Bolton Wanderers Football Club Fan Forum for all BWFC Supporters.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Wandering Minds » Nepotism/Cronyism Watch

Nepotism/Cronyism Watch

+7
Natasha Whittam
wanderlust
Ten Bobsworth
y2johnny
Norpig
Sluffy
xmiles
11 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14 ... 27  Next

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 27]

31Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 14:47

Guest


Guest

Sluffy wrote:

I don't believe everything I read in the papers, do you?

Lord Sedwill was the Head of the Civil Service at the time who in the private sector if you are more familiar with that world is equivalent to the Chief Executive/Managing Director role and as such he wouldn't be involved in the day to day stuff but certainly would be the one answerable when things go wrong and as such would have been very much involved in the suspension of normal tendering procedures and the replacement of them with emergency powers and also getting to the bottom of all the allegations of contracts being wrongly awarded and/or not delivered upon.

You show a staggering lack of knowledge about Contract Law if I may say so, implicit in any contract for sale of goods is that they have to be fit for purpose and any breech of that is enforceable by law - you certainly don't need any government minister having to say that, its already fundamental to any contract throughout the world.

Awarding contracts to anyone you know is also not an issue as long as a declaration of interest is made before the contract is awarded - you and the press reports/social media seem to be making out that it is something sinister/underhanded in someway - it is in fact common practise and those declaring their interests are simply excluded from the contract negotiations or awarding of them.

All government contracts are also able to be scrutinised by the all party Public Accounts Committee -

The Committee of Public Accounts is a select committee of the British House of Commons. It is responsible for overseeing government expenditures, and to ensure they are effective and honest. The committee is seen as a crucial mechanism for ensuring transparency and accountability in government financial operations, having been described by Professor the Lord Hennessy as "the queen of the select committees...[which] by its very existence exert[s] a cleansing effect in all government departments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Accounts_Committee_(United_Kingdom)

Don't you find it somewhat strange then that the only people claiming 'foul play' is social media and journalist with a particular political agenda and not the leader of Her Majesty's  Opposition Party or the 'Queen' of all Parliament's 'scrutinising' bodies?

My 'issue' if I have one, is that it seems to me yet again that the people with the least knowledge about the subject (social media) are making by far the most noise about it.

If there really was a major problem of corruption going on don't you think it would be front page news akin to what happened with Cummings that went on for days on end rather than some anti-government nutjob lawyer with a major bee in his bonnet about the government attempting to stir up some shit against them?

Sorry missed this earlier.

1. Im not claiming there's corruption, I've been very clear on that.
2. Labour are asking for this to be looked into - and most national papers are carrying the story. You're trying to dismiss valid questions as social media conspiracies again.
3. A staggering lack of knowledge on contact law - can't claim i have much knowledge on it (no doubt you do), but what's to know? They had to recall 750,000 units and either replace them or refund the value? Either way we lose out because there's a delay to testing kits.
4. Great to see the PACs are investigating it. Pokes a rather large hole in your dismissal of this as a social media hack job.

32Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:15

xmiles

xmiles
Jay Jay Okocha
Jay Jay Okocha

Interesting as the discussion on the PPE contracts that the Tories have given to their friends is, it has rather moved away from the blatant cronyism of appointing people like Dido Harding and Kate Bingham without any proper process and despite their manifest lack of knowledge and apparently the ability to do their jobs.

33Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:23

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

xmiles wrote:Interesting as the discussion on the PPE contracts that the Tories have given to their friends is, it has rather moved away from the blatant cronyism of appointing people like Dido Harding and Kate Bingham without any proper process and despite their manifest lack of knowledge and apparently the ability to do their jobs.
Don't you have to be a little forgiving to folks whose parents gave them names like Dido and Robinette?

34Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:25

Guest


Guest

xmiles wrote:Interesting as the discussion on the PPE contracts that the Tories have given to their friends is, it has rather moved away from the blatant cronyism of appointing people like Dido Harding and Kate Bingham without any proper process and despite their manifest lack of knowledge and apparently the ability to do their jobs.

Yes good point to be fair, im not as aware of Bingham but Harding was an awful appointment given her track record.

35Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:25

Guest


Guest

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
Don't you have to be a little forgiving to folks whose parents gave them names like Dido and Robinette?

Very Happy

36Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:35

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Dido is a cool name.

37Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:35

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Dido was only one letter out.

38Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:40

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Who is Dino?

39Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:48

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

T.R.O.Y. wrote:Sorry missed this earlier.

1. Im not claiming there's corruption, I've been very clear on that.
2. Labour are asking for this to be looked into - and most national papers are carrying the story. You're trying to dismiss valid questions as social media conspiracies again.
3. A staggering lack of knowledge on contact law - can't claim i have much knowledge on it (no doubt you do), but what's to know? They had to recall 750,000 units and either replace them or refund the value? Either way we lose out because there's a delay to testing kits.
4. Great to see the PACs are investigating it. Pokes a rather large hole in your dismissal of this as a social media hack job.

1 - Your argument seems to be based on the government making poor decisions does it not?  If so I refer you to the impartial Head of the Civil Service at the time where he states that  he is adamant that the government coped fairly well during a once in a generation crisis.

Given a choice between your 'opinion' of what 'might' have happened and his 'knowledge' of what 'did', then I obviously believe him to actually know what actually happened!

You seem to be in denial about this presumably because it doesn't fit with your desired politically biased narrative?

2 - Some random points raised by Labour several months ago and occasional newspaper reporting of a campaign on social media from a lawyer with a massive axe to grind with this government does not constitute that this is all being continually driven from social media - particularly at this moment in time when Labour and the more reputable newspapers are well aware of a PAC inquiry scheduled for next month.

3 - Yes a substantial part of my professional qualification involved being taught contract law - and your flippant remark of "but what's to know?" clearly demonstrates your vast ignorance on the subject.

If you don't understand even the basics about contract law - and you clearly don't - then its pointless even discussing it any further with you as you clearly don't know what you are saying on the subject and how ridiculous some of the things you have said are.

Not your finest moment on Nut's I'm afraid.

4 - If you say so!

In the real world however the PAC inquiry was born out of the National Audit Office, Overview of the UK government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic
that was published on the 21st May, 2020

https://www.nao.org.uk/report/summary-of-uk-governments-response-to-the-covid-19-pandemic/

The National Audit Office started this process last month by reporting this -

In our previous report, Overview of the UK government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we signalled our intention to report on how government has managed risks created by its response to the crisis. This report will set out the scale of COVID-19-related procurement, how procurement rules have changed and how the government is managing the risks associated with these changes.

https://www.nao.org.uk/work-in-progress/government-procurement-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

This just goes to prove that the social media campaign has never had any bearing or relevance on the inquiry of the many billions of pounds spent on Government procurement during the pandemic and fwiw is they are undertaking exactly what I said they would be doing when you and others were in hysterics and the beginning of the pandemic and screaming that the government wasn't being held to account.

Amazingly I do actually know what I'm talking about occasionally although it does feel a massive waste of my breath at the time.

Onwards and upwards though.

40Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 15:55

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

Natasha Whittam wrote:Who is Dino?

Fred Flintstone's pet I believe.

Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Tenor

41Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 16:18

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Just add an L.

42Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 16:32

wanderlust

wanderlust
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

boltonbonce wrote:Just add an L.
Didol? Only a drug addict would name their kid after a synthetic opiate.

43Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 16:37

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

wanderlust wrote:
Didol? Only a drug addict would name their kid after a synthetic opiate.
Very Happy

44Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 16:48

Guest


Guest

Sluffy wrote:

1 - Your argument seems to be based on the government making poor decisions does it not?  If so I refer you to the impartial Head of the Civil Service at the time where he states that  he is adamant that the government coped fairly well during a once in a generation crisis.

Given a choice between your 'opinion' of what 'might' have happened and his 'knowledge' of what 'did', then I obviously believe him to actually know what actually happened!

You seem to be in denial about this presumably because it doesn't fit with your desired politically biased narrative?

2 - Some random points raised by Labour several months ago and occasional newspaper reporting of a campaign on social media from a lawyer with a massive axe to grind with this government does not constitute that this is all being continually driven from social media - particularly at this moment in time when Labour and the more reputable newspapers are well aware of a PAC inquiry scheduled for next month.

3 - Yes a substantial part of my professional qualification involved being taught contract law - and your flippant remark of "but what's to know?" clearly demonstrates your vast ignorance on the subject.

If you don't understand even the basics about contract law - and you clearly don't - then its pointless even discussing it any further with you as you clearly don't know what you are saying on the subject and how ridiculous some of the things you have said are.

Not your finest moment on Nut's I'm afraid.

4 - If you say so!

In the real world however the PAC inquiry was born out of the National Audit Office, Overview of the UK government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic
that was published on the 21st May, 2020

https://www.nao.org.uk/report/summary-of-uk-governments-response-to-the-covid-19-pandemic/

The National Audit Office started this process last month by reporting this -

In our previous report, Overview of the UK government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we signalled our intention to report on how government has managed risks created by its response to the crisis. This report will set out the scale of COVID-19-related procurement, how procurement rules have changed and how the government is managing the risks associated with these changes.

https://www.nao.org.uk/work-in-progress/government-procurement-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

This just goes to prove that the social media campaign has never had any bearing or relevance on the inquiry of the many billions of pounds spent on Government procurement during the pandemic and fwiw is they are undertaking exactly what I said they would be doing when you and others were in hysterics and the beginning of the pandemic and screaming that the government wasn't being held to account.

Amazingly I do actually know what I'm talking about occasionally although it does feel a massive waste of my breath at the time.

Onwards and upwards though.

1. Again, you take a general comment and try and apply it to a specific point. You've no idea if Sedwill was referencing government procurement.

2. Shadow Cabinet Office minister Rachel Reeves, who analysed the contracts, told the Mirror: “It is outrageous that so much public money is being siphoned to Tory friends and donors. We need to know who agreed these contracts, when and why.” You clearly didn't read Xmiles post.

3. The products are faulty so need to be replaced or refunded is as far as I've gone on contract law. If that's inaccurate please do explain otherwise ill just discard that as more posturing.

4. Don't know what point you're trying to make, please try again.

45Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 21:49

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

T.R.O.Y. wrote:1. Again, you take a general comment and try and apply it to a specific point. You've no idea if Sedwill was referencing government procurement.

2. Shadow Cabinet Office minister Rachel Reeves, who analysed the contracts, told the Mirror: “It is outrageous that so much public money is being siphoned to Tory friends and donors. We need to know who agreed these contracts, when and why.” You clearly didn't read Xmiles post.

3. The products are faulty so need to be replaced or refunded is as far as I've gone on contract law. If that's inaccurate please do explain otherwise ill just discard that as more posturing.

4. Don't know what point you're trying to make, please try again.

1 - Sedwill was talking about how the government had dealt with Covid.  If you want to believe that excludes the key component of procurement which has been essential in sourcing safety equipment for all frontline staff and what has cost at least £11 billion pounds to acquire then that's up to you but clearly it is an essential component in dealing with Covid and as such is obviously included in Sedwill's stated opinion as to how the government has done during his term in office.

2 - The article you refer to also includes this line as well -

"There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing. But the Good Law Project is challenging the Government’s decision to award contracts to a few firms run by “allies” without a competitive tender".

Note - Jo Maugham QC, director of the Good Law Project, is the very same nutcase running his twitter war against the government just like he did against them unsuccessfully in respect of Brexit and clearly roped one of his left-wing Labour mates for a comment to get into (surprise, surprise) The Daily Mirror!

Funny how no other other national picked up the story and ran with it that day!

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/fury-over-1billion-coronavirus-deals-22885550

As an aside it reminds me very much of the funny story of the tale told about an old American politician called George Smathers who told a number of 'facts' to an ill educated audience about his rival he was running against to devastating effect - below is his speech - certainly worth a read!

Part of American political lore is the Smathers "redneck speech," which Smathers reportedly delivered to a poorly-educated audience. The comments were recorded in a small magazine, picked up in Time and elsewhere, and etched into the public's memories. Time Magazine, during the campaign, claimed that Smathers said this: "Are you aware that Claude Pepper is known all over Washington as a shameless extrovert? Not only that, but this man is reliably reported to practice nepotism with his sister-in-law, he has a brother who is a known homo sapiens, and he has a sister who was once a thespian in wicked New York. Worst of all, it is an established fact that Mr. Pepper, before his marriage, habitually practiced celibacy."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Smathers#In_popular_culture

The story is fake and never actually happened but the parallels are certainly there in that Maugham has painted a picture using true facts but has presented them to a poorly educated audience (read that as a Tory hating audience) gullible enough to believe things that aren't actually there!

Crucially included in the article but somewhat 'hidden' is the legal rebuttal to protect himself that...

"There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing"

You and countless others (including Shadow Cabinet Office minister Rachel Reeves) have taken from this that the government has been up to all sorts of cronyism when in fact it all just smoke and mirrors with nothing - six months on already from these contracts remember - found to be wrong or untoward!

3 - Very good, you've now accepted that there is means of legal remedy within the contracts which you hadn't acknowledged up to now.

As I've been saying all the time, only half a story has been presented so far, it doesn't stop at the point the contractor delivers goods not fit for purpose and walks off with all the money in their back pocket as you and many others seemed to think they did.

4 - If you can't understand understand the concept of public scrutiny of the government by Parliament which has been going on now for 150 years or so then that's your problem not mine.

Suffice to say this had nothing to do with placating Maugham's social media campaign he carries on against the government which he clearly detests.

46Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 22:15

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

boltonbonce wrote:Just add an L.
I don't think she could grasp it, Boncey

48Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Mon Nov 09 2020, 23:11

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin


No, you've missed my point entirely.

Sluffy wrote:Funny how no other other national picked up the story and ran with it that day!

The article TROY refers to was run on the 21st October - no other national seemed to run it that day.

Your links are for

The Times - 9th August (subscription required to read the article)

The Independent - 16th July

A quote from the article -

Penny Mordaunt, a Cabinet Office minister, did not deny that PPE had not been delivered, but insisted every MP knew a senior employee at Public First – who was a “former much-loved deputy speaker” of the Commons.

“If the honourable lady (Helen Hayes (Lab)) has serious concerns about these contracts, other than insinuations, there are very clear processes to go through, and I would urge her to do so,” she said.

The row comes as the government faces a court case over the awarding of emergency contracts, outside of normal rules, alleging breaches of procurement law and apparent bias to longstanding associates.

It has been launched by the Good Law Project, which instigated important legal challenges, and is crowdfunding for resources.

The Metro - 28th October

I have now taken legal action, together with two other MPs and the Good Law Project, over this failure, launching a judicial review in the High Court to force ministers to reveal who is getting these contracts. We want to know why these people have been given such lucrative deals, and who some of them are.

BBC - 10th July

Campaigners are seeking a judicial review...

No prizes for guessing who the campaigners are!

My point if you can't seem to grasp it is that it is just one pressure group behind all of these 'individual' and 'singular' articles and that is Maugham who tried to stop Brexit by this government by using judicial reviews - and failed!

It's clearly one man's vendetta against the Tory government who every so often manages to get a piece in a paper but never making it relevant enough for the story to be picked up by all of the press at the same time - ie it isn't an issue as such - no doubt many editors having had previous dealings with Maugham.

It's almost like what happened with Ken Anderson, namely many didn't like him to start with (many don't like the Tory government) and if they threw enough shit at him (if Maugham gets his story in the media often enough) then people will begin to believe it is true (then people will begin to believe it is true) but the truth is he didn't do anything actually wrong (the truth is that six months and more from Maugham raising all this nobody has actual found anything actually wrong - and hence the need to even include this...

"There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing"

...in the latest reincarnation of the story in the Mirror!

And they haven't included that just by chance - I would suspect some of those alleged to be up to no good have started to take legal action to protect themselves from such continual insinuations!

Don't you think if there was really something in this that the police would be involved by now and that there would be bigger 'hitters' on the case rather than Rachel Reeves, Helen Hayes and Caroline Lucas???

49Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Tue Nov 10 2020, 07:36

Guest


Guest

‘Maugham has painted a picture using true facts but has presented them to a poorly educated audience (read that as a Tory hating audience) gullible enough to believe things that aren't actually there!’

How do you know there’s nothing there? For the tenth time, I’m not claiming anything illegal has happened so drop the spin. It’s about poor decision making, what do you know about the process that was undertaken that makes you feel confident enough to completely dismiss any other view on it?

Stop wasting everyone’s time with never ending posts which say nothing new. And bear in mind this is just one example. Why don’t you also give your view on Bingham or Harding?

This is tax payers money; we are all allowed an opinion on it. You don’t know any more than any of us, yet as always you think you’re okay to dismiss any other view as gullible and poorly educated. And you wonder why so many posters fall out with you?

50Nepotism/Cronyism Watch - Page 3 Empty Re: Nepotism/Cronyism Watch Tue Nov 10 2020, 08:55

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

You do realise, Sluffy, that Maugham is a close associate of Dale Interest-Free and all that 'betta ways to do stuff'?

But it is 'taxpayers money' after all. Do you know any ways of gettin' round it?

https://www.channel4.com/news/dale-vince-labour-donor-tax-video



Last edited by Ten Bobsworth on Tue Nov 10 2020, 10:27; edited 1 time in total

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 27]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14 ... 27  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum