Said with tongue firmly in cheek.
General election
- Thread starter Chippy_Tea
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
Said with tongue firmly in cheek.
You mean similar to the 1500 potentially owed by Rayner to the 150 million by mone?
Send 'em to Rwanda!
Last edited:
You mean similar to the 1500 potentially owed by Rayner to the 150 million by mone?
Exactly. Neither of those things should happen, but it's laughable which gets the column inches. Or it would be laughable if it wasn't so manipulative and costly.
Government destroys £1.4bn of PPE from one Covid deal despite it being manufactured to the proper standard.
The Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC), which was responsible for purchasing and delivering Covid PPE, said: “We do not recognise the £1.4bn quoted. Our position on PPE stock is set out in the department’s annual accounts as audited by the National Audit Office."
The Labour Party described the contract as a "staggering waste" while the Liberal Democrats said it was a "colossal misuse of public funds".
Full Support Healthcare agreed a £1.78bn deal in April 2020 to deliver face masks, respirators, eye protection and aprons - the largest Covid PPE order from a single supplier, accounting for 13% of the government’s total spend.
Before the pandemic, the Northamptonshire-based company, which was already a specialist manufacturer of PPE, had 25 employees and annual profits of £800,000, external.
Any profits since the contract was fulfilled are not known because in 2021 the co-directors, Sarah Stoute, 50, and her husband Richard, 53, based the business offshore in Jersey for privacy reasons.
They and the company continue to pay all UK tax. Neither Full Support Healthcare nor the Stoutes have done anything improper.
BBC Investigations made a series of requests over a six-month period under the Freedom of Information Act to NHS Supply Chain, which manages the delivery of healthcare products.
The responses reveal that about £1.4bn worth of Full Support Healthcare's PPE will not be used.
The figure includes some 749 million items that have already been burned or destroyed, “including by energy from waste”, and a further 825 million that are classified as excess stock “where disposal and recycling are possible outcomes”.
Full Support provided 2.02 billion items of PPE, however, only 232 million items have been dispatched to the NHS or other care settings.
The deal is almost certain to be the most wasteful of the Covid pandemic. Data compiled by data firm Tussell, external, shows only one contract was more costly and it was awarded to a range of suppliers providing mixed services.
The government previously estimated that £85m worth of PPE secured under the contract would not be used, which is approximately 6% of the true total.
We have asked the DHSC to explain this disparity and why so much of the PPE was never used.
The BBC understands that at least £100m of public money has additionally been spent on storing and incinerating the excess stock since its purchase.
Full article - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cll476qzm85o
Polls coming out today suggest that Reform has now lost quite a few of the votes they gained when Farage declared that he would stand as a candidate.
This is the one i always follow they have dropped slightly
Where’s that from?
The Internet 
Looks like politico. It's a poll of polls.
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2013
- Messages
- 6,495
- Reaction score
- 6,346
Doesn't that say 6 months ago?
No last 6 months
Not to
This article covers the PPE destroyed that was made to the correct standards, what about the millions of PPE that were destroyed, because they were not made the correct standard and could not be used. This is an even greater scandal yes it was a pandemic and it was probably done with the best intention BUT by circumventing the procurement process ministers could place LARGE orders for PPE they knew feck all about to companies that had no background or provenance in this area, and low and behold these new companies were donors, friends or relations of the ministers.
the substandard PPE was not issued even when care homes begged for it and accepted it was to standard but better than nothing, nope instead it was destroyed.
That for me is the bigger scandal and none has ever been held to account fully for this.
This article covers the PPE destroyed that was made to the correct standards, what about the millions of PPE that were destroyed, because they were not made the correct standard and could not be used. This is an even greater scandal yes it was a pandemic and it was probably done with the best intention BUT by circumventing the procurement process ministers could place LARGE orders for PPE they knew feck all about to companies that had no background or provenance in this area, and low and behold these new companies were donors, friends or relations of the ministers.
the substandard PPE was not issued even when care homes begged for it and accepted it was to standard but better than nothing, nope instead it was destroyed.
That for me is the bigger scandal and none has ever been held to account fully for this.
Last edited by a moderator:
I was watching Starmer on the news earlier jeez he has the charisma of a wet kipper
I heard an interview the other day where he kept saying his mother worked in the NHS and when she became ill the NHS looked after her, we get it shut the **** up.
I believe his dad was a toolmaker.
Its lucky Sunak has blown his chance and has made no difference to how the Tories are seen by voters or this election could have been a lot closer.
I believe his dad was a toolmaker.
Its lucky Sunak has blown his chance and has made no difference to how the Tories are seen by voters or this election could have been a lot closer.
I don’t need to be entertained by our country’s leadership. I want competence.
I do have a grudging respect for Sunak, it must be bloody hard work doing what he's doing, defending the indefensible.
Well, I’ve voted.
I used this website the other day to see if any party's manifesto particularly chimed with me: https://voteforpolicies.org.uk/
You pick the areas that matter to you and then it shows you the policies for each party, but blinded, taking bias out of the picture.
You pick the areas that matter to you and then it shows you the policies for each party, but blinded, taking bias out of the picture.
MickDundee
Landlord.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2016
- Messages
- 5,435
- Reaction score
- 3,992
I did it for all policy areas:
In a little ashamed to be 6.3% Tory, looking at the policy results it was energy and I’m sure there were a few I was torn between.
Last edited:
