T.R.O.Y. wrote:Hancocks been out on the attack, claiming his pub landlord never had a covid contract, demanding that Annelies Dodds retracts her comment to the contrary.
Hancock pointed to published contracts with Alpha Laboratories to support his defence - a company with no connection to his pub landlord. Certain information was removed from the contracts before publishing including the name of the manufacturer who the job was sub contracted to (guess where this is going).
Unfortunately for Hancock the censored contracts have leaked out, and it turns out it was his pub landlord’s company who had been awarded the sub contract to do the manufacturing.
Pretty clear effort to deceive by hiding that information in the first place, wonder why he would do that.
Utter bollocks I'm afraid!
You really need to stop believing everything you read on social media.
The story was first published over EIGHT MONTHS AGO in the Guardian! -
"Hinpack is specified as the sole subcontractor in one £40m contract between DHSC and Alpha Laboratories".
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/11/covid-test-kit-supplier-joked-matt-hancock-whatsapp-never-heard-of-him-alex-bourne?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other...hardly 'hidden' or breaking news then is it?
The way awarding contracts work in government goes something like this.
First an invite to put your company forward to tender for future contracts is issued in order to form an approved contractors list.
Before any company is put on the list they are vetted to establish that they are financially secure and capable of doing the work they claim.
When a contract is required an invite to tender for the work is made and any company tendering for the work can bid for it themselves or bid for it using company's from the approved suppliers list as their sub-contractor/s.
In fact a company can employ whoever they want as subbies BUT these sub-contractors would need to be first evaluated and approved before any contract is awarded.
(That's probably why first FWR and latterly Alpha Labs used Hinpack as they had already been evaluated and approved and on the suppliers list and time was of the essence due to the needs of the ongoing pandemic and associated emergency powers).
The evaluation and award of the contract is always done by public servants and NOT elected representatives such as MP's or councillors.
It would seem to me (from the Guardian article above) that the pub landlord contacted Hancock (who was his MP) offered his company (Hinpack) for work and Hancock correctly referred him to the DHSC website and the Civil Servants there did whatever they were required to do so under the Emergency Legislation which they were acting on at the time to satisfy themselves that it should be added to the approved list of potential suppliers.
(Note: being on the list doesn't equate that a company would ever be awarded a contract - that would depend on the evaluation of any bid for a contract either directly by them or being part of the evaluation of any company using them as a sub- contractor)
Hancock would not have put him on the list, indeed this is what he said...
...nor would any Civil Servant do so at Hancock (or anyone else's) behest without making damn sure this was recorded and their back was securely covered - in fact I would resign before ever doing so and make public why I resigned.
Once on the approved list an existing NHS supplier, VWR, used the landlords company as a sub-contractor, without it seemingly being an issue to anyone.
Some months latter another existing NHS supplier, Alpha Labs, did the same but this time for whatever reason it suddenly became an issue for the good folks at Good Law Project.
There is absolutely nothing in the story other than once again innuendo and spin and may I say, swallowed whole by people like you wanting to believe it is true and that there is rampant sleaze and corruption going on.
As always if there is any truth in the story it can only be achieved by a corrupt Civil Servant - as they are the ones who evaluate and award contracts.
I don't believe such as happened.
One key point to underline what I've said above that everyone should note is that the National Audit Office has looked into this contract and found absolutely nothing wrong with the awarding of it!!!
As for this...
...what it means is simply the government AGREES the use of Hinpack as the sub-contractor - it DOES NOT MEAN that the government is instructing Alpha Labs to use Hinpack - or else...!
It's all just anti-Tory hatred from you know who!