Search results

Yeh, you're right. Don't know much about public procurement. Know a bit about private though, but i'm just going on the information that is out there which apparently everyone else is able to jump to chunky conclusions with...

Because they are importing from an accredited producer and obviously have significantly bigger volume commitments on offer than the "long established PPE supplier" (beauty gown supplier that is) who was able to offer 40k gowns per month. The awarded supplier was able to offer 25 million gowns...

Can you be more specific? So is the default to just assume someone is guilty of corruption or misallocation of public funds and everyone who says that might be somewhat of a stretch needs to provide immediate proof otherwise? Just trying to figure out the rules of tory bashing is all, lmk

What the fuck are you talking about? It's not guilty until proven innocent is it? What EVIDENCE (nice and shouty for you) is there than the other company is able to meet it's stated targets? Your argument is ridiculous. You have no idea about the MedPro producer and what their reputation or...

Yes because the government are not going to go for a strategy of onboarding and setting up supply chain, logistics networks, payment terms, onboarding, etc., for ten companies when they can get the same volume with one company are they? So I am not suprised they didn't get a response. Do you...

Their ability to meet the stated volume requirements was never even brought into question apart from by yourself? But this is something you are going after oddly. So you admit it then, we should assume that everything is a lie by any company or firm that has any connection to the conservatives...

Is that how it works though mate? Do we just assume everything is illegitimate until proven otherwise? Shouldn’t it be the other way around

I’m sorry but I’m losing patience. Are you truly not understanding the point or are you just so blinded by hatred for a party that you are refusing to see it? The company that was set up is an importing company. It’s not claiming to be some massive UK based factory producing gowns is it? It’s a...

But this is exactly my point. You’re trying to make one really weak argument hold kore weight by referring to a load of other scandals which I haven’t said anything about. It’s a straw man argument. Credibility is lost when you start trying to make something out of nothing (or at best, not...

Under the evidence that they said they could and I am going by the assumption that not everything is a big nasty conspiracy where people are lying all over the place. The tweets said one could do 500k a week and one could do 40k a week. That’s the evidence we are both presented with. If you’re...

An audit process by the accreditation body obviously

It is common sense. What’s so hard to get your head around with it? Someone on Twitter tries to make out there’s loads of corruption going on and the big bad Tories gave business to their friends instead of the little guy, when actually it sounds like little guy wasn’t accredited and could offer...

No, that’s exactly the point? 😘😘

The point you’re asking all of these as questions is exactly the point - there are lots of of variables but most likely they were just more likely to deliver to scale so they went with them. Re the accreditation, I doubt the company set up was actually manufacturing anything obviously, it would...

I actually meant this thread on this forum

Lol all these angry posts you can’t even see the irony in it

This is literally just a labour ranting thread. Zero objectivity and embarrassing bias. My party isn’t in power so must slag absolutely everything off that current party is doing! Would have so much more credibility if actually looked at things objectively.

So one company could supply 500k gowns per week and it already had the accreditation, one company could supply 40k per week with no accreditation. Obviously they’re going to focus on the former ffs. Ridiculous one-sidedness like this that just takes credibility away from labour

He’s a RWB so probably could yeh

I am not sure the council bit is in the clubs control. To clarify, if your question RE being in a better place than where we were in 2007 being between: - £1.5m a year rent for 23 days a year access and no revenues. Club making millions (7m?) losses each year, shit management and a club...