[James Malloch]

In a similar vein there was a news story that popped up on my social media today about the value £1bn worth of contracts awarded without tender. The alternative is a tender process that delays the start date and might mean you end up working with someone new - not necessarily a bad thing but I can understand the desire to work with existing partners who you already have a relationship with if time is of the essence. use the laws allowing you to act quickly to send hundreds of millions in the direction of your friend's companies knowing they wouldn't win a tendering process because they're an asset management company based in Bermuda or a veterinary supplies company with no stock.

Fixed that one for you, Will.

[tomtom]

Anyone know where to find if your area is medium, high or very high risk?

As far as I can see this is still in the ‘pre announced’ stage as Galpinos said, looks like it will be announced this evening.

This is a right dogs dinner of a pre announcement. Even by this governments dealings its a fucking shambles.

We only 'know' that Liverpool will be in Tier 3 because the mayor (I think) has said as much and what it will entail (pubs, bars - not restaraunts or takeaways, bookies and gyms). If you read sky news those same restrictions will apply to all tier 3 areas. If you look at the BBC, they;ve been 'briefed' that this will only happen in Liverpool and NOT manchester/NE. If you read the Manchester Evening News they say Manchester will be tier3 but the Mayor (Burnham) says there has been no discussion with the government since friday...

In theory - the three tiers/traffic lights - whatever is a good idea - simplifying things. WELL DONE (NZ did this 6 months ago BTW...). But how its being brought in is a shit show of bad information/message management at the moment.

[teestub]

Agree TT, I thought Cummings was meant to be a data and information guy? When I was trying to work out if we were in the somewhat nebulous ‘Bradford’ lockdown area (we have a BD postcode) all I could find on the gov website was a pdf map with only the cities as identifying features. They’re going to need something better this time if you want to be taking localised areas in and out of lockdown. Surely they’ve got the GIS capabilities, or just a postcode searcher like the BBC one.

[tomtom]

Maybe postcodes don’t work in Excel :D

[iain]

Anyone know where to find if your area is medium, high or very high risk?

Really worried about Sheffield being judged high risk and the walls closing. Think that might kill me at the minute.

As teestub said because it's not been officially announced there's no current way to check official tier.

Obviously I'm a random Internet person but Sheff is arguing for tier 2 (high) with some extra support for specific outbreaks. Unfortunately it's a political decision and they may not get their way.

This is a right dogs dinner of a pre announcement. Even by this governments dealings its a fucking shambles.

...

In theory - the three tiers/traffic lights - whatever is a good idea - simplifying things. WELL DONE (NZ did this 6 months ago BTW...). But how its being brought in is a shit show of bad information/message management at the moment.

This. ^^^

Whitty and Valance were arguing for a short full lock down 3 weeks ago and were ignored, and as you said something decisive 7-10 days ago would've really helped, instead we're back in March territory.

[iain]

To add, it's probable that gyms, and therefore walls, will be allowed to remain open under Tier 2, but until the government publishes clear guidelines we just don't know.

[galpinos]

What I find frustrating is if we need to lockdown, why the wait? The traffic light system was "pre-announced" last week, will be announced today and will be implemented Wednesday at the earliest?

From what I've been reading over the weekend (in such reliable sources as the Guardian), it's because they've spent the last week negotiating with the local authorities to not have them respond with open revolt...

They haven't spoken to Andy Burnham since last week so Manchester are totally in the dark, Liverpool are making announcements based on what has been leaked to the Times/Telegraph, as that's more up to date than there briefings from the Cabinet and the actually briefing to "MPs and Leaders in the North" was run by Jenrick* and he cut the call when asked questions.

*Don't get me started on the "He approved the spending in my constituency and I approved the spending in his constituency" interview

[ali k]

there was a news story that popped up on my social media today about the value £1bn worth of contracts awarded without tender. The alternative is a tender process that delays the start date and might mean you end up working with someone new - not necessarily a bad thing but I can understand the desire to work with existing partners who you already have a relationship with if time is of the essence.

This defence of what’s been happening might wash if the contracts had been awarded to companies with even the vaguest experience of the relevant service, or if there wasn’t a long list of contracts going to Cummings/Gove’s pals.

[galpinos]

They are high in the north east as well but compared to Liverpool manchester and others we look good.

I should also add that Manchester numbers have been driven up by the decision to mass test thousands of students, whether symptomatic or not, to allow an effective isolation campaign. Many students were asymptomatic so would not have got tested in regimes who aren't testing the asymptomatic population. Manchester don't what to be punished for having high numbers when that may be the result of more testing.

[Nigel]

In a similar vein there was a news story that popped up on my social media today about the value £1bn worth of contracts awarded without tender. The alternative is a tender process that delays the start date and might mean you end up working with someone new - not necessarily a bad thing but I can understand the desire to work with existing partners who you already have a relationship with if time is of the essence.

I guess the above take does have the virtue of common sense Will. Unfortunately what you described didn't actually happen.

£252 million contract awarded to Ayanda Capital - https://www.ayandacapital.com/. As you can see they are by their own description a currency trading, offshore property, personal equity and trade financing company. They are owned via a Mauritius company, which is a zero tax haven They were not "existing partners" with whom the DHSC / NHS "already have a relationship". They don't make PPE, they have never previously supplied PPE, they don't have a logistics operation, and have no connection to the medical sector. Via a roundabout route involving a member of the UK Board of Trade they had a promise to secure the full production of a Chinese PPE factory, which they did on a very favourable contract (to them) which appeared to involve no samples or any time stipulation / penalties. Half the masks provided were deemed unsuitable by the NHS due to the fastening, but may be useable in a non-medical setting. Which of course is not why they were bought.

There are other well known examples (Clandboyne Agencies, Pestfix, Luxe Lifestyle, etc.). What happened is that there was a rush by government to secure companies with strong contacts in China that could make sure that Chinese-made PPE would come to Britain in an environment described by one company director involved as "like the Wild West". All of this is well documented.

It may well be right to say that we were pushed for time and in a PPE crisis so that leveraging mates with the ability to open doors in China was justified, but lets at least recognise that was what happened to anywhere between £1bn and £5.5bn of taxpayer's money, rather than upping orders with existing NHS suppliers in the UK. Legal action is ongoing so the answers will come out in the fullness of time. I would still like to think that having a proper stockpile and using trusted domestic producers would have been preferable!

[tomtom]

I would still like to think that having a proper stockpile and using trusted domestic producers would have been preferable!

A stitch in time saves nine. As our beloved leader like to trope...

[Paul B]

In theory - the three tiers/traffic lights - whatever is a good idea - simplifying things. WELL DONE (NZ did this 6 months ago BTW...). But how its being brought in is a shit show of bad information/message management at the moment.

This is looking increasing like theory, with Merseyside/Greater Manchester seemingly negotiating/re-buffing the Government's offer.

I thought this was very interesting:

***actually that's the wrong clip from the same interview***
https://twitter.com/KayBurley/status/1315563705506115584?s=20

The one I was meaning:
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1315546002305228801?s=20

My take is that suggests that the measures wouldn't address the infection pathway(s) identified in Oldham (intensive workplaces). Is there now publicly available data on where infection occurs?

[Will Hunt]

there was a news story that popped up on my social media today about the value £1bn worth of contracts awarded without tender. The alternative is a tender process that delays the start date and might mean you end up working with someone new - not necessarily a bad thing but I can understand the desire to work with existing partners who you already have a relationship with if time is of the essence.

This defence of what’s been happening might wash if the contracts had been awarded to companies with even the vaguest experience of the relevant service, or if there wasn’t a long list of contracts going to Cummings/Gove’s pals.

I don't doubt that there is corruption going on and that contracts have been awarded to dodgy suppliers. There's a separate story about Cummings throwing contracts to his mates. The story I was referring to (it's actually quite old but popped up on social media today: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/15/firms-given-1bn-of-state-contracts-without-tender-in-covid-19-crisis) used the logos of Deloitte, Serco, Sodexo, PWC etc in its headline. The biggest contract mentioned in the article was for Edenred to set up and launch a voucher scheme for free school meals, reportedly in just 10 days. Edenred are something like the biggest provider of childcare vouchers so aren't exactly an unexpected choice. Had there been a tender process then it would have taken weeks or months more than that which would have been unacceptable.

Note: I absolutely despise this and the previous government for all that they have done with Brexit and more (particularly on things like the unlawful prorogation and a general disregard for the rule of law). I'm only pointing out the Catch-22 of their situation. Perhaps the contracts issue wasn't the best example to choose.

There is heaps of confusion around what the announcement tonight will look like, probably because it's still a work in progress (whether or not that should be the case is a different matter). As far as I can tell a significant portion of confusion has arisen because local council leaders/mayors have leaked information in a bid to get their own local restrictions relaxed.

[galpinos]

As far as I can tell a significant portion of confusion has arisen because local council leaders/mayors have leaked information in a bid to get their own local restrictions relaxed.

Do you mean the info leaked to the telegraph and times wasn't from the government source but was actually from the local mayors?

[Will Hunt]

No. I'm not sure why you'd think I was suggesting that.

[petejh]

In a similar vein there was a news story that popped up on my social media today about the value £1bn worth of contracts awarded without tender. The alternative is a tender process that delays the start date and might mean you end up working with someone new - not necessarily a bad thing but I can understand the desire to work with existing partners who you already have a relationship with if time is of the essence.

I guess the above take does have the virtue of common sense Will. Unfortunately what you described didn't actually happen.

£252 million contract awarded to Ayanda Capital - https://www.ayandacapital.com/. As you can see they are by their own description a currency trading, offshore property, personal equity and trade financing company. They are owned via a Mauritius company, which is a zero tax haven They were not "existing partners" with whom the DHSC / NHS "already have a relationship". They don't make PPE, they have never previously supplied PPE, they don't have a logistics operation, and have no connection to the medical sector. Via a roundabout route involving a member of the UK Board of Trade they had a promise to secure the full production of a Chinese PPE factory, which they did on a very favourable contract (to them) which appeared to involve no samples or any time stipulation / penalties. Half the masks provided were deemed unsuitable by the NHS due to the fastening, but may be useable in a non-medical setting. Which of course is not why they were bought.

There are other well known examples (Clandboyne Agencies, Pestfix, Luxe Lifestyle, etc.). What happened is that there was a rush by government to secure companies with strong contacts in China that could make sure that Chinese-made PPE would come to Britain in an environment described by one company director involved as "like the Wild West". All of this is well documented.

It may well be right to say that we were pushed for time and in a PPE crisis so that leveraging mates with the ability to open doors in China was justified, but lets at least recognise that was what happened to anywhere between £1bn and £5.5bn of taxpayer's money, rather than upping orders with existing NHS suppliers in the UK. Legal action is ongoing so the answers will come out in the fullness of time. I would still like to think that having a proper stockpile and using trusted domestic producers would have been preferable!

No idea about the other companies you mention, but Pestfix have been one of my suppliers for 3 or 4 years and I occasionally chat to their sales manager. I had an interesting conversation with them about the PPE contract.. sounded very much a case of small company done well due to their contacts in China.. no supporters of the government etc...
i.e. a very different version to what you read on here or in the press. Suppose we'll see what facts emerge down the line.

But it shouldn't be a snap announcement. They should be in constant conversation with local government, leaders and public health officials. There should be a clear "roadmap" as to what would trigger further restrictions so everyone knows what is going on. The "snap decision" scenario we are now in is because the government has been working in isolation, not listening to local leaders and making decisions off the cuff.

Eh? Unless you've been orbiting Pluto for the last 6 months then I'm pretty sure you don't need a constant conversation to know what's 'going on' and where cases numbers have been heading... first downwards as a result of national lockdown, now decidedly upwards following easing of rules and increased social mixing. It may be complex but any fool can see the pattern.
I don't get people criticising the lead-in time for consultation before this latest rule change as they're the same people who'd criticise a change of rules brought in 'without consultation'. The Mayor's of Liverpool and Manchester criticising the government's handling is hardly enlightening or evidence of anything - see Andy F's sentiment. Just wait for the announcement this afternoon FFS.

My real issue is that the government have burnt through the goodwill from the first lockdown. A lot was sacrificed to get the numbers down for the summer an, in simple terms, we've fucked it and are back to where we were at the start of the year. The public's appetite to lockdown again, only for the government to squander the gains is probably minimal.

On this I agree. I think if you could layer society into strata based on 'willingness to obey the covid rules' then the government has lost many layers of the public who were compliant during March lockdown. I'm in Conwy, supposedly the whole county is in lockdown yet people don't seem to give a shit about leaving and coming in to the county to go climbing or whatever else. I've been obeying the rules but it seems futile when so many are ignoring them. I suppose/hope the policies are based on knowing a certain proportion will ignore the rules. There also doesn't seem to be any enforcement..

[tomtom]

There also doesn't seem to be any enforcement..

Yes - this is an important/interesting point. UK has always been proud of policing by consent... maybe some of this needs to go now, and we need a French/Spanish style of having to have a letter to show you are allowed out/to go to work etc...

BTW, Dyfed Powys have the highest ratio of CV19 fines given per population in the UK - by quite some margin!

[Nigel]

No idea about the other companies you mention, but Pestfix have been one of my suppliers for 3 or 4 years and I occasionally chat to their sales manager. I had an interesting conversation with them about the PPE contract.. sounded very much a case of small company done well due to their contacts in China.. no supporters of the government etc...
i.e. a very different version to what you read on here or in the press. Suppose we'll see what facts emerge down the line.

Doesn't seem that different from what I wrote tbh! We used to buy pigeon spikes from them I think.

[galpinos]

Eh? Unless you've been orbiting Pluto for the last 6 months then I'm pretty sure you don't need a constant conversation to know what's 'going on' and where cases numbers have been heading... first downwards as a result of national lockdown, now decidedly upwards. I don't get people criticising the lead-in time for consultation before this latest rule change as they're the same people who'd criticise a change of rules brought in 'without consultation'. The Mayor's of Liverpool and Manchester criticising the government's handling is hardly enlightening or evidence of anything - see Andy F's sentiment. Just wait for the announcement this afternoon FFS.

I was obviously unclear. By "what's going on" I meant the governments planned response to the inevitable "second wave" and what they had proposed to combat it. My criticism on the lead in time is not that they are getting local leaders on board (or not, as the case may be) but that this should have been sorted out over the summer, so when they sent everyone out to eat in restaurants, they schools reopened and they encouraged student to swarm back to the unis and office workers back  to their offices, they had a plan as to what they would do in the various scenarios of the infection rate rising, hospital admissions rising and deaths rising.

This harks back to my comment about wasting the goodwill from the first lockdown. We now hear they won't be announcing the areas that will be put into stricter lockdown today. Nightingale Manchester is being brought back online though, so..........

My real issue is that the government have burnt through the goodwill from the first lockdown. A lot was sacrificed to get the numbers down for the summer an, in simple terms, we've fucked it and are back to where we were at the start of the year. The public's appetite to lockdown again, only for the government to squander the gains is probably minimal.

On this I agree. I think if you could layer society into strata based on 'willingness to obey the covid rules' then the government has lost many layers of the public who were compliant during March lockdown. I'm in Conwy, supposedly the whole county is in lockdown yet people don't seem to give a shit about leaving and coming in to the county to go climbing or whatever else. I've been obeying the rules but it seems futile when so many are ignoring them. I suppose/hope the policies are based on knowing a certain proportion will ignore the rules. There also doesn't seem to be any enforcement..

[Paul B]

Eh? Unless you've been orbiting Pluto for the last 6 months then I'm pretty sure you don't need a constant conversation to know what's 'going on' and where cases numbers have been heading... first downwards as a result of national lockdown, now decidedly upwards. I don't get people criticising the lead-in time for consultation before this latest rule change as they're the same people who'd criticise a change of rules brought in 'without consultation'.

Have to disagree strongly with this Pete. The last round of measures were brought in overnight and as of yet haven't been backed up by evidence (have I missed this?). The 'acceptance' at the time was very much based on the evidence following. As I've said (now numerous times on the other thread), the measures (for whatever reason, either poor adherence or they just aren't sufficient) are not working (also see the video I've posted); Pendle has been in local lockdown for ~7 weeks.

Likewise, if you now look at the rates per 100k, there doesn't appear to be a logical threshold to 'trigger' additional measures. This doesn't look good with all the talk of levelling up. There may be practical reasons why this is the case, but I've not heard them articulated by a Government Minister.

People's willingness to sit back and just take measures on the chin or accept that the Government is doing the best in bad situation is just completely broken. I went out for lunch on Thurs and the owner didn't know what to do with ordering for the next week as he has literally no idea if he'd even be allowed to open (and I'd wager he still doesn't).

The Mayor's of Liverpool and Manchester criticising the government's handling is hardly enlightening or evidence of anything - see Andy F's sentiment. Just wait for the announcement this afternoon FFS.

GM have been offering suggestions to try and improve contract tracing. As far as I'm aware, this has been the case (in various forms) since April.  Various local leaders have spoken out since Fri saying that the suggestion that there's consultation/engagement is false and they're being told of what the restrictions may/will be and prevented from asking questions. These are the same people who were quite rightly saying that the range of restrictions across GM were completely unworkable (was it Bolton that had ~6 sets of rules in ~8 days?). There's plenty of scope for fair criticism in there.

[galpinos]

It's worth noting there are more patients in hospital with Covid than there were when we went into the last, national lockdown.

The statement doesn't seem to clarify "with Covid" or "because of Covid", nor compare ICU stats, but it is a worrying statistic.

[tomtom]

Good graphic from Van Tam https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-more-covid-deaths-baked-in-due-to-creep-from-young-to-old-deputy-chief-medical-officer-warns-12102431

One good thing to take from this is the low increase in 0-15yo's...

[gme]

One good thing to take from this is the low increase in 0-15yo's...

It would appear that the schools are doing a good job and the kids going back hasn’t been a big issue.

It definitely appears to have a relation to indoor socialisation either in bars or houses. We have had a couple of cases at work but not a lot. My lads school had a few issues at first but dropped off now with a few weeks of no cases.

My oldest at uni in London appears to be out every night on the piss so expect an increase down there.

[tomtom]

One good thing to take from this is the low increase in 0-15yo's...

It would appear that the schools are doing a good job and the kids going back hasn’t been a big issue.

Yes - possibly better controlled having them in one controlled (as much as you can!) place for most of the week... I was deeply sceptical of opening schools earlier in the year and it looks like I was wrong about that (and I'm pleased to be wrong).

[chris j]

It's worth noting there are more patients in hospital with Covid than there were when we went into the last, national lockdown.

The statement doesn't seem to clarify "with Covid" or "because of Covid", nor compare ICU stats, but it is a worrying statistic.

I don't know what the situation is elsewhere in the country but as of last week in devon half of those in hospital with Covid had been admitted for another reason. Which rather begged thequestion whether they were not showing symptoms on admittal or if they were infected while in hospital.