000€ but still.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Companies with relevant experience don't exist at the volume required. The only way to get the billions of items needed was to rely upon new companies too.

---

Yes, let's trust that a completely new company is experienced enough to do this.

I'm not sure why you think that established companies are completely incapable of scaling up their production. Is there some natural law which states that companies have an upper limit to their size and only new companies can be bigger? This is all very confusing and I'm not quite sure that you know what you're talking about.

To me it sounds more like you're defending Team Trump whatever come. We've been over this before: You're pathologically incapable of admitting that your best boy Boris does not smell of roses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

Dude, you still need an open tender. And no, it does not need to be overly long.

I just did something like that myself. The time between tendering and accepting an offer was a mere two weeks.

Granted, it was only for stuff worth 25,000€ but still.



Yes, let's trust that a completely new company is experienced enough to do this.

I'm not sure why you think that established companies are completely incapable of scaling up their production. Is there some natural law which states that companies have an upper limit to their size and only new companies can be bigger? This is all very confusing and I'm not quite sure that you know what you're talking about.

To me it sounds more like you're defending Team Trump whatever come. We've been over this before: You're pathologically incapable of admitting that your best boy Boris does not smell of roses.

---

Prior to the pandemic 99% of PPE was imported.

As of September 70% is domestically produced.

The volume that is required has considerably increased too. So it was 1% of a smaller number vs 70% of a much bigger number now. I'm not sure what ratio it is now but earlier in the pandemic PPE demand was up over 50x, so using that figure domestic PPE production would be up over 350,000%

If you think it's possible to transform from 1% of not as much to 70% of much more without using new supply chains then I'm curious why you believe that?

Of course existing companies can scale up too but given the companies that supplied 99% of the supplies didn't exist in this country changing that required companies moving into this sector.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Prior to the pandemic 99% of PPE was imported.

As of September 70% is domestically produced.

The volume that is required has considerably increased too. So it was 1% of a smaller number vs 70% of a much bigger number now. I'm not sure what ratio it is now but earlier in the pandemic PPE demand was up over 50x, so using that figure domestic PPE production would be up over 350,000%

If you think it's possible to transform from 1% of not as much to 70% of much more without using new supply chains then I'm curious why you believe that?

Of course existing companies can scale up too but given the companies that supplied 99% of the supplies didn't exist in this country changing that required companies moving into this sector.

---

No, you still have not shown where it requires that a completely new company moves into this sector. Please show evidence and proper logic that this is needed. No "because I say so".

The "new supply chains" is just a buzzword you've heard. Please also show the class how an existing company is incapable of opening new supply chains.

Lastly, please show the class why an open tender was completely impossible.

psst you guys

ppe is not the only thing tories have been issuing contracts without tender for, most notable test and trace went to serco without tender and i think we all know that went really well

also many of the ppe contractors who were awarded contracts without tender or even, apparently, basic due diligence subsequently delivered faulty equipment, perhaps most notably spending 1/4 billion on 50 million face masks for the nhs with ayanda capital, a private equity company with no experience in ppe, which subsequently proved to be unusable by the NHS due to being secured to the face with ear loops rather than straps at the back

you'll never guess who recommended ayanda capital for the contract, unless you guessed 'a tory advisor who also serves on the board of ayanda capital'. thread: https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/st...44082145177600

New companies moving into the sector is just the market in action, addressing a gap in the market.

I'm sure if any existing companies capable of producing millions of goods were rejected a contract then that will go viral. So Occam's Razor is it never happened because Aimless is dredging minor bullshit and not quoting it.