Michelle Mone

I remember at the time several companies saying they were ready to boost production of medical grade masks and they weren’t even contacted by the Gov. All makes sense now. Greed and profit over the national interests. The general public had to make do with ineffective cheap crap
And werent anybody that made anything resembling ppe invited to tender.
 
I found her interview staggering (a bit like Captain Tom's family looking for sympathy) and devoid of any recognition of her personal legal and standards responsibilities as a public servant. Those include declaration of interests and avoidance of lobbying or involvement with any business where there may be a direct or indirect financial or other interest. As far as I can see, this is misconduct in public office, which is a criminal offence. When I was still working, the ex-leader of the council was charged with that offence for not declaring land ownership which was increasing in development value because of a highway scheme. He was found guilty, got 18 months and a large fine. The figures involved were a fraction of those in the Mone case.
She should be treated in a similar way and prosecuted.
 
Hasn’t she fucked off to Honduras where’s there’s no extradition treaty to the UK?

I wonder where the interview took place? It seems they didn’t want to go to the BBC studios?
LK was filmed travelling somewhere in the back of a car, maybe to a secret rendezvous?
I wonder if this was to avoid any risk of arrest and they are planning to flit back to somewhere like Honduras once they have completed their PR campaign?
 
I remember at the time several companies saying they were ready to boost production of medical grade masks and they weren’t even contacted by the Gov. All makes sense now. Greed and profit over the national interests. The general public had to make do with ineffective cheap crap
The stories I can find from the time:

https://www.businessinsider.com/cor...e-offers-slow-response-covid-2020-4?r=US&IR=T
A micro company offering to act as an intermediary and a campaign group representing small suppliers (and not at all trying to raise their own profile).

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co....turns-factorys-offer-40-000-weekly-units-ppe/
A small plastics company doing less than this much work in a year.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...HS-faced-five-weeks-frustration-red-tape.html
A bankrupt "property developer".

So a bunch of chancers, who had no realistic prospect of delivering PPE on any meaningful scale, and of course if any genuine opportunities were missed, it was because the system was swamped with people like these.

Can you find me examples of any companies that might've had a realistic chance of producing medical grade masks after the need for much more PPE was needed?
 
The stories I can find from the time:

https://www.businessinsider.com/cor...e-offers-slow-response-covid-2020-4?r=US&IR=T
A micro company offering to act as an intermediary and a campaign group representing small suppliers (and not at all trying to raise their own profile).

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co....turns-factorys-offer-40-000-weekly-units-ppe/
A small plastics company doing less than this much work in a year.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...HS-faced-five-weeks-frustration-red-tape.html
A bankrupt "property developer".

So a bunch of chancers, who had no realistic prospect of delivering PPE on any meaningful scale, and of course if any genuine opportunities were missed, it was because the system was swamped with people like these.

Can you find me examples of any companies that might've had a realistic chance of producing medical grade masks after the need for much more PPE was needed?
So your'e displaying a small list of companies, with some chancers, to defend Mone and her husband? Wow - are you related? Why is there an ongoing criminal investigation then?
 
The stories I can find from the time:

https://www.businessinsider.com/cor...e-offers-slow-response-covid-2020-4?r=US&IR=T
A micro company offering to act as an intermediary and a campaign group representing small suppliers (and not at all trying to raise their own profile).

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co....turns-factorys-offer-40-000-weekly-units-ppe/
A small plastics company doing less than this much work in a year.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...HS-faced-five-weeks-frustration-red-tape.html
A bankrupt "property developer".

So a bunch of chancers, who had no realistic prospect of delivering PPE on any meaningful scale, and of course if any genuine opportunities were missed, it was because the system was swamped with people like these.

Can you find me examples of any companies that might've had a realistic chance of producing medical grade masks after the need for much more PPE was needed?
I know Lost, it's almost like asking your pub landlord to set up a company and to then produce PPE ! We don't want any old chancers to be given wads of taxpayers cash do we? I am really glad that none of those chancers you mention were given a PPE contract, after all none of them were friends of anyone in government! Trebles all round!
 
So Lord Bethell, who was the Minister who oversaw Covid contracts, is rushing to distance himself from Mone. He hs tweeted a copy of text message he received from Mone in 2020 where she is opaque about her realtionship with Medpro.

The trouble for Lord Bethell is that he has claimed previously, in response to legal proceedings by the Good Law Project, that he had lost his phone data from before early 2021. This lot couldn't lie straight in bed.


 
Irrespective of whether you consider them guilty or not, it is plainly obvious that these two chancers saw the Covid pandemic as an opportunity to fleece the nation and make a quick £60 million or so!

Pair of ####'s!; I hope Karma is going to visit them.
 
So your'e displaying a small list of companies, with some chancers, to defend Mone and her husband? Wow - are you related? Why is there an ongoing criminal investigation then?
I'm answering a separate point about stories of companies able to supply medical grade masks not being contacted by the government, and those are the ones I can find.

If you have others, please feel free to share.
 
The hole in your argument, which you repeat every time, is that firms who actually had PPE, and the supply chains to get more quickly, were left out of the discussion, in fact several contacted NHS supply and were told they already had enough, way before contracts were issued. This has all been explained at committee in the HoC, with specific evidence from the firms affected
Hi, can you help me with this specific point?

These are all of Hancock's appearances at the STSC:
21/07/2020
24/11/2020
10/06/2021
and I can find one question (1429) on 10 June that talks vaguely of "PPE manufacturers ...... say that they were either knocked back for contracts or were not taken up on offers to manufacture or procure PPE" but with no detail, so presumably this will have been in the press and not directly provided to the enquiry (why would they have waited until June 2021).

The other likely HoC committee I can think of is: Public Accounts Committee - COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of personal protective equipment, but I can find no trace of these firms providing evidence in the minutes of those meetings, and in fact no questions on the subject at all on 14 December, which would've been the logical point.

So the question is, which committee were these firms providing evidence to?
 
Hi, can you help me with this specific point?

These are all of Hancock's appearances at the STSC:
21/07/2020
24/11/2020
10/06/2021
and I can find one question (1429) on 10 June that talks vaguely of "PPE manufacturers ...... say that they were either knocked back for contracts or were not taken up on offers to manufacture or procure PPE" but with no detail, so presumably this will have been in the press and not directly provided to the enquiry (why would they have waited until June 2021).

The other likely HoC committee I can think of is: Public Accounts Committee - COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of personal protective equipment, but I can find no trace of these firms providing evidence in the minutes of those meetings, and in fact no questions on the subject at all on 14 December, which would've been the logical point.

So the question is, which committee were these firms providing evidence to?

Stick to the topic of Michelle Mone will you?

This is not a deflective flannel on behalf of your Lords and Masters thread.
 
Hi, can you help me with this specific point?

These are all of Hancock's appearances at the STSC:
21/07/2020
24/11/2020
10/06/2021
and I can find one question (1429) on 10 June that talks vaguely of "PPE manufacturers ...... say that they were either knocked back for contracts or were not taken up on offers to manufacture or procure PPE" but with no detail, so presumably this will have been in the press and not directly provided to the enquiry (why would they have waited until June 2021).

The other likely HoC committee I can think of is: Public Accounts Committee - COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of personal protective equipment, but I can find no trace of these firms providing evidence in the minutes of those meetings, and in fact no questions on the subject at all on 14 December, which would've been the logical point.

So the question is, which committee were these firms providing evidence to?
Give over
 
Stick to the topic of Michelle Mone will you?

This is not a deflective flannel on behalf of your Lords and Masters thread.
Give over
The problem is that posters are making definitive statements without providing evidence to back them up, and when I try to find the evidence it appears that their statements are wrong.

I really don't think the admins want me starting a new thread for every post I disagree with on here.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that posters are making definitive statements without providing evidence to back them up, and when I try to find the evidence it appears that their statements are wrong.

I really don't think the admins want me starting a new thread for every post I disagree with on here.
Explain how Hancock's pub landlord got a contract, despite having no track record in the industry?

Find a link to that please.
 
Advised by her lawyers to lie. Also known as throwing them under the bus.

Hard to believe, I know, but there is a standard lawyers have to abide by, and advising clients to lie is not part of it.
Anyone legal know the position for lawyers who have threatened action to stop facts being discussed in the wide world, when their principal then admits that the alegations were true? Does liabiity for this action lie with the client or the Lawyer?
 
Anyone legal know the position for lawyers who have threatened action to stop facts being discussed in the wide world, when their principal then admits that the alegations were true? Does liabiity for this action lie with the client or the Lawyer?
See also those sued by Oyston who settled out of court...
 
Anyone legal know the position for lawyers who have threatened action to stop facts being discussed in the wide world, when their principal then admits that the alegations were true? Does liabiity for this action lie with the client or the Lawyer?
Listen to the newsagents pod today. It's not currently illegal. However Mone instructed lawyers to threaten ruinous libel action on the journalists who were trying to expose something she knew was actually true. Sounds like the law might be changed to stop this, there is no penalty on the person lying in this case. Has there been a worse defence of the indefensible since Prince Andrew? Surely better to keep her mouth shut. Hope she ends up in court and eventually in prison.
 
Listen to the newsagents pod today. It's not currently illegal. However Mone instructed lawyers to threaten ruinous libel action on the journalists who were trying to expose something she knew was actually true. Sounds like the law might be changed to stop this, there is no penalty on the person lying in this case. Has there been a worse defence of the indefensible since Prince Andrew? Surely better to keep her mouth shut. Hope she ends up in court and eventually in prison.
Labour have promised a covid corruption enquiry should they get in at the next election. Another reason to vote for them.
 
Explain how Hancock's pub landlord got a contract, despite having no track record in the industry?

Find a link to that please.
Simple, Mr David Williams (or possibly a subordinate) signed off on it after the usual procedures were followed, which means he would've had to:
  1. convince the buy team that there was a serious offer there;
  2. convince the technical assurance team that the goods would be in spec;
  3. pass financial due diligence;
  4. negotiate prices etc with the closing team;
  5. finally, the person awarding the contract would consider the overall need, risk and value for money and make a decision to award the contract or not.
Here's the link again: High Court judgement para 26 - 54 for those interested, and for the avoidance of doubt, this evidence applies to all PPE contracts, not just the handful that the specific case is about.

Here's a link to Mr Williams (and others) giving evidence to the Public Accounts Committee saying much the same thing.
 
I thought Laura Kuenssberg did a good job in her interview, continually at the throat of the two unrepentant shysters...

Looked like Mone was going to shed some crocodile tears at one point...

And as for her fat hog of a husband, you would think he could get clothes to fit; I thought his shirt buttons were going to pop under the pressure from his fat gut.
It must have been made by the same company that made their PPE
 
Simple, Mr David Williams (or possibly a subordinate) signed off on it after the usual procedures were followed, which means he would've had to:
  1. convince the buy team that there was a serious offer there;
  2. convince the technical assurance team that the goods would be in spec;
  3. pass financial due diligence;
  4. negotiate prices etc with the closing team;
  5. finally, the person awarding the contract would consider the overall need, risk and value for money and make a decision to award the contract or not.
Here's the link again: High Court judgement para 26 - 54 for those interested, and for the avoidance of doubt, this evidence applies to all PPE contracts, not just the handful that the specific case is about.

Here's a link to Mr Williams (and others) giving evidence to the Public Accounts Committee saying much the same thing.
So a pub landlord earns a contract for £30 million despite having no experience in the field, while the head judges of the Sewing Bee, with over 60 years experience in the industry are passed over.

If you look at the landlord, the contract was awarded to another company with the express proviso that his company was a sub contractor.

Weak attempt to cover their tracks.
 
So a pub landlord earns a contract for £30 million despite having no experience in the field, while the head judges of the Sewing Bee, with over 60 years experience in the industry are passed over.

If you look at the landlord, the contract was awarded to another company with the express proviso that his company was a sub contractor.

Weak attempt to cover their tracks.
If what you are saying is true, then either Mr Williams' evidence to both the High Court and the PAC were lies, or he and/or other Civil Servants working for him are guilty of corruption, so which is it perjury, or corruption by senior Civil Servants?
 
The hole in your argument, which you repeat every time, is that firms who actually had PPE, and the supply chains to get more quickly, were left out of the discussion, in fact several contacted NHS supply and were told they already had enough, way before contracts were issued. This has all been explained at committee in the HoC, with specific evidence from the firms affected
Any chance of a reply to my earlier post, because try as I might, I can't find any sign of what you claim in any committee.

This is important stuff, because what you appear to be suggesting is that established firms were overlooked so that contracts could be awarded to "cronies", despite this being completely inconsistent with the evidence of senior Civil Servants, that I have already provided.
 
Any chance of a reply to my earlier post, because try as I might, I can't find any sign of what you claim in any committee.

This is important stuff, because what you appear to be suggesting is that established firms were overlooked so that contracts could be awarded to "cronies", despite this being completely inconsistent with the evidence of senior Civil Servants, that I have already provided.
How about this thread on X.

 
Any chance of a reply to my earlier post, because try as I might, I can't find any sign of what you claim in any committee.

This is important stuff, because what you appear to be suggesting is that established firms were overlooked so that contracts could be awarded to "cronies", despite this being completely inconsistent with the evidence of senior Civil Servants, that I have already provided.


 
Any chance of a reply to my earlier post, because try as I might, I can't find any sign of what you claim in any committee.

This is important stuff, because what you appear to be suggesting is that established firms were overlooked so that contracts could be awarded to "cronies", despite this being completely inconsistent with the evidence of senior Civil Servants, that I have already provided.
Please...... This is now very well known and documented, do your own research.
 
@Kurtan, sorry, quoted wrong post.

If you follow the tweet back, that's Dan Carden (PAC) and it's dated 25 May 2021, after a lot of digging that resolves back to a one-day hearing, that never produced a report, and seems to have been ignored in the press as well, here's the transcript: https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/2235/default/

There were four witnesses on that day, starting with the angry one from your tweet:

Thomas Martin - ARCO Limited
They do in fact sell PPE, mostly of the bright yellow kind that you'll see on building sites and the like, although their main business seems to be protective footwear, they also have a bit of a line in respirators and masks, but most of that's sourced from other brands, and their own brand masks are clearly nowhere near spec.

They didn't have what was needed at the time, and at first glance they seem to be mostly retailers, so they likely fell at the first hurdle when someone Googled who they were, but in retrospect that might've been a mistake, luck of the draw though.

Sarah Stoute - Full Support Healthcare
Sold the thick end of £2bn and her main complaint seems to be that those were "orders" rather than "contracts".

I hardly think that counts as turning her away.

Iain Liddell - Uniserve
Q15
Our position was that we were contacted by the DHSC on Mothering Sunday 22 March last year initially to urgently move ventilators out of China into the UK. Prior to that, we had not spoken to the DHSC and we had not sold into Government. The guys who contacted us came from a commercial world and would have known Uniserve from that commercial world we are fairly well recognised for our services and our strengths in places like China. From that first call, we were able to urgently move ventilators by air freight into the UK.

So our initial contact with the DHSC was directly made by them to us. That led to them asking us if we could source for them some desperately required PPE, which was based on various different products and commodities. Initially, it was based on gowns and then gloves and masks. Right at the very beginning, we said to them, “We do not normally procure PPE, but we have a huge network of customers, vendors, manufacturers and factories throughout China that do”—we work in that sector and have done for a long time. We said that we would put the call out to them to try to locate the specific items that they were looking for.

Q16 Absolutely, we did not approach the Government, and absolutely we were not approached by any Government middlemen. The call came directly from the DHSC, directly to us.


So DHSC actively searching for PPE suppliers rather than handing contracts out to cronies, that's hardly turning them away either, is it?

Chris Wakeman - Bunzi
£167m contracts, his role there appears to answer questions about media reports about his company being placed back on an approved list by Lord Feldman, the reports were wrong, although LF did contact him and ask him to speak to the lead of the new PPE team.

Again, DHSC searching for PPE proactively, not turning it away.


Not looking good so far, is it?
 
Please...... This is now very well known and documented, do your own research.
I've wasted more than enough time on your unsourced claims that amount to nothing, right now I'm assuming that you've no idea where you got your idea from and can find no evidence to support it yourself.

FWIW, if there's any validity in your claims at all, it would've been in January 2020, when SAGE etc thought it was flu, and that the existing supplies were sufficient, the fact that additional supplies might've been knocked back at the time is not evidence of the massive criminal conspiracy you seem to think it is.
 
Treated the country like there own personal ATM helped along the way by government without any regard for the safety of people who needed PPE to do their job. They may be legally Ok but not morally but don't suppose that will bother them. As a few have found out there is subtle difference between common law and tax law and HMRC may be taking a look _ very keen on routing out tax avoidance and evasion.
 
Moany Mone and Barrowman are domiciled in the Isle of Man. It has its own tax authority independent of the UK. Our HMRC will not get a look in. The Manx will likely not care if they get their cut. Though there might be little to pay at all with a trust, which heaps insult on injury.

 
Source? Do we even know if they were of a type suitable for the NHS?

In any event, the first SAGE meeting was on 22 January 2020, nobody knew what Covid was at the time, so whoever turned them down wouldn't have known how many we'd need, and I suspect that decision never made it to a minister's desk.

Finally, all procurement was handled by Civil Servants, only the Permanent Secretary has the power to approve contracts, so why do you think he would've been handing out contracts to the ministers' mates?
Just a clerk, under orders.
 
The stories I can find from the time:

https://www.businessinsider.com/cor...e-offers-slow-response-covid-2020-4?r=US&IR=T
A micro company offering to act as an intermediary and a campaign group representing small suppliers (and not at all trying to raise their own profile).

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co....turns-factorys-offer-40-000-weekly-units-ppe/
A small plastics company doing less than this much work in a year.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...HS-faced-five-weeks-frustration-red-tape.html
A bankrupt "property developer".

So a bunch of chancers, who had no realistic prospect of delivering PPE on any meaningful scale, and of course if any genuine opportunities were missed, it was because the system was swamped with people like these.

Can you find me examples of any companies that might've had a realistic chance of producing medical grade masks after the need for much more PPE was needed?
Labour Mps have brought up names of companies with relevant experience who were excluded . Im not doing the research though, Im sure you can dig it out.
 
Back
Top