Explain how this guy get 21 million of our Taxes ?

[clangerman]

1 minute ago, Lloyd90 said:

Are you saying if Corbyn was in position, or some other Tory MP then they would have only bought entirely fit for purpose PPE, from UK only firms, all at a discount price, and no middlemen would have made any money out of it?  

i’m saying there is nothing wrong with earning a living but this is pure negligence and greed with the sick paying the bill 

[Lloyd90]

Just now, clangerman said:

i’m saying there is nothing wrong with earning a living but this is pure negligence and greed with the sick paying the bill 

They probably got paid a % on the order, and quite obviously the order amount was VERY large. 

Everyone slated the Government for not getting PPE fast enough, now complain that we overpaid.

 

You pay over the top for rapid delivery ... 

[Scully]

39 minutes ago, oowee said:

It was predicted in 2016 with the trial Exercise Cygnus. Nothing to do with hindsight more a case of head in the sand. 

Like I said, no one could possibly know to what extent any virus would get hold, so I’ll ask again, if the government had paid out 20, 30, 40 ( think of any figure ) million quid of taxpayers money for PPE to just sit idle in storage ‘just in case’, the same people wouldn’t be criticising them now? Of course they would, you know it and I know it. 
 

[oowee]

7 minutes ago, Scully said:

Like I said, no one could possibly know to what extent any virus would get hold, so I’ll ask again, if the government had paid out 20, 30, 40 ( think of any figure ) million quid of taxpayers money for PPE to just sit idle in storage ‘just in case’, the same people wouldn’t be criticising them now? Of course they would, you know it and I know it. 
 

The trial predicted far worse. The last was only two years ago. 

The PPE would not be sitting idle it would have been used and probably saved us countless millions and probably lives.

Same with capacity in the NHS you know its coming make the space. Cut things to the bone and pay a higher price later trying to back peddle in a crisis or get ready in advance. 

 

[Scully]

2 minutes ago, oowee said:

The trial predicted far worse. The last was only two years ago. 

The PPE would not be sitting idle it would have been used and probably saved us countless millions and probably lives.

Same with capacity in the NHS you know its coming make the space. Cut things to the bone and pay a higher price later trying to back peddle in a crisis or get ready in advance. 

 

But again, it’s only a prediction. No government is going to spend millions on PPE ‘ just in case’; even manufacturers were caught flat footed by demand. 
Like I said, it’s dead easy to criticise in hindsight, anything or anyone for their lack of foresight. 

[oowee]

11 minutes ago, Scully said:

But again, it’s only a prediction. No government is going to spend millions on PPE ‘ just in case’; even manufacturers were caught flat footed by demand. 
Like I said, it’s dead easy to criticise in hindsight, anything or anyone for their lack of foresight. 

Head in sand.

It's for this reason that the UK is so good at learning lessons. 

Edited November 18, 2020 by oowee

[Scully]

Not really, just seems logical to me. 🤷‍♂️
I doubt we’re any worse than any other country. 

[discobob]

I am actually in agreeance with @oowee a bit here. That exercise showed up shortcomings in PPE stock. They should have took the worst scenario, had that amount in stock to cover 3-6 months and put into place the infrastructure for companies to be able to supply quickly (within 2-5 months) the items of PPE - then do a first in first out of the PPE from that stock - you take a months worth - you add a month to the back of the queue. When/If the proverbial hits - you have a buffer while production ramps up in the background.

This is just a process to mitigate risk - and costs

I have said previously that running things at full capacity just doesn't work - this has been shown year after year with the NHS where they can't cope with Flu/Norvo virus etc.. during the winter.  Same is true of trying to apply JIT (Just in Time) supply methods for PPE - when you really do need it you find out that JIT doesn't work.

JIT is also the reasons that panic buying cleared the shelves of everything at the start of the first lockdown. Supermarkets now don't stock anything hence an uptake in something means they don't have the stock to replenish. Especially toilet rolls which are a bulky item.

[Agriv8]

42 minutes ago, discobob said:

I am actually in agreeance with @oowee a bit here. That exercise showed up shortcomings in PPE stock. They should have took the worst scenario, had that amount in stock to cover 3-6 months and put into place the infrastructure for companies to be able to supply quickly (within 2-5 months) the items of PPE - then do a first in first out of the PPE from that stock - you take a months worth - you add a month to the back of the queue. When/If the proverbial hits - you have a buffer while production ramps up in the background.

This is just a process to mitigate risk - and costs

I have said previously that running things at full capacity just doesn't work - this has been shown year after year with the NHS where they can't cope with Flu/Norvo virus etc.. during the winter.  Same is true of trying to apply JIT (Just in Time) supply methods for PPE - when you really do need it you find out that JIT doesn't work.

JIT is also the reasons that panic buying cleared the shelves of everything at the start of the first lockdown. Supermarkets now don't stock anything hence an uptake in something means they don't have the stock to replenish. Especially toilet rolls which are a bulky item.

Thanks disco Bob this is what I was trying to get at. Because of cost savings, the plan for tomorrow is always left to do another day as you are too busy firefighting today’s issues.

If we had a buffer even call off aragements that the supper markets have hthe emergency fixer was not required and the rest of the mess would not have happened. 

I also believe that there was no single purchasing framework for the trusts so in fact they were working against each other to procure supplies.

I am not sure blue or red at the top would have made any difference. The fact is these individuals were paid our taxes for stuff that was not right. The devil is always in the detail I’ll put money on the fact that the same officials who awarded the contracts are all distancing themselves like rats off a sinking ship. Some junior staff will end up carrying the can.

[discobob]

@Agriv8something like this should not be red or blue - it is national infrastructure and should be done by cross party or run it as a private organization taking it totally away from party politics - but not as private health!!

Edited November 19, 2020 by discobob

[oowee]

3 hours ago, discobob said:

@Agriv8something like this should not be red or blue - it is national infrastructure and should be done by cross party or run it as a private organization taking it totally away from party politics - but not as private health!!

It should not be blue or red but it very much is. Red build capacity and blue gets rid of waste. Cross party is the way to go but it's not happening without a major restructuring and that's not likely in any 5 year term. Same with devolved power for England, abolition of the lords, reform of electoral system, reform of the monarchy all in the same too hard to think about box. 

[Scully]

8 hours ago, discobob said:

I am actually in agreeance with @oowee a bit here. That exercise showed up shortcomings in PPE stock. They should have took the worst scenario, had that amount in stock to cover 3-6 months and put into place the infrastructure for companies to be able to supply quickly (within 2-5 months) the items of PPE - then do a first in first out of the PPE from that stock - you take a months worth - you add a month to the back of the queue. When/If the proverbial hits - you have a buffer while production ramps up in the background.

This is just a process to mitigate risk - and costs

I have said previously that running things at full capacity just doesn't work - this has been shown year after year with the NHS where they can't cope with Flu/Norvo virus etc.. during the winter.  Same is true of trying to apply JIT (Just in Time) supply methods for PPE - when you really do need it you find out that JIT doesn't work.

JIT is also the reasons that panic buying cleared the shelves of everything at the start of the first lockdown. Supermarkets now don't stock anything hence an uptake in something means they don't have the stock to replenish. Especially toilet rolls which are a bulky item.

But again, you’re criticising with the benefit of hindsight, a body for not having foresight! 🤷‍♂️

[oowee]

48 minutes ago, Scully said:

But again, you’re criticising with the benefit of hindsight, a body for not having foresight! 🤷‍♂️

Why are we spending an extra £16b on defence? 

[Scully]

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

Why are we spending an extra £16b on defence? 

Because humankind have a tradition going back millennia for killing each other?

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by Scully

[oowee]

11 minutes ago, Scully said:

Because humankind have a tradition going back millennia for killing each other?

 

Bingo.  It's prudent to do so because history shows it has happened and will happen again. Exactly as it is to prepare for a pandemic that your advisers are telling you has happened and will happen again. 

Edited November 19, 2020 by oowee

[clangerman]

9 minutes ago, oowee said:

Why are we spending an extra £16b on defence? 

same reason we have given away 21 million country is run by first class idiots 

[Scully]

Just now, oowee said:

Bingo.  It's prudent to do so because history shows it has happened and will happen. Exactly as it is to prepare for a pandemic that your advisers are telling you is inevitable. 

Bingo is a game for old women. 🙂
I almost added ‘the same cannot be said for pandemics’ but thought there was no need! I was obviously wrong. 
We’ve come full circle really, in as much that would the same people criticising the government now for not stockpiling PPE, ( isnt the default cry ‘think of all the incubators that money would have bought!’ ? ) be criticising if the government had squandered tax payers money on PPE based on predictions which weren’t half as predictable as our capacity for waging war on each other? 
There is no one alive today who can recall the last pandemic on such a scale as it is, on the other hand......

I can see your point, and to an extent I could agree, if your point wasn’t perpetually based on your distaste of a government and particularly a PM who was voted in overwhelmingly on the basis of leaving the EU. 

[oowee]

My distaste is for actions, or lack of action, carried out without, thought through reasoned argument for the consequences. Regardless of the political party involved. Particularly when those decisions are made for the advancement of a group or individual at the cost of the country.

The current incumbent is particularly good at such decisions and following a long line of those with similar abilities.

[Scully]

16 minutes ago, oowee said:

My distaste is for actions, or lack of action, carried out without, thought through reasoned argument for the consequences. Regardless of the political party involved. Particularly when those decisions are made for the advancement of a group or individual at the cost of the country.

The current incumbent is particularly good at such decisions and following a long line of those with similar abilities.

No, your distaste is now as it has been throughout the entire Brexit thread ( because if you’re honest this is what this is all about ) namely distaste of anything which you perceive as impacting negatively on your personal finances. You made this apparent throughout that thread. 
Have a trawl through the Brexit thread and tell me I’m wrong. 

[Vince Green]

In America a lot of government supplies, even quite mundane stuff like ballpoint  pens and toilet paper  has to be bought from American companies and made using american materials. Thats not protectionism is just being smart so they can't be held to ransom.

There is a law in the US, I don't know what it is, Something like the essencial supplies bill. But whatever it is,we need the same law over here. Why the heck are we buying theatre gowns from places like Indonesia when Manchester is the land of cotton? Then they shaft us when the demand goes up

British companies employ British staff and pay British taxes and its not a win - win situation its a win - win - win. can't be outbid by whoever.

If Brexit is about clawing back soverignty lets do it

You dont need to stockpile PPE if there is a factory producing it just up the road

57 minutes ago, oowee said:

My distaste is for actions, or lack of action, carried out without, thought through reasoned argument for the consequences. Regardless of the political party involved. Particularly when those decisions are made for the advancement of a group or individual at the cost of the country.

The current incumbent is particularly good at such decisions and following a long line of those with similar abilities.

thats total babble, sixty words and nothing said

Edited November 19, 2020 by Vince Green

[discobob]

14 hours ago, Scully said:

But again, you’re criticising with the benefit of hindsight, a body for not having foresight! 🤷‍♂️

But it isn't hindsight - I have always said about JIT - which is in itself a cost cutting practice - "hey we don't have to have extra space to store stuff because of JIT" which then goes up to the next level, and the next and the next - then it only takes something out of the ordinary and everything falls apart. This doesn't hold true for everything for example Mach III razor blades as an example as you can just swap brand or grow some stubble - but for items that are essential.

How have Pfizer managed to be able to produce (or will be able to produce) all the vaccine required - because they have capacity that they "might" need for when something like this happens. So if Pfizer can have this foresight within this area I don't think it would be too big an ask for Governments to have this either.

With regards to capacity - a good analogy is an F1 car - that is tuned to run at as close to 100% efficiency for the duration of the race + a certain amount over. Try and do a Le Mans 24 hour in one though and it will have no chance - even cars that are designed to endure a Le Mans 24 hour have enough difficulty - whereas your average car can trundle around that circuit baring normal wear and tear (brakes, tires etc) day after day after day at normal speeds but can also accelerate up and run at short periods of time of extra speed. Try and do it at full belt all the time and things will start failing.

We are trying to run hospitals at minimum 90% average capacity but that capacity has been calculated for a full year - In summer that could have beenthat 7 beds on a 10 bed ward are occupied, but actually in winter they had people in corridors on trolleys (which is what we have seen for a large number of years)

[AVB]

7 minutes ago, discobob said:

But it isn't hindsight - I have always said about JIT - which is in itself a cost cutting practice - "hey we don't have to have extra space to store stuff because of JIT" which then goes up to the next level, and the next and the next - then it only takes something out of the ordinary and everything falls apart. This doesn't hold true for everything for example Mach III razor blades as an example as you can just swap brand or grow some stubble - but for items that are essential.

How have Pfizer managed to be able to produce (or will be able to produce) all the vaccine required - because they have capacity that they "might" need for when something like this happens. So if Pfizer can have this foresight within this area I don't think it would be too big an ask for Governments to have this either.

With regards to capacity - a good analogy is an F1 car - that is tuned to run at as close to 100% efficiency for the duration of the race + a certain amount over. Try and do a Le Mans 24 hour in one though and it will have no chance - even cars that are designed to endure a Le Mans 24 hour have enough difficulty - whereas your average car can trundle around that circuit baring normal wear and tear (brakes, tires etc) day after day after day at normal speeds but can also accelerate up and run at short periods of time of extra speed. Try and do it at full belt all the time and things will start failing.

We are trying to run hospitals at minimum 90% average capacity but that capacity has been calculated for a full year - In summer that could have beenthat 7 beds on a 10 bed ward are occupied, but actually in winter they had people in corridors on trolleys (which is what we have seen for a large number of years)

I can pretty much guarantee that Pfizer don’t have spare capacity laying around just waiting for a pandemic to come along. They will have repurposed other production lines and built new temporary facilities. 
 

It is completely unaffordable and unrealistic to scale things for the worst case scenario. As a doctor said the other day (during the discussion on SAGE doomsday forecasts) that no doctors work on the basis of worst case and if they did no operations would ever take place as their is always the risk of death. 

[islandgun]

12 hours ago, Vince Green said:

In America a lot of government supplies, even quite mundane stuff like ballpoint  pens and toilet paper  has to be bought from American companies and made using american materials. Thats not protectionism is just being smart so they can't be held to ransom.

There is a law in the US, I don't know what it is, Something like the essencial supplies bill. But whatever it is,we need the same law over here. Why the heck are we buying theatre gowns from places like Indonesia when Manchester is the land of cotton? Then they shaft us when the demand goes up

British companies employ British staff and pay British taxes and its not a win - win situation its a win - win - win. can't be outbid by whoever.

If Brexit is about clawing back soverignty lets do it

You dont need to stockpile PPE if there is a factory producing it just up the road

 

Correct.. The amount of money concerned should be invested into UK production of ppe.... then and now

[Scully]

1 hour ago, discobob said:

But it isn't hindsight - I have always said about JIT - which is in itself a cost cutting practice - "hey we don't have to have extra space to store stuff because of JIT" which then goes up to the next level, and the next and the next - then it only takes something out of the ordinary and everything falls apart. This doesn't hold true for everything for example Mach III razor blades as an example as you can just swap brand or grow some stubble - but for items that are essential.

How have Pfizer managed to be able to produce (or will be able to produce) all the vaccine required - because they have capacity that they "might" need for when something like this happens. So if Pfizer can have this foresight within this area I don't think it would be too big an ask for Governments to have this either.

With regards to capacity - a good analogy is an F1 car - that is tuned to run at as close to 100% efficiency for the duration of the race + a certain amount over. Try and do a Le Mans 24 hour in one though and it will have no chance - even cars that are designed to endure a Le Mans 24 hour have enough difficulty - whereas your average car can trundle around that circuit baring normal wear and tear (brakes, tires etc) day after day after day at normal speeds but can also accelerate up and run at short periods of time of extra speed. Try and do it at full belt all the time and things will start failing.

We are trying to run hospitals at minimum 90% average capacity but that capacity has been calculated for a full year - In summer that could have beenthat 7 beds on a 10 bed ward are occupied, but actually in winter they had people in corridors on trolleys (which is what we have seen for a large number of years)

So you were posting about the governments lack of foresight regarding their stocks of PPE, and the supply of such prior to the outbreak of Covid 19 were you? 
Your analogies are lacking conviction, think about them. 

[Dave-G]

3 hours ago, islandgun said:

Correct.. The amount of money concerned should be invested into UK production of ppe.... then and now

But UK manufacturing overheads is so much higher than many other countries overall costs of doing business.

From what I can see through my 'Joe Bloggs' eyes on the sidelines - Industrial politics drove our manufacturing competitiveness away.

Edited November 20, 2020 by Dave-G