Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm curious if/how anybody will try to defend this one." Set your watch by it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Andrew Mills/Prospermill Ltd being awarded the contract situation, and then having to ask Ayenda to service it as Prospermill Ltd didn't have an international payment infrastructure - is a bite in the bum that should be looked into. " The government chucked a quarter of a billion at a government advisor. Via a tax haven. This resulted in PPE that wasn't fit for purpose. A quarter of a billion. That's a tiny bit more than a bite in the bum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Andrew Mills/Prospermill Ltd being awarded the contract situation, and then having to ask Ayenda to service it as Prospermill Ltd didn't have an international payment infrastructure - is a bite in the bum that should be looked into. " Standard. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they weren't to specification, don't pay. Or claim the money back if you've already paid. Standard business practice. " Depends on what's specified on the contract but yes if they are not as ordered its down to the supplier to replace or refund | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Original contract was going to be awarded to the Prospermill Ltd company (Andrew Mills company) - but this was changed at the request of Andrew Mills as they couldn't handle international payments - i.e their company couldnt pay the Chinese factory in USD - Main point here is why on earth were they going to award the contract to this Prospermill company if they didnt even have an international currency account, and not withstanding the fact it is a company owned by Liz Truss's advisor and his wife! Based on Prospermill not being able to do the deal, he thought "ah... I know how to do this" and it was switched to the hedge fund company (who he has connections with). Main point here - contract should have been put back to tender and another company sought - so again why on earth did they battle on digging a shit hole! The masks - based on the original specification requested by the tender - an order was placed. The fact the specification was changed by the government (probabluy PHE or NHS Supply Chain realising "oh shit, these are for NHS and the head strap is needed and not the ear loop spec in the tender"). Someone than changed the spec of the order at a later stage in the manufacture process - not good. Main point here - whoever realised the mistake in the spec at a late stage and changed the masks - should be fired. The "faulty" masks are not as a result of who the supplier is. In other words it could have been the best PPE supplier in the world supplying whatever the requested spec is. The background to this contract is of more interest and serious questions being asked than the fact the masks are not now the revised spec they changed late in the day. Problem is the media focus is on the "bad masks"
"Agreed, and good to see someone normally defending them able to call foul 
You said "tender" a couple of times though and that's part of the problem. None of these contracts went to tender, they went to friends.
This has been in the public domain for weeks and it's incredible that there haven't been any arrests yet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Original contract was going to be awarded to the Prospermill Ltd company (Andrew Mills company) - but this was changed at the request of Andrew Mills as they couldn't handle international payments - i.e their company couldnt pay the Chinese factory in USD - Main point here is why on earth were they going to award the contract to this Prospermill company if they didnt even have an international currency account, and not withstanding the fact it is a company owned by Liz Truss's advisor and his wife! Based on Prospermill not being able to do the deal, he thought "ah... I know how to do this" and it was switched to the hedge fund company (who he has connections with). Main point here - contract should have been put back to tender and another company sought - so again why on earth did they battle on digging a shit hole! The masks - based on the original specification requested by the tender - an order was placed. The fact the specification was changed by the government (probabluy PHE or NHS Supply Chain realising "oh shit, these are for NHS and the head strap is needed and not the ear loop spec in the tender"). Someone than changed the spec of the order at a later stage in the manufacture process - not good. Main point here - whoever realised the mistake in the spec at a late stage and changed the masks - should be fired. The "faulty" masks are not as a result of who the supplier is. In other words it could have been the best PPE supplier in the world supplying whatever the requested spec is. The background to this contract is of more interest and serious questions being asked than the fact the masks are not now the revised spec they changed late in the day. Problem is the media focus is on the "bad masks"
"I salute you Sir. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Original contract was going to be awarded to the Prospermill Ltd company (Andrew Mills company) - but this was changed at the request of Andrew Mills as they couldn't handle international payments - i.e their company couldnt pay the Chinese factory in USD - Main point here is why on earth were they going to award the contract to this Prospermill company if they didnt even have an international currency account, and not withstanding the fact it is a company owned by Liz Truss's advisor and his wife! Based on Prospermill not being able to do the deal, he thought "ah... I know how to do this" and it was switched to the hedge fund company (who he has connections with). Main point here - contract should have been put back to tender and another company sought - so again why on earth did they battle on digging a shit hole! The masks - based on the original specification requested by the tender - an order was placed. The fact the specification was changed by the government (probabluy PHE or NHS Supply Chain realising "oh shit, these are for NHS and the head strap is needed and not the ear loop spec in the tender"). Someone than changed the spec of the order at a later stage in the manufacture process - not good. Main point here - whoever realised the mistake in the spec at a late stage and changed the masks - should be fired. The "faulty" masks are not as a result of who the supplier is. In other words it could have been the best PPE supplier in the world supplying whatever the requested spec is. The background to this contract is of more interest and serious questions being asked than the fact the masks are not now the revised spec they changed late in the day. Problem is the media focus is on the "bad masks"
Agreed, and good to see someone normally defending them able to call foul
You said "tender" a couple of times though and that's part of the problem. None of these contracts went to tender, they went to friends.
This has been in the public domain for weeks and it's incredible that there haven't been any arrests yet."Procurement contracts were all put out to tender, and available for anyone to submit and quote etc. - the only difference in the process being the method of selection. And its for this reason this contract is of significant interest - there are clear signs it is rotten! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they weren't to specification, don't pay. Or claim the money back if you've already paid. Standard business practice. " Or sue for breach of contract. Trouble is in the circumstances.... A global stampede for the ppe kit... I can understand and possibly forgive giving procurement deals to people and some of them not working out... But if its as described his company needs to reimburse and if there are any breaches in the award of the Contract they need to be explained satisfactorily. Again... Surely the job of the opposition party not necessarily a journalist. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Original contract was going to be awarded to the Prospermill Ltd company (Andrew Mills company) - but this was changed at the request of Andrew Mills as they couldn't handle international payments - i.e their company couldnt pay the Chinese factory in USD - Main point here is why on earth were they going to award the contract to this Prospermill company if they didnt even have an international currency account, and not withstanding the fact it is a company owned by Liz Truss's advisor and his wife! Based on Prospermill not being able to do the deal, he thought "ah... I know how to do this" and it was switched to the hedge fund company (who he has connections with). Main point here - contract should have been put back to tender and another company sought - so again why on earth did they battle on digging a shit hole! The masks - based on the original specification requested by the tender - an order was placed. The fact the specification was changed by the government (probabluy PHE or NHS Supply Chain realising "oh shit, these are for NHS and the head strap is needed and not the ear loop spec in the tender"). Someone than changed the spec of the order at a later stage in the manufacture process - not good. Main point here - whoever realised the mistake in the spec at a late stage and changed the masks - should be fired. The "faulty" masks are not as a result of who the supplier is. In other words it could have been the best PPE supplier in the world supplying whatever the requested spec is. The background to this contract is of more interest and serious questions being asked than the fact the masks are not now the revised spec they changed late in the day. Problem is the media focus is on the "bad masks"
Agreed, and good to see someone normally defending them able to call foul
You said "tender" a couple of times though and that's part of the problem. None of these contracts went to tender, they went to friends.
This has been in the public domain for weeks and it's incredible that there haven't been any arrests yet."No one has the balls to hold them to account apart from the likes of the indi and the guardian. The bbc are shit scared Starmer is too busy paying out whistleblowers. It does seem that are getting away with more and more with v little accountability. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Original contract was going to be awarded to the Prospermill Ltd company (Andrew Mills company) - but this was changed at the request of Andrew Mills as they couldn't handle international payments - i.e their company couldnt pay the Chinese factory in USD - Main point here is why on earth were they going to award the contract to this Prospermill company if they didnt even have an international currency account, and not withstanding the fact it is a company owned by Liz Truss's advisor and his wife! Based on Prospermill not being able to do the deal, he thought "ah... I know how to do this" and it was switched to the hedge fund company (who he has connections with). Main point here - contract should have been put back to tender and another company sought - so again why on earth did they battle on digging a shit hole! The masks - based on the original specification requested by the tender - an order was placed. The fact the specification was changed by the government (probabluy PHE or NHS Supply Chain realising "oh shit, these are for NHS and the head strap is needed and not the ear loop spec in the tender"). Someone than changed the spec of the order at a later stage in the manufacture process - not good. Main point here - whoever realised the mistake in the spec at a late stage and changed the masks - should be fired. The "faulty" masks are not as a result of who the supplier is. In other words it could have been the best PPE supplier in the world supplying whatever the requested spec is. The background to this contract is of more interest and serious questions being asked than the fact the masks are not now the revised spec they changed late in the day. Problem is the media focus is on the "bad masks"
Agreed, and good to see someone normally defending them able to call foul
You said "tender" a couple of times though and that's part of the problem. None of these contracts went to tender, they went to friends.
This has been in the public domain for weeks and it's incredible that there haven't been any arrests yet.
Procurement contracts were all put out to tender, and available for anyone to submit and quote etc. - the only difference in the process being the method of selection.
And its for this reason this contract is of significant interest - there are clear signs it is rotten!
"Incorrect https://www.ft.com/content/7fe7c2d5-24df-431b-9149-50417fa0236a | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Original contract was going to be awarded to the Prospermill Ltd company (Andrew Mills company) - but this was changed at the request of Andrew Mills as they couldn't handle international payments - i.e their company couldnt pay the Chinese factory in USD - Main point here is why on earth were they going to award the contract to this Prospermill company if they didnt even have an international currency account, and not withstanding the fact it is a company owned by Liz Truss's advisor and his wife! Based on Prospermill not being able to do the deal, he thought "ah... I know how to do this" and it was switched to the hedge fund company (who he has connections with). Main point here - contract should have been put back to tender and another company sought - so again why on earth did they battle on digging a shit hole! The masks - based on the original specification requested by the tender - an order was placed. The fact the specification was changed by the government (probabluy PHE or NHS Supply Chain realising "oh shit, these are for NHS and the head strap is needed and not the ear loop spec in the tender"). Someone than changed the spec of the order at a later stage in the manufacture process - not good. Main point here - whoever realised the mistake in the spec at a late stage and changed the masks - should be fired. The "faulty" masks are not as a result of who the supplier is. In other words it could have been the best PPE supplier in the world supplying whatever the requested spec is. The background to this contract is of more interest and serious questions being asked than the fact the masks are not now the revised spec they changed late in the day. Problem is the media focus is on the "bad masks"
"That does indeed sound dodgy and the supplier can only supply what's been requested. If they are not suitable for medical use could they not be sold either direct to the public or to shops given they are now needed by us all in indoors public places | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" If they are not suitable for medical use could they not be sold either direct to the public or to shops given they are now needed by us all in indoors public places" Great idea | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" If they are not suitable for medical use could they not be sold either direct to the public or to shops given they are now needed by us all in indoors public places Great idea" Too good an idea, they'll be burnt on a huge bonfire knowing these lot | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This story's just astonishing. Basically, a government advisor (Mills) with a tiny company was given a quarter of a billion quid to supply PPE. 50 million of the masks bought via Mills (purchased for 156-177 million) weren't usable by the NHS as they weren't suitable. The remaining masks also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS. https://goodlawproject.org/news/ppe-masks-not-fit-for-purpose/" Is that mills an advisor to liz truss? And she will be heading our post Brexit trade negotiations? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This story's just astonishing. Basically, a government advisor (Mills) with a tiny company was given a quarter of a billion quid to supply PPE. 50 million of the masks bought via Mills (purchased for 156-177 million) weren't usable by the NHS as they weren't suitable. The remaining masks also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS. https://goodlawproject.org/news/ppe-masks-not-fit-for-purpose/ Is that mills an advisor to liz truss? And she will be heading our post Brexit trade negotiations?" That's the fellow. Are you implying there's something about this that isn't fully above board? He claimed his position played no part in the award of the huge contract.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This story's just astonishing. Basically, a government advisor (Mills) with a tiny company was given a quarter of a billion quid to supply PPE. 50 million of the masks bought via Mills (purchased for 156-177 million) weren't usable by the NHS as they weren't suitable. The remaining masks also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS. https://goodlawproject.org/news/ppe-masks-not-fit-for-purpose/ Is that mills an advisor to liz truss? And she will be heading our post Brexit trade negotiations? That's the fellow. Are you implying there's something about this that isn't fully above board? He claimed his position played no part in the award of the huge contract. "Yeah course it didn't. Is someone actually going to ask why do so many of these companies have links to the Tory party? However I'm sure our future looks bright with someone as competent as liz on board. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This story's just astonishing. Basically, a government advisor (Mills) with a tiny company was given a quarter of a billion quid to supply PPE. 50 million of the masks bought via Mills (purchased for 156-177 million) weren't usable by the NHS as they weren't suitable. The remaining masks also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS. https://goodlawproject.org/news/ppe-masks-not-fit-for-purpose/ Is that mills an advisor to liz truss? And she will be heading our post Brexit trade negotiations? That's the fellow. Are you implying there's something about this that isn't fully above board? He claimed his position played no part in the award of the huge contract.
Yeah course it didn't.
Is someone actually going to ask why do so many of these companies have links to the Tory party?
However I'm sure our future looks bright with someone as competent as liz on board."She may have the protection of the great one, sering as whe can illegally, accidentally.. Oops.. Sell weapons, and still keep her job | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. " I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid." Mate I agree he should have his collar felt to the least. And has as been said on here..a lot of these shenanigans would have brought governments down in the past ,but bugger all seems to happen to this thick skinned bunch of corrupt cunts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid." no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct." Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect?" The contract was not won by Ayanda. It was "won" by Prospermill - who then couldn't complete the deal, and so Mills devised a workaround with the company that he is connected with - Ayanda. Ayenda Capital is a UK registered company that pays its taxes in the UK. The PPE ordered and delivered is perfectly good and meets all the safety standards - and is exactly as per the specifications set out in the original tender details. The actual worth of the Prospermill company is unknown as it has not yet filed accounts as it was set up in 2019. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect? The contract was not won by Ayanda. It was "won" by Prospermill - who then couldn't complete the deal, and so Mills devised a workaround with the company that he is connected with - Ayanda. Ayenda Capital is a UK registered company that pays its taxes in the UK. The PPE ordered and delivered is perfectly good and meets all the safety standards - and is exactly as per the specifications set out in the original tender details. The actual worth of the Prospermill company is unknown as it has not yet filed accounts as it was set up in 2019. " It's astonishing you're trying to defend this. I don't think I mentioned any company names. Since you brought that up though, I'll quote from the Goodlawproject: "We have also unearthed another absolutely remarkable feature of the £252 million Ayanda contract. Matt Hancock’s lawyers have now admitted they planned to enter into that contract with a £100 company wholly owned by Liz Truss’ adviser Andrew Mills and his wife. Mr Mills asked – and Government agreed – to enter into it with Ayanda instead because the £100 company (Prospermill Limited) didn’t have “international payment infrastructure.”" And: "The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date." Also: "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m – “will not be used in the NHS” because “there was concern as to whether the[y]… provided an adequate fixing.” So, unless Government finds another use for, or seeks to sell, those unsuitable masks, that money has been wasted. And as for the remaining 150 million Type IIR masks purchased from Ayanda Capital? Government has admitted they also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect? The contract was not won by Ayanda. It was "won" by Prospermill - who then couldn't complete the deal, and so Mills devised a workaround with the company that he is connected with - Ayanda. Ayenda Capital is a UK registered company that pays its taxes in the UK. The PPE ordered and delivered is perfectly good and meets all the safety standards - and is exactly as per the specifications set out in the original tender details. The actual worth of the Prospermill company is unknown as it has not yet filed accounts as it was set up in 2019. It's astonishing you're trying to defend this. I don't think I mentioned any company names. Since you brought that up though, I'll quote from the Goodlawproject: "We have also unearthed another absolutely remarkable feature of the £252 million Ayanda contract. Matt Hancock’s lawyers have now admitted they planned to enter into that contract with a £100 company wholly owned by Liz Truss’ adviser Andrew Mills and his wife. Mr Mills asked – and Government agreed – to enter into it with Ayanda instead because the £100 company (Prospermill Limited) didn’t have “international payment infrastructure.”" And: "The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date." Also: "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m – “will not be used in the NHS” because “there was concern as to whether the[y]… provided an adequate fixing.” So, unless Government finds another use for, or seeks to sell, those unsuitable masks, that money has been wasted. And as for the remaining 150 million Type IIR masks purchased from Ayanda Capital? Government has admitted they also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS."" Not defending anything - check my earlier posts on my opinion on this situation - I'm just correcting your incorrect understanding of the facts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect? The contract was not won by Ayanda. It was "won" by Prospermill - who then couldn't complete the deal, and so Mills devised a workaround with the company that he is connected with - Ayanda. Ayenda Capital is a UK registered company that pays its taxes in the UK. The PPE ordered and delivered is perfectly good and meets all the safety standards - and is exactly as per the specifications set out in the original tender details. The actual worth of the Prospermill company is unknown as it has not yet filed accounts as it was set up in 2019. It's astonishing you're trying to defend this. I don't think I mentioned any company names. Since you brought that up though, I'll quote from the Goodlawproject: "We have also unearthed another absolutely remarkable feature of the £252 million Ayanda contract. Matt Hancock’s lawyers have now admitted they planned to enter into that contract with a £100 company wholly owned by Liz Truss’ adviser Andrew Mills and his wife. Mr Mills asked – and Government agreed – to enter into it with Ayanda instead because the £100 company (Prospermill Limited) didn’t have “international payment infrastructure.”" And: "The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date." Also: "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m – “will not be used in the NHS” because “there was concern as to whether the[y]… provided an adequate fixing.” So, unless Government finds another use for, or seeks to sell, those unsuitable masks, that money has been wasted. And as for the remaining 150 million Type IIR masks purchased from Ayanda Capital? Government has admitted they also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS." Not defending anything - check my earlier posts on my opinion on this situation - I'm just correcting your incorrect understanding of the facts." It all seems pretty clear from the link. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect? The contract was not won by Ayanda. It was "won" by Prospermill - who then couldn't complete the deal, and so Mills devised a workaround with the company that he is connected with - Ayanda. Ayenda Capital is a UK registered company that pays its taxes in the UK. The PPE ordered and delivered is perfectly good and meets all the safety standards - and is exactly as per the specifications set out in the original tender details. The actual worth of the Prospermill company is unknown as it has not yet filed accounts as it was set up in 2019. It's astonishing you're trying to defend this. I don't think I mentioned any company names. Since you brought that up though, I'll quote from the Goodlawproject: "We have also unearthed another absolutely remarkable feature of the £252 million Ayanda contract. Matt Hancock’s lawyers have now admitted they planned to enter into that contract with a £100 company wholly owned by Liz Truss’ adviser Andrew Mills and his wife. Mr Mills asked – and Government agreed – to enter into it with Ayanda instead because the £100 company (Prospermill Limited) didn’t have “international payment infrastructure.”" And: "The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date." Also: "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m – “will not be used in the NHS” because “there was concern as to whether the[y]… provided an adequate fixing.” So, unless Government finds another use for, or seeks to sell, those unsuitable masks, that money has been wasted. And as for the remaining 150 million Type IIR masks purchased from Ayanda Capital? Government has admitted they also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS." Not defending anything - check my earlier posts on my opinion on this situation - I'm just correcting your incorrect understanding of the facts. It all seems pretty clear from the link." it's not, which is why a lot of the guff being written about this situation is detracting from the real point of concern with this contract. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect? The contract was not won by Ayanda. It was "won" by Prospermill - who then couldn't complete the deal, and so Mills devised a workaround with the company that he is connected with - Ayanda. Ayenda Capital is a UK registered company that pays its taxes in the UK. The PPE ordered and delivered is perfectly good and meets all the safety standards - and is exactly as per the specifications set out in the original tender details. The actual worth of the Prospermill company is unknown as it has not yet filed accounts as it was set up in 2019. It's astonishing you're trying to defend this. I don't think I mentioned any company names. Since you brought that up though, I'll quote from the Goodlawproject: "We have also unearthed another absolutely remarkable feature of the £252 million Ayanda contract. Matt Hancock’s lawyers have now admitted they planned to enter into that contract with a £100 company wholly owned by Liz Truss’ adviser Andrew Mills and his wife. Mr Mills asked – and Government agreed – to enter into it with Ayanda instead because the £100 company (Prospermill Limited) didn’t have “international payment infrastructure.”" And: "The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date." Also: "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m – “will not be used in the NHS” because “there was concern as to whether the[y]… provided an adequate fixing.” So, unless Government finds another use for, or seeks to sell, those unsuitable masks, that money has been wasted. And as for the remaining 150 million Type IIR masks purchased from Ayanda Capital? Government has admitted they also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS." Not defending anything - check my earlier posts on my opinion on this situation - I'm just correcting your incorrect understanding of the facts. It all seems pretty clear from the link. it's not, which is why a lot of the guff being written about this situation is detracting from the real point of concern with this contract. " A glaring example of government corruption and incompetence. That seems pretty clear. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect? The contract was not won by Ayanda. It was "won" by Prospermill - who then couldn't complete the deal, and so Mills devised a workaround with the company that he is connected with - Ayanda. Ayenda Capital is a UK registered company that pays its taxes in the UK. The PPE ordered and delivered is perfectly good and meets all the safety standards - and is exactly as per the specifications set out in the original tender details. The actual worth of the Prospermill company is unknown as it has not yet filed accounts as it was set up in 2019. It's astonishing you're trying to defend this. I don't think I mentioned any company names. Since you brought that up though, I'll quote from the Goodlawproject: "We have also unearthed another absolutely remarkable feature of the £252 million Ayanda contract. Matt Hancock’s lawyers have now admitted they planned to enter into that contract with a £100 company wholly owned by Liz Truss’ adviser Andrew Mills and his wife. Mr Mills asked – and Government agreed – to enter into it with Ayanda instead because the £100 company (Prospermill Limited) didn’t have “international payment infrastructure.”" And: "The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date." Also: "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m – “will not be used in the NHS” because “there was concern as to whether the[y]… provided an adequate fixing.” So, unless Government finds another use for, or seeks to sell, those unsuitable masks, that money has been wasted. And as for the remaining 150 million Type IIR masks purchased from Ayanda Capital? Government has admitted they also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS." Not defending anything - check my earlier posts on my opinion on this situation - I'm just correcting your incorrect understanding of the facts. It all seems pretty clear from the link. it's not, which is why a lot of the guff being written about this situation is detracting from the real point of concern with this contract. A glaring example of government corruption and incompetence. That seems pretty clear." it's not corruption, but it is underhand in how the tender was awarded to a company owned by an advisor. This does need investigating Incompetence on the part of those procuring the masks - yes. So there's no need to fudge the facts to make the point... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"jumping on the gravy train has been going on long before covid19, and is something that happens no matter which party is in government... it's business / natural instinct! The changed mask specification is not due to inexperience in supplying the product. In some respects you could say he was very experienced, in that he was in a position to directly secure a large manufacturing source capable of producing large volume order. I'm going to repeat the undisputed facts here. The government gave a quarter of a billion quid to a government advisor to procure PPE. Via a tax haven. The government advisor claimed his position had no bearing on him winning the vast contract. And the PPE he procured was not fit for purpose. Oh and the company he'd set up that showed just how perfect he was for all this was worth about 100 quid. no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still very clear, albeit some of your interpretation of the facts is actually not correct. Which of those undisputed facts are incorrect? The contract was not won by Ayanda. It was "won" by Prospermill - who then couldn't complete the deal, and so Mills devised a workaround with the company that he is connected with - Ayanda. Ayenda Capital is a UK registered company that pays its taxes in the UK. The PPE ordered and delivered is perfectly good and meets all the safety standards - and is exactly as per the specifications set out in the original tender details. The actual worth of the Prospermill company is unknown as it has not yet filed accounts as it was set up in 2019. It's astonishing you're trying to defend this. I don't think I mentioned any company names. Since you brought that up though, I'll quote from the Goodlawproject: "We have also unearthed another absolutely remarkable feature of the £252 million Ayanda contract. Matt Hancock’s lawyers have now admitted they planned to enter into that contract with a £100 company wholly owned by Liz Truss’ adviser Andrew Mills and his wife. Mr Mills asked – and Government agreed – to enter into it with Ayanda instead because the £100 company (Prospermill Limited) didn’t have “international payment infrastructure.”" And: "The Government awarded a PPE contract worth £252 million to Ayanda Capital Limited, a ‘family office’ owned through a tax haven in Mauritius, with connections to Liz Truss. It is the largest PPE contract we have seen to date." Also: "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m – “will not be used in the NHS” because “there was concern as to whether the[y]… provided an adequate fixing.” So, unless Government finds another use for, or seeks to sell, those unsuitable masks, that money has been wasted. And as for the remaining 150 million Type IIR masks purchased from Ayanda Capital? Government has admitted they also require further testing and have not been released for use in the NHS." Not defending anything - check my earlier posts on my opinion on this situation - I'm just correcting your incorrect understanding of the facts. It all seems pretty clear from the link. it's not, which is why a lot of the guff being written about this situation is detracting from the real point of concern with this contract. A glaring example of government corruption and incompetence. That seems pretty clear. it's not corruption, but it is underhand in how the tender was awarded to a company owned by an advisor. This does need investigating Incompetence on the part of those procuring the masks - yes. So there's no need to fudge the facts to make the point..." Definition of corruption: "dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery." The government handed a quarter of a billion to a Ayanda, a company with no previous experience in the healthcare sector. "An opaque family fund owned through a tax haven." And, lest we forget, "Andrew Mills - an adviser to the government's Board of Trade chaired by International Trade Secretary Liz Truss - has been listed on LinkedIn as a Senior Board Adviser to Ayanda Capital since March." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m "" I'll tell you what. That was a bloody good price they got for FFP2 masks to begin with. It works out at wall over 3 quid a mask...for what is a pound per mask in any b&q ,screwfix or toolstation at retail price. I think I'll offer myself as a buyer to these dumb feckers  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" "In response to judicial review proceedings issued by Good Law Project, the Government has admitted that the 50 million FFP2 masks they purchased from Ayanda Capital – for a price that we calculate to be between £156m and £177m " I'll tell you what. That was a bloody good price they got for FFP2 masks to begin with. It works out at wall over 3 quid a mask...for what is a pound per mask in any b&q ,screwfix or toolstation at retail price. I think I'll offer myself as a buyer to these dumb feckers "Good luck. lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’d be interested to know who signed off on £3 a mask Our our civil servants really this incompetent? " “Are” obviously. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’d be interested to know who signed off on £3 a mask Our our civil servants really this incompetent? “Are” obviously. " Not if it was the cheapest price at the time - given the world shortage and extraordinarily high demand, at that time it was very much a sellers market. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’d be interested to know who signed off on £3 a mask Our our civil servants really this incompetent? " You could have bought FFP2 masks of ebay for less then that in the height of the pandemic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’d be interested to know who signed off on £3 a mask Our our civil servants really this incompetent? “Are” obviously. Not if it was the cheapest price at the time - given the world shortage and extraordinarily high demand, at that time it was very much a sellers market. " They have only recently arrived and with all the offers of manufacturing in the U.K. on the table they could have been both manufactured and supplied much cheaper. I buy a lot of high end PPE this is way too expensive given the volume and potential long term business outlook for a manufacturer. It’s incompetent buying on a massive scale. Or perhaps the civil servants have been mislead by a vested interest advisor. Surely not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’d be interested to know who signed off on £3 a mask Our our civil servants really this incompetent? “Are” obviously. Not if it was the cheapest price at the time - given the world shortage and extraordinarily high demand, at that time it was very much a sellers market. They have only recently arrived and with all the offers of manufacturing in the U.K. on the table they could have been both manufactured and supplied much cheaper. I buy a lot of high end PPE this is way too expensive given the volume and potential long term business outlook for a manufacturer. It’s incompetent buying on a massive scale. Or perhaps the civil servants have been mislead by a vested interest advisor. Surely not. " You will also know in March/April when this contract was out to tender there was a worldwide shortage of suitable masks, and manufacturers capable of supplying in volume. at that time I also understand the standard lead time for PPE was already stretched and was nearing 4-5 months from order being placed to port landed. Part of the purchasing decision would be "is this manufacturer able to supply and sustain an order of x millions". No British manufacturer is able to manufacture at that level. Yes they could produce masks, but not to the scale required. In terms of value, even if the UK was able to supply in volume, the production cost would not be significantly cheaper in the UK - raw material costs had already been inflated back in Jan/Feb not to mention the higher labour cost. That said, I agree, it was incompetent buying, but not for the reasons I think most people will think it was incompetent.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’d be interested to know who signed off on £3 a mask Our our civil servants really this incompetent? “Are” obviously. Not if it was the cheapest price at the time - given the world shortage and extraordinarily high demand, at that time it was very much a sellers market. They have only recently arrived and with all the offers of manufacturing in the U.K. on the table they could have been both manufactured and supplied much cheaper. I buy a lot of high end PPE this is way too expensive given the volume and potential long term business outlook for a manufacturer. It’s incompetent buying on a massive scale. Or perhaps the civil servants have been mislead by a vested interest advisor. Surely not. You will also know in March/April when this contract was out to tender there was a worldwide shortage of suitable masks, and manufacturers capable of supplying in volume. at that time I also understand the standard lead time for PPE was already stretched and was nearing 4-5 months from order being placed to port landed. Part of the purchasing decision would be "is this manufacturer able to supply and sustain an order of x millions". No British manufacturer is able to manufacture at that level. Yes they could produce masks, but not to the scale required. In terms of value, even if the UK was able to supply in volume, the production cost would not be significantly cheaper in the UK - raw material costs had already been inflated back in Jan/Feb not to mention the higher labour cost. That said, I agree, it was incompetent buying, but not for the reasons I think most people will think it was incompetent. "I agree it’s unlikely we have manufacturers to produce such numbers but we certainly would have had lots of 25k per day manufacturers and given most of the clothing industry was in shut down the factories were idle and could have been converted . So whilst we wouldn’t have 50 million arrive at once we would have have been a bloody long way there and I suspect half way through the crap procurement specification would have been identified and adjusted accordingly We must bring government spending back to the U.K. and keep the money here . It’s just stupid to spend so much money on a simple product in another country . Bad economics Still I think we both know the point is the corrupt advisor . If a buyer in a factory take a a financial kick back from a supplier he will be sacked for corruption. Work for the government and no worries get two bites | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is Andrew Mills related to the actor John Mills? "If he were, I bet Andrew would have got a contract to run the RSC. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry can't take shit like this seriously, Thought fab was a swinger's site!" It's whatever you want it to be. Nobody's forcing you to post anything. Whatever makes you happy, I guess. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
