O/T. The Government's handling of Covid

[swaledale]

...and isn’t the point, GP...that this shipless, ferry company with no trading history and no port agreement that went into liquidation last week doesn’t reflect terribly favourably on this rudderless Government?

Can’t you stop playing ‘devil’s advocate’ and accept that things are all too often not as they should be at the moment?

Not so much playing devils advocate as making sweeping statements then rather than admitting the statement was wrong, finds some petty detail to raise!

Not sure about the media, some posters information is either biased or simply wrong.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I'm not going to argue with fools, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.

[swaledale]

I'm not going to argue with fools, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.

What does the disproving of your sweeping statement and your refusal to acknowledge it make you?

[Geoff Parkstone]

A sweeping statement? I think you will find that knowing the people involved in the ferry company, what they wanted to achieve etc, and how, places me in a far better position than "Mr 5 minute internet searcher" to assess things. If that's a sweeping statement, then fine, guilty as charged. Media talk trumps knowledge.

[ramAnag]

I'm not going to argue with fools, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.

Okay...you’re right...as ever.
It was always a good idea to shake hands with all and sundry and then boast about it...to go into lockdown too slowly...to make excuses for and cover up your chief advisor’s wrongdoings.
Test and Trace has been a massive success, the chief scientific officer having huge holdings in one pharma company is perfectly normal and acceptable as is our government investing in a ferryless ferry company which has since gone bust.
It’s completely consistent to say, three months ago, that the over sixties were the most at risk group and then exempt them from lockdown restrictions - as long as they’re involved in child care, and for thousands of students to be effectively incarcerated in their halls of residence because no one in authority questioned the wisdom of sending thousands of 18-19 year olds off to Uni. in cities which were in, or on the verge of, lockdown and of course there is absolutely nothing wrong with the various friends, relatives and other Tory Party donors benefitting from various contracts that have been handed out.
Only a ‘fool’ would think otherwise...all is well with the world...after all...you ‘know the people’.

[swaledale]

A sweeping statement? I think you will find that knowing the people involved in the ferry company, what they wanted to achieve etc, and how, places me in a far better position than "Mr 5 minute internet searcher" to assess things. If that's a sweeping statement, then fine, guilty as charged. Media talk trumps knowledge.

So you believe what you hear from other people, supposedly involved in the operation, which could well be true, but ignore the bare facts?

I've met many people in business who have grand plans and assemble a company and people to deliver them, 40 years in working in a wide range of business sectors enables me to be a pretty good judge about whats viable and what isn't.

[Andy_Faber]

Jumping back to the ‘shares in pharmaceutical companies’ issue, my friends son, who is a very very very junior advisor / fag / bag carrier / bum boy (delete according to your political POV) to one of HMG’s ministers, tells my friend that anyone with an input to a sourcing decision (Above 70k I think he said) has to declare an interest In a Possible source At The start if one exists and can be excluded from the decision by the minister (or pm if it’s a minister) if the ‘benefit’ is over a certain amount that I was told but can’t recall, maybe a million. So some control does exist. Its not Health by the way.

[ramAnag]

Jumping back to the ‘shares in pharmaceutical companies’ issue, my friends son, who is a very very very junior advisor / fag / bag carrier / bum boy (delete according to your political POV) to one of HMG’s ministers, tells my friend that anyone with an input to a sourcing decision (Above 70k I think he said) has to declare an interest In a Possible source At The start if one exists and can be excluded from the decision by the minister (or pm if it’s a minister) if the ‘benefit’ is over a certain amount that I was told but can’t recall, maybe a million. So some control does exist. Its not Health by the way.

Glad that’s cleared that up for us then!

[Andy_Faber]

Glad that’s cleared that up for us then!

Is that a rare bit of sarcasm rA? Only trying to add a bit of coloration with reasonably good provenance to the discussion!

[swaledale]

A sweeping statement? I think you will find that knowing the people involved in the ferry company, what they wanted to achieve etc, and how, places me in a far better position than "Mr 5 minute internet searcher" to assess things. If that's a sweeping statement, then fine, guilty as charged. Media talk trumps knowledge.

So I had a conversation today with someone who is more au fait with this sector than myself and his view of the Seabourne Freight fiasco was and I quote -"A tin pot speculative outfit run by people whose reputation within the sector is poor"

They were proposing to run a ferry service from a port which few existing vessels can use, hadn't actually got an agreement nor it seems were likely to get an agreement to use a port on either side of the channel. Were casting around for suitable ferries but no reputable operator was interested.

So yes whilst media reports were simplified about giving a contract to a company with no ferries, in effect a contract had been awarded to an unproven outfit that it seems had little chance of delivering and proven firms who could have done were not even given a chance to tender.

Couple that with the awarding of a contract to a company with no track record of making PPE who delivered PPE that wa sunfit for purpose and the words piss up brewery couldn't organise one, spring to mind.