Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Weren't these the ones people were kicking off at before, even though they provided exactly what they said they would? Giving contracts like this out is only a problem if they don't fulfil said contracts. Like the ferry one that had no ferries. 

 

There does seem something a bit fishy here (see snippets from article in June)... at least with someone taking the government to court they will be able to vindicate themselves to the fullest degree? 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8394309/Small-family-run-pest-control-firm-won-108m-contract-procure-PPE-frontline-NHS-staff.html

 

Revealed: Small family-run pest control firm with just 16 staff won £108MILLION contract to procure PPE for frontline NHS staff

 

  • PestFix, which has 16 employees, was awarded a £108million contract in April
  • Founder Dan England said that his firm may have been quicker to respond to the call for help 
  • The Government has spent £340million securing PPE since the virus outbreak

 

Normally PestFix supplies customers with supplies for pest control but received the £108million contract after responding to the Government’s call for help.

 

PestFix founder Dan England said: ‘Some of the bigger players that would normally be supplying this were perhaps not as quick to react or as dynamic.’

 

PestFix has no external investors and is instead owned by the England family, being run by brothers Dan and Matt England.

 

The company offers a range of products that help deal with most commonly found pests such as birds, rodents, insects and animals.

 

 

The company, based in Littlehampton, West Sussex, also sells shooting accessories such as air gun pellets, shooting safety glasses, gun lamps and cases for guns.

 

The contract awarded by the government was for the supply of PPE and on their website they offer 21 different PPE products.

 

In February, the company reportedly distanced itself from Cambridge University after BBC presenter Chris Packham spoke out against the university over using netting to cover trees and prevent birds from nesting.

 

The company provided the nets but said they disapproved of how they had been used by Cambridge.

Edited by DJ Barry Hammond
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Especially when the data is being analysed on a daily basis. Trying to predict anything from that graph is impossible, it could start to drop again tomorrow, but we won't find out until tomorrow. You can't predict the future based on one event in the past.

How on earth is it impossible exactly, it plots out a trend of months and not one event. We know how a virus spreads and multiples and without us actually doing something we currently aren’t, the graph is in all likelihood going to keep going up at an increasing rate.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

There does seem something a bit fishy here (see snippets from article in June)... at least with someone taking the government to court they will be able to vindicate themselves to the fullest degree? 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8394309/Small-family-run-pest-control-firm-won-108m-contract-procure-PPE-frontline-NHS-staff.html

 

Revealed: Small family-run pest control firm with just 16 staff won £108MILLION contract to procure PPE for frontline NHS staff

 

  • PestFix, which has 16 employees, was awarded a £108million contract in April
  • Founder Dan England said that his firm may have been quicker to respond to the call for help 
  • The Government has spent £340million securing PPE since the virus outbreak

 

Normally PestFix supplies customers with supplies for pest control but received the £108million contract after responding to the Government’s call for help.

 

PestFix founder Dan England said: ‘Some of the bigger players that would normally be supplying this were perhaps not as quick to react or as dynamic.’

 

PestFix has no external investors and is instead owned by the England family, being run by brothers Dan and Matt England.

 

The company offers a range of products that help deal with most commonly found pests such as birds, rodents, insects and animals.

 

 

The company, based in Littlehampton, West Sussex, also sells shooting accessories such as air gun pellets, shooting safety glasses, gun lamps and cases for guns.

 

The contract awarded by the government was for the supply of PPE and on their website they offer 21 different PPE products.

 

In February, the company reportedly distanced itself from Cambridge University after BBC presenter Chris Packham spoke out against the university over using netting to cover trees and prevent birds from nesting.

 

The company provided the nets but said they disapproved of how they had been used by Cambridge.

It's only fishy if you've got a baited hook out. Many companies offered to provide PPE during the early stages, many of which don't produce any PPE is this country at all. It's all about can you fulfil the contract. This tiny pest control company obviously can, or at least they could, because they provided millions of pieces of PPE for the price the government was asking, in the time frame they were provided. You don't need to be a massive business to be a middle man if you've got the right contacts who can provide supplies, which these guys clearly have. I'd say that's why they've been provided additional contracts, because they did excellently with the first one. 

 

Not sure why people are so desperate to drag this company down, when I've seen zero evidence that says they've a) done anything dodgy or b) not provided what they were tasked with. From everything I've seen, they've done an excellent job. I must be missing something. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ktfox59 said:

How on earth did we get to 654 pages talking about covid19?

I dunno, odd that. Must be something to do with an emergent novel highly infectious virus and a resultant global pandemic that has devastated global economics?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

It's only fishy if you've got a baited hook out. Many companies offered to provide PPE during the early stages, many of which don't produce any PPE is this country at all. It's all about can you fulfil the contract. This tiny pest control company obviously can, or at least they could, because they provided millions of pieces of PPE for the price the government was asking, in the time frame they were provided. You don't need to be a massive business to be a middle man if you've got the right contacts who can provide supplies, which these guys clearly have. I'd say that's why they've been provided additional contracts, because they did excellently with the first one. 

 

Not sure why people are so desperate to drag this company down, when I've seen zero evidence that says they've a) done anything dodgy or b) not provided what they were tasked with. From everything I've seen, they've done an excellent job. I must be missing something. 

 

I think it's more a question of whether the government have acted correctly in spending public money. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harrydc said:

In recent local lockdowns, only 1 out of 20 places had reduced cases. They do not work. 

They're under restrictions, not lockdown. That's not semantics, but instead a very different set of rules to live by.

 

Local restrictions have reduced infection rate, hence we are seeing a r just above 1, instead of the natural rate of around 3 for the virus.

 

And let's remember the point is to keep infections low enough that we don't breach nhs capacity. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Line-X said:

I dunno, odd that. Must be something to do with an emergent novel highly infectious virus and a resultant global pandemic that has devastated global economics?

Yeah imagine talking about something that has had the single biggest influence on the world since ww2. Why would anyone do that?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Imo, the government should have put Greater Manchester into Tier 3 before Andy Burnham had time to put up any resistance. How many deaths will it take before he stops playing politics? That speech he made yesterday completely ignored the gravity of the situation. He'd should perhaps go and see some of the victims dying rather than wasting time talking nonsense about canaries down mines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

53 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

It's only fishy if you've got a baited hook out. Many companies offered to provide PPE during the early stages, many of which don't produce any PPE is this country at all. It's all about can you fulfil the contract. This tiny pest control company obviously can, or at least they could, because they provided millions of pieces of PPE for the price the government was asking, in the time frame they were provided. You don't need to be a massive business to be a middle man if you've got the right contacts who can provide supplies, which these guys clearly have. I'd say that's why they've been provided additional contracts, because they did excellently with the first one. 

 

Not sure why people are so desperate to drag this company down, when I've seen zero evidence that says they've a) done anything dodgy or b) not provided what they were tasked with. From everything I've seen, they've done an excellent job. I must be missing something. 

 

The gowns PestFix have purchased are currently in storage; awaiting testing. They've also supplied masks to the public which despite being advertised did not have the relevant testing regulation. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53672841 - end of this article

 

The awarding of the contract to Pest Fix was achieved on 10th April....the deadline was 13st April, which leaves a huge hole for legal challenge

 

Additionally one of the other suppliers, Ayanda Capital  reportedly supplied 43.5 million of the wrong FFP2 mask. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-waste-150m-buying-unusable-masks-from-banker-5v8390xtp 

 

It's not solely about delivering on the contract - it's also whether that's been achieved at value for the tax payer. 

Edited by Cardiff_Fox
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Babylon said:

Is it? It's been clearly stated and reported by the government and the press that keeping education going is a priority. If that's their decision, then we have got to target and look at other areas. Whether that's personal lives and not letting people mix at home or certain settings.  It's clear why education is a priority as the knock-on effects are huge of a generation missing out of proper schooling, then you have the knockoff of parents not working because kids are at home and grandparents having to care more for kids etc. 

 

I've seen people going on about of well pubs only cause this small percentage, and gyms only cause that small percentage, restaurants only cause another small percentage. The point is they all add up. 

They all add up but only to a tiny amount compared to the education system and it would be an even smaller amount if the main problem was dealt with.  If the whole point of all this government action is to 'protect the NHS and save lives' and essentially bide time until this magic and miraculous vaccine is gonna show up then they are scandolously ignoring taking action against the one area that will have a big effect on their goals. Is it an easy decision? No. Is it fair on students and some parents? No, but then all of the actions taken recently havent been fair on somebody and will have far reaching effects on the economy and peoples lives. The difference being that action on the education system may well have an actually noticeable effect on the virus which is what this whole cluster**k of a situation is supposed to be about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At least government always give people time for one last night out before they introduce new restrictions. Blackpool should be fun tonight and tomorrow. Venues probably think whats the point as well if they're closing, and just try to get as much as they can. 

 

Its the inconsistencies in only shutting pubs. I'm not allowed to have a quiet pint in my local, where I'm not close to anyone but its ok for me to sit in a full restaurant with tables relatively close together and could be in there for over an hour. Either hospitality is a danger or not, close it all in an area or not at all. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

At least government always give people time for one last night out before they introduce new restrictions. Blackpool should be fun tonight and tomorrow. Venues probably think whats the point as well if they're closing, and just try to get as much as they can. 

 

Its the inconsistencies in only shutting pubs. I'm not allowed to have a quiet pint in my local, where I'm not close to anyone but its ok for me to sit in a full restaurant with tables relatively close together and could be in there for over an hour. Either hospitality is a danger or not, close it all in an area or not at all. 

 

 

They get criticism for not giving warning and criticism for giving it. It’s not an easy job managing a pandemic and a stupid population.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

At least government always give people time for one last night out before they introduce new restrictions. Blackpool should be fun tonight and tomorrow. Venues probably think whats the point as well if they're closing, and just try to get as much as they can. 

 

Its the inconsistencies in only shutting pubs. I'm not allowed to have a quiet pint in my local, where I'm not close to anyone but its ok for me to sit in a full restaurant with tables relatively close together and could be in there for over an hour. Either hospitality is a danger or not, close it all in an area or not at all. 

 

 

Not playing dumb here, but can I for a beer at the weekend as I've planned to do? Or do I have to order a meal? 

 

Anon of Glenfield. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Paninistickers said:

Not playing dumb here, but can I for a beer at the weekend as I've planned to do? Or do I have to order a meal? 

 

Anon of Glenfield. 

Sorry should have been clearer, I'm in Lancashire so I can't. 

 

You're ok in Leicester for time being I believe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/coronaviruscovid19relateddeathsbydisabilitystatusenglandandwales/2marchto14july2020

 

59.5% of all COVID-19 deaths to 14 July in England and Wales were in people that had a disability status.

 

That is mental!

Why do you think that it's mental? I'm surprised it's not a touch higher bearing in mind that the vast vast majority of deaths are in the elderly. Most elderly people will have some form of disability. Dodgy knees, hips, arthritis, dodgy lungs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, twoleftfeet said:

 

Reading that has definitely given me some hope. Hopefully they pass all of the "tests" in the hoped time frames. We could potentially see vaccines being deployed as early as Jan, if not December then.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...