Coronavirus:Covid: Crisp Websites Ltd

[darmstadt]

302 Moved

I am fairly certain that this is nothing but a witch hunt aimed at Tories who are working hard behind the scenes.

A pest control company has been awarded 100 million PPE contract by Matt Hancock and there is nothing wrong here. There was only one bidder for this tender and they got the contract. Matt has no connections to the geezers behind the outfit. In fact, Matt said he preferred to award the contract to MF but MF declined to bid, stating that it was not worth it.

There were no other bidders:

The government handed out more than £350m worth of PPE contracts to private companies in March without a competitive tender process

The government are saying that due to a crisis they don't need to have to issue a tender, they can just give the contract to anyone they like which explains the farcical situation that is currently playing out with, not only PPE, but also track and trace

[WTFH]

And...
RADIANT HOLDINGS LIMITED - Overview (free company information from Companies House)

MAXTORO LIMITED - Overview (free company information from Companies House)

DRAGON INDUSTRIES INVESTMENTS LIMITED - Overview (free company information from Companies House)

BIRD-X LIMITED - Overview (free company information from Companies House)

[Old Greg]

I object to it being challenged because Boris and Matt have done nothing wrong and it is all above board. Nothing but mud slinging from Tory party haters.

Don't encourage them. You're not that thick.

[Old Greg]

Why can't small businesses win big? By your measure when I'm competing against say Siemens who're a 1000+ times bigger for public sector contracts I should automatically lose but I don't, not always Sometimes the small guy is the best value option and has a longer and more stable track record In this case they were the only people to bid and if they can deliver what's the problem? All businesses start small and as they say from little acorns mighty oaks grow

You have (unsurprisingly) got the wrong end of the stick.

My measure says nothing about all public contracts. For a small public contract, it can make sense from a value for money perspective to give the contract to a small supplier. So the conclusion you have drawn is (unsurprisingly) wrong.

For a 108,000,000 contract however, it makes no sense from a financial stability and risk perspective to give the contract to such a small company makes, because it presents a risk that they may not be able to deliver. The fact that they are the only bidder does not change this. The government has extensive procurement guidelines on financial stability and risk.

The government has recent form here. URL below is from the Mail, so you don't lose your tulip.

No deal ferry firm copied its terms and conditions from a takeaway | Daily Mail Online

The no deal ferry firm that was handed a £13.8million Government contract despite owning no ships copied its terms and conditions from a takeaway shop, it was claimed today.

Seaborne Freight's website includes a long run of small print that featured a section about 'placing an order' that placed an obligation on a customer to check their 'meal'.

[tazdevil]

The issue here is the size of the company. "16 staff" and "cash assets of just over £19,500"? Supplier financial strength and risk are an important part of procurement. At first sight, this company should have been a straight "fail" on that basis. The article Dave links to doesn't suggest that Hancock had any connection. It just looks like a crap procurement. Why would you object to it being challenged?

Why can't small businesses win big? By your measure when I'm competing against say Siemens who're a 1000+ times bigger for public sector contracts I should automatically lose but I don't, not always Sometimes the small guy is the best value option and has a longer and more stable track record In this case they were the only people to bid and if they can deliver what's the problem? All businesses start small and as they say from little acorns mighty oaks grow

[fullyautomatix]

The issue here is the size of the company. "16 staff" and "cash assets of just over £19,500"? Supplier financial strength and risk are an important part of procurement. At first sight, this company should have been a straight "fail" on that basis. The article Dave links to doesn't suggest that Hancock had any connection. It just looks like a crap procurement. Why would you object to it being challenged?

I object to it being challenged because Boris and Matt have done nothing wrong and it is all above board. Nothing but mud slinging from Tory party haters.

[Old Greg]

302 Moved

I am fairly certain that this is nothing but a witch hunt aimed at Tories who are working hard behind the scenes.

A pest control company has been awarded 100 million PPE contract by Matt Hancock and there is nothing wrong here. There was only one bidder for this tender and they got the contract. Matt has no connections to the geezers behind the outfit. In fact, Matt said he preferred to award the contract to MF but MF declined to bid, stating that it was not worth it.

The issue here is the size of the company. "16 staff" and "cash assets of just over £19,500"? Supplier financial strength and risk are an important part of procurement. At first sight, this company should have been a straight "fail" on that basis. The article Dave links to doesn't suggest that Hancock had any connection. It just looks like a crap procurement. Why would you object to it being challenged?

[DaveB]

What is a 100 million PPE contract?

Maybe this will help.


Government faces lawsuit over GBP108m PPE contract with pest control firm - CityAM : CityAM

[jamesbrown]

What is a 100 million PPE contract?

It's one better than a 99,999,999 PPE contract.

[AtW]

Why ministers are even allowed to make decisions who wins contracts?

[minestrone]

What is a 100 million PPE contract?

[fullyautomatix]

302 Moved

I am fairly certain that this is nothing but a witch hunt aimed at Tories who are working hard behind the scenes.

A pest control company has been awarded 100 million PPE contract by Matt Hancock and there is nothing wrong here. There was only one bidder for this tender and they got the contract. Matt has no connections to the geezers behind the outfit. In fact, Matt said he preferred to award the contract to MF but MF declined to bid, stating that it was not worth it.