Covid-19 Discussion

[ChipChop]

...which is precisely why Twitter didn't actually ban Trump. If you read or watched or listened to any of the 'mainstream' media channels you'd know that. But I guess that the media channels you choose to frequent carry their own version of events, and one that chimes well with your own ideas. A match made in heaven. .

Whatever you say.

Maybe one day soon there will just be one news source. They could call it TwitFaceAche or similar.

They will tell you everything you need to know to function "correctly".

 

[markjay]

Whatever you say.

Maybe one day soon there will just be one news source. They could call it TwitFaceAche or similar.

They will tell you everything you need to know to function "correctly".

This has been done before, it was called Pravda (Правда - 'Truth'), but thankfully I don't think it's coming back any time soon, other than perhaps in science fiction novels.

 

[Teego]

This has been done before, it was called Pravda (Правда - 'Truth'), but thankfully I don't think it's coming back any time soon, other than perhaps in science fiction novels.

It's here and it's called Fox News. For a different point of view you can try Russia Today.

 

[markjay]

It's here and it's called Fox News. For a different point of view you can try Russia Today.

I am actually a fan of both RT and Al-Jazeera.

 

[Benzowner]

Log in to Facebook

Log in to Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family and people you know.

www.facebook.com

Words fail me.

 

[markjay]

Log in to Facebook

Log in to Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family and people you know.

www.facebook.com

Words fail me.

Why? There was a lot of pressure on the government to buy PPE kit asap. Mat Hancock was criticised for taking 'too long' to approve offers for purchase of PPE. The newspaper were full of articles about businesses and individuals who offered PPE to the government and 'heard nothing back'.

A £150m mistake might sound like a lot when taken out of context - but the total expenditure on PPE was £15bn. So a government department having to spend billions within weeks and only getting 1%(!) of it wrong, sounds to me like a world record in bureaucratic efficiency.

But setting aside party-politics and tabloid-style mud-slinging... where the government got it wrong, is in not having stockpiles of PPE beforehand. It would have been much cheaper to buy PPE before COVID-19, and the kit has a very long shelf life when stored correctly.

And the Conservatives have been in power since 2010, so they can't really blame Labour for it.

We all knew a pandemic was coming our way, it was always just a question of when, not if... and yet when it happened as predicted, we were unprepared with the most basic of things.

But I think it's wrong to take aim at the people who did their best to fix the problem in very difficult circumstances and under massive time pressure.

 

[st13phil]

where the government got it wrong, is in not having stockpiles of PPE beforehand. It would have been much cheaper to buy PPE before COVID-19, and the kit has a very long shelf life when stored correctly.

What everyone needs to remember is that for decades everyone involved in inventory control has had it drilled into them that stock is a bad thing. The mantra was always that what was needed was a responsive supply chain that can supply what you want, when you want it. Anyone who invested in inventory was considered a spendthrift fool, and whatever the shelf life, it still needs somewhere to store it, and that means someone to count it, and someone to ensure that the stuff with the shortest shelf life gets issued first, yada yada yada. Due to this mindset, the NAO would have been all over it as "government waste", as would our media when it came out that we were destroying (say) £1.5bn of out of date PPE every year because high enough stock levels were being held to cope with a massive peak...

Of course, low (or zero) inventory and JIT supply chains are fine until something disrupts them (like the Fukishima tsunami), or there's a massive global increase in demand that grossly exceeds manufacturing capacity - which is what happened in in the early days of this pandemic. The trick that was missed is not that we should have had stocks, but rather local manufacturing capacity that can be quickly ramped up when needed. That would still have left us exposed regarding raw materials, but they are generally much easier and cheaper to store in bulk than the finished goods, and the write-off costs for anything that expires is also cheaper.

 

[Benzowner]

Why? There was a lot of pressure on the government to buy PPE kit asap. Mat Hancock was criticised for taking 'too long' to approve offers for purchase of PPE. The newspaper were full of articles about businesses and individuals who offered PPE to the government and 'heard nothing back'.

A £150m mistake might sound like a lot when taken out of context - but the total expenditure on PPE was £15bn. So a government department having to spend billions within weeks and only getting 1%(!) of it wrong, sounds to me like a world record in bureaucratic efficiency.

But setting aside party-politics and tabloid-style mud-slinging... where the government got it wrong, is in not having stockpiles of PPE beforehand. It would have been much cheaper to buy PPE before COVID-19, and the kit has a very long shelf life when stored correctly.

And the Conservatives have been in power since 2010, so they can't really blame Labour for it.

We all knew a pandemic was coming our way, it was always just a question of when, not if... and yet when it happened as predicted, we were unprepared with the most basic of things.

But I think it's wrong to take aim at the people who did their best to fix the problem in very difficult circumstances and under massive time pressure.

But spent with a business owned by a friend of Liz Truss, £150million is a lot of money to a £100 company.

 

[markjay]

But spent with a business owned by a friend of Liz Truss, £150million is a lot of money to a £100 company.

If this was fraud or corruption (or both), then the police should investigate. From what I read in The London Economic , this is the core of the issue you have raised above:

'The deal was brokered by Andrew Mills who... is one of twelve advisers to the Board of Trade, chaired by International Trade Secretary Liz Truss.'
...
'Mills reportedly made the initial approach to the government in the name of Prospermill, a small firm he set up with his wife last year.'

So, did the adviser participate in any Board of Trade discussions regarding PPE contracts, and if so did he declare a conflict of interest and excluded himself from the decision-making process? How much does he stand to earn from 'brokering' the deal? These are all questions that an inquiry should look into.

(Additionally, there are two other unrelated PPE contracts that some suggest should be looked into)

 

[Dryce]

If this was fraud or corruption (or both), then the police should investigate. From what I read in The London Economic , this is the core of the issue you have raised above:

Not just police.

There are normal public sector procurement rules to deal with - which are supposed to stop friend of a friend shortcuttng.

 

[Swotty]

PHE is charged with maintaining stocks of PPE fit for purpose. That is an integral part of their role.

They will no doubt point to an overlap with the NHS when the inevitable Inquiry comes.

Could be an interesting bun fight.

 

[Benzowner]

Apart from that, why would the UK Government pay for the PPE so fast, anyone who has dealt with them know they usually take several
months to pay

 

[Swotty]

Liz Truss certainly is certainly ahead on the bun front:



As Boris has clearly noticed:

 

[grober]

The UK Politics & Brexit Thread | OT (OFF Topic) Forums

What's there to write about? The government is doing a decent job, given the circumstances. The opposition party now has a responsible, and dare I say it, potentially-electable, leadership, but no election in sight. All a bit boring, really....

forums.mbclub.co.uk

PPE masks not fit for purpose - Good Law Project

The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date. In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law...

goodlawproject.org

 

[ChipChop]

The UK Politics & Brexit Thread | OT (OFF Topic) Forums

What's there to write about? The government is doing a decent job, given the circumstances. The opposition party now has a responsible, and dare I say it, potentially-electable, leadership, but no election in sight. All a bit boring, really....

forums.mbclub.co.uk

PPE masks not fit for purpose - Good Law Project

The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date. In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law...

goodlawproject.org

The goodlawproject link details a pretty shocking state of affairs. As ever it seems it is all about the money.

 

[Dryce]

Apart from that, why would the UK Government pay for the PPE so fast, anyone who has dealt with them know they usually take several
months to pay

In defence you get UORs - Urgent Operational Requirement (s)- which are used to circumvent normal process delays and effectively shortcut extended procurement decision making.

So I suspect that in other areas of government there are similar ways of gettig stuff expedited.

 

[m80]

It looks to me that the Gov't, or individual ministers, are spending our money at an accelerated pace. Any later discovered discrepancies will be irrelevant as the money will be gone and back handers enjoyed.
Maybe on boob jobs.

We will be left looking after the pennies as they look after the pounds, lot's of them, for themselves.


Markjay, what do you lean of general relevance from the state run RT?
I gave up on it years ago when I recognised that its twisted bias should be an embarrassment. Putin has done wonders for Russia (and massively well for himself), but he doesn't have the halo they would have followers believe.

 

[markjay]

...Markjay, what do you lean of general relevance from the state run RT?
I gave up on it years ago when I recognised that its twisted bias should be an embarrassment. Putin has done wonders for Russia (and massively well for himself), but he doesn't have the halo they would have followers believe...

I like to hear views from different angles. I also watch pieces on Fox news, telling the world how great Trump is. And I am interested to hear what the Hizbullah-run Al-Manar TV have to say about the blast in Beirut. And I read articles in the Guardian.... etc etc.

 

[ChipChop]

Bill Gates says climate change could be even worse than Covid-19 in "just a few decades"

COVID-19 is awful. Climate change could be worse.

Bill Gates believes if we learn the lessons of COVID-19, we can approach climate change more informed about the consequences of inaction, and more prepared to save lives and prevent the worst possible outcome.

www.gatesnotes.com

 

[AMGeed]

Bill Gates says climate change could be even worse than Covid-19 in "just a few decades"

COVID-19 is awful. Climate change could be worse.

Bill Gates believes if we learn the lessons of COVID-19, we can approach climate change more informed about the consequences of inaction, and more prepared to save lives and prevent the worst possible outcome.

www.gatesnotes.com

Yet there are respected scientists who refute that claim.
Since when has Bill Gates been a climate change expert?