1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

More bunce for Tory mates.

Discussion in 'Personal' started by modelmaker, Jul 3, 2020.

  1. modelmaker

    modelmaker Lead commenter

    https://bylinetimes.com/2020/07/02/...ading-history-handed-25-million-ppe-contract/

    The Great British COVID-19 procurement scandal continues after a newly published contract revealed yet another business with little experience or expertise being awarded a multi-million-pound contract to supply personal protective equipment (PPE) to the NHS.

    Design company Luxe Lifestyle Ltd was awarded a £25 million contract on 27 April to supply garments for biological or chemical protection to the NHS. According to Companies House, the business was incorporated by fashion designer Karen Brost in November 2018. However, it appears to have no employees, no assets and no turnover.

    Additional research into the company’s background using business information provider Endole revealed no evidence that the company has actually done any trading at all. It is not clear how a business with no experience in the sector is able to meet its contractual requirements to provide 1.2 million gowns and 10 million FFP2/KN95 masks to the NHS during a national crisis.
     
  2. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    The article says the contract was awarded by Public Health England.
     
  3. WB

    WB Lead commenter

    This seems to be another dodgy source.

    They keep popping up on here. Devon Eye, Squark Box, The Byline Times.

    They are more blogs than newspapers and they are just pushing their own not-so-hidden agendas.

    Some posters seem to jump on them with a kind of I-told-you-so glee because they dovetail with their own views.
     
    nomad and Oscillatingass like this.
  4. WB

    WB Lead commenter

    I may have missed it but could you point out the financial link between this company the "Tory mates"?
     
    nomad likes this.
  5. magic surf bus

    magic surf bus Star commenter

    Private Eye (if that's considered a reliable source) ran a piece recently on a PPE transport contract that was granted to a Tory party donor without any competitive bidding. The excuse was they didn't have time for competitive bidding. So much for accountability with public funds.

    That doesn't necessarily mean the process allowed for competitive bidding. There's apparently an emergency power that can bypass it, rightly or wrongly.
     
    ajrowing likes this.
  6. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    No . It wasn't
    Somebody messed up big time awarding this to a woman who sews masks at home as per her Facebook page. Obvs it's not money up front.
    (No wonder Cummings is keen to shake up the Civil Service)

    Type of procedure
    Award of a contract without prior publication of a call for competition in the Official Journal of the European Union in the cases listed below

    • Extreme urgency brought about by events unforeseeable for the contracting authority and in accordance with the strict conditions stated in the directive
    Explanation:




    1) The Coronavirus disease (Covid-19) is a serious infectious respiratory disease and its consequences pose a risk to life. The Covid-19 outbreak is a public health emergency of international concerns as declared by the World Health Organisation on 30 January 2020. The WHO Director General characterised Covid-19 as a pandemic on 11 March 2020, by this stage Europe was the centre of the pandemic.

    2) The use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is critical in safeguarding the health and lives of the care professionals treating patients with Covid-19. Delays in procuring the PPE, in this case, gowns and masks, poses a risk to life of those on the front line and the likelihood of significantly increased death toll.

    3) In March the NHS experienced severe shortages of PPE, modelling based the trajectory of other European countries forecast the need for significant and extremely rapid increase in the UK PPE capacity. Similar shortfalls in PPE stocks were identified globally. There was immense demand for PPE, requiring the UK government to actively seek and create new supply chains rapidly to meet that demand. In these circumstances, a procurement following the usual timescales under the PCR 2015, including accelerated options, was impossible. PPE manufacturers and supply chains were under immediate and unprecedented global pressure to provide products. A delay in engaging with the market by running a usual procurement process ran the risk of failing to acquire the necessary stock of PPE equipment and presenting a significant risk to life.

    4) The Department for Health and Social Care (‘DHSC’) is satisfied the tests permitting use of the Negotiated procedure without prior publication (Regulation 32(2)(c)) were met:

    A. As far as is strictly necessary:

    PPE was identified as strictly necessary to meet anticipated demand on the NHS during the first wave of cases in the UK.

    B. There are genuine reasons for extreme urgency:

    DHSC are responding to Covid-19 immediately because of public health risks presenting a genuine emergency.

    C. The events that have led to the need for extreme urgency were unforeseeable:

    As the commission itself confirmed: ‘the current coronavirus crisis presents an extreme and unforeseeable urgency – precisely for such a situation our European rules enable public buyers to buy within a matter of days, even hours, if necessary.’ (Commissioner Breton, Internal Market, 1 April 2020).

    D. It was impossible to comply with the usual timescales in the PCR:

    Due to the urgency of the situation there was no time to run an accelerated procurement under the open, restricted or competitive procedures with negotiation that would allow DHSC to secure delivery of products, particularly in light of the corresponding delays to timelines associated with securing supply of the PPE equipment.

    E. The situation is not attributable to the contracting authority:

    DHSC has not caused or contributed to the coronavirus crisis, which justifies the need for extreme urgency.
     
  7. ajrowing

    ajrowing Lead commenter

    You missed the Guardian off your list.
     
    WB likes this.
  8. Oscillatingass

    Oscillatingass Star commenter

    Surely you must have realized by now that on the TES you never let facts get in the way of (yet another) anti government rant.
     
    nomad and WB like this.
  9. Oscillatingass

    Oscillatingass Star commenter

    So true.:)
     
    nomad likes this.
  10. Oscillatingass

    Oscillatingass Star commenter

    Yes a glaring omission.
     
  11. ajrowing

    ajrowing Lead commenter

    Your right of course. It really is unnecessary to rant about this government, they provide all the evidence one could ever need to be anti them.
    As for fact free, the Rose Garden story time with Dom was so devoid of facts it gave fiction a bad name.
     
    jellycowfish and Jolly_Roger15 like this.
  12. modelmaker

    modelmaker Lead commenter

    It's right to keep an open mind about sources of information, but before dismissing the Byline Times as a dodgy news source, it would be worth checking out who they are and the veracity of other stories they've run.

    It's also a fair guide that if Madge jumps in to justify the government's position with supporting bluster, rather that dismiss it as lies, the story will be one that evidence is available to prove it's true.
     
  13. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    Anyway if they made anything in cash we can consider Labour;s view that we can all pay a value tax with the rich paying more as they can afford it!
     
  14. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    Whilst is a fact that Supplies - 293547-2020 in TED tenders is real, you have shown no connection to the Tory party as paraded by the thread title.
    (There does tend to be a naive belief that every single government financial transaction is the personal decision of a government minister)
     
    Oscillatingass likes this.
  15. modelmaker

    modelmaker Lead commenter

    It amuses me to point out when governmemts deviate from the legislation they consturcted to ensure transparency in how our government is spending our money; and amuses us all more when you attempt to justify why they are abusing the established rules are being broken.

    Even in a time of crisis, we would surely expect our government to place orders with companies that had a track record of experise in supplying the goods we need in a crisis situation.

    Sorry, but the civil service isn't autonomous from the government.
    It takes direction from the government, who is ultimately to blame when founld to be incompetent of giving directing.

    The next thing you'll be trying to tell us is that the gallant six hundred who rode into the Valley of Death did so without being ordered to. Do me a favour and get a grip.
     
    ajrowing likes this.
  16. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    Probably because you don't understand EU public tendering
    Maybe but their execution is often poor and misguided. It becomes apparent when you work with them
    That is as fictitious as your thread title
     
    Oscillatingass likes this.
  17. modelmaker

    modelmaker Lead commenter

    Don't try to give me tha nonsense. It's part of my life. What I'd like you to explain is how it's possible to bypass any form of tendering, even in a crisis, in placing orders with companies that have no track record of supplying PPE, nor even a record or having traded anything to get £25m orders.

    You know it's a scam as much as everyone else does. What's your interest in pretending it isn't?
     
    ajrowing likes this.
  18. Oscillatingass

    Oscillatingass Star commenter

    Of course it is my right as well as yours. As for for you being anti government: no doubt you are a natural Tory voter but it is only in the last few months you have realized the Tories deserve your derision rather than your vote. On the other hand, I suppose there is the smallest possibility that you are just another lefty who likes to have a good moan because you realize there will be no lefty government for at least 10 years. As for 'the rose garden with Dom' I haven't a clue what you are insinuating. I hope it isn't anything rude.
     
  19. WB

    WB Lead commenter

    This isn't the first time The Byline Times has been quoted as a source on TES.

    Last time I did spend a while looking around the site. You only need a short time on The Morning Star website to work out the slant it is putting on the stories it publishes and the same is true for The Byline Times.

    Twice now (posts 4 and 14) you've been asked to justify your thread title. The title is a clear accusation that somebody with connections to the Tory party as made cash unethically out if the deal with Luxe Lifestyle Ltd. I can find no reference in the article you have linked to or in the posts you have made to any such deal.
     
    Oscillatingass and nomad like this.
  20. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    So it's no longer "more bunce for Tory mates". I guess you were so eager to start the thread you didn't bother with facts.
     
    WB and nomad like this.

Share This Page