Virgin lose West Coast franchise to First Group
Discussion
anonymous said:
[redacted]
The point I was making was to the scale of the cock up. Can you remember the last time a government was forced to come out so openly, after repeated denials that the bid process was anything but 'robust'? There has been a catastrophic failure here, with much more to come I'm sure. Your confident assertion that this is all the fault of the civil servants belies a degree of naivity that beggars belief.Blue62 said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
The point I was making was to the scale of the cock up. Can you remember the last time a government was forced to come out so openly, after repeated denials that the bid process was anything but 'robust'? There has been a catastrophic failure here, with much more to come I'm sure. Your confident assertion that this is all the fault of the civil servants belies a degree of naivity that beggars belief.anonymous said:
[redacted]
I think you'll find the 'system' was designed by politicians, the whole privatisation thing was dreamt up by Major, Labour continued to screw up the procurement process and this lot have taken it to another level entirely. Greening refuted claims by Labour and Virgin, McLoughlin unwisely repeated those claims, you cannot let them off the hook if you have any sense of balance. On the other hand, if you want to defend an incompetent administration under any circumstances, be my guest.Blue62 said:
Greening refuted claims by Labour and Virgin, McLoughlin unwisely repeated those claims, you cannot let them off the hook if you have any sense of balance.
So to get this straight, you think McLoughlin should have appeared in front of the Transport Select Committee alongside the Permanent Secretary and told the committee that, despite repeated assurances by the Permanent Secretary that the department had adequately assessed the risk of each bid, he didn't believe them?Surely that would have made the Permanent Secretary's position untenable? Possibly even resulting in a claim for constructive dismissal if McLoughlin was not in possession of any evidence that the calculations were wrong. I expect you would have claimed that the Minister was incompetent then as well.
ralphrj said:
So to get this straight, you think McLoughlin should have appeared in front of the Transport Select Committee alongside the Permanent Secretary and told the committee that, despite repeated assurances by the Permanent Secretary that the department had adequately assessed the risk of each bid, he didn't believe them?
Surely that would have made the Permanent Secretary's position untenable? Possibly even resulting in a claim for constructive dismissal if McLoughlin was not in possession of any evidence that the calculations were wrong. I expect you would have claimed that the Minister was incompetent then as well.
No I don't believe that, but McLoughlin is a red herring isn't he? In hindsight it was unwise of him to repeat Greening's claim that the process was robust, I have no doubt he made that statement in good faith. The issue of risk lies within the process itself, it 'appears' that risk assessment was carried out by the department itself, on a project of this size RA would be carried out independently, possibly by more than one body (at big cost) but this doesn't appear to have happened this time, although details are still sketchy. There seems to be incompetence at every level, that's my point, not just Whitehall. Surely that would have made the Permanent Secretary's position untenable? Possibly even resulting in a claim for constructive dismissal if McLoughlin was not in possession of any evidence that the calculations were wrong. I expect you would have claimed that the Minister was incompetent then as well.
Eric Mc said:
What would you prefer them to do?
If you don't like this government, NOTHING they do would be to your liking.
Politicians can never win. It's the number one rule in politics.
I'm cynical of all politicians Eric, this is not a 'party' issue but one of governance. To state that politicians can never win is to ignore their platinum plated pensions and the fact that in this instance, they have pointed the finger directly at the civil servants, I can't beleive it is that simple.If you don't like this government, NOTHING they do would be to your liking.
Politicians can never win. It's the number one rule in politics.
Blue62 said:
they have pointed the finger directly at the civil servants, I can't beleive it is that simple.
It is and it isn't (which doesn't really help the discussion I know but bear with me!)The previous Labour government instigated an approach to tendering for public sector work that whilst well intentioned, was woefully short sighted to the point where companies were winning contracts they had no right to for no reason other than they were simply the best at filling out a tender.
In fairness to the government then, the procurement system was issued as 'guidelines' rather than absolute and departments and councils were largely left to their own devices. However, the problem was that the public sector was also being managed in such a way that individual ownership of management responsibility was removed leading to things being done in the right way at the direct expense of doing the right thing.
As a consequence, there is a litany of examples where contracts have been awarded to companies unable to deliver (see G4S for further information) but the process of procurement means that nobody or no department on the client side is to blame....they followed procedures.
One example of the absurdity of this relates to the way tenders are scored.
We have had a few tenders recently where 40% of the total score is on cost, 60% on skills, experience and proposed approach. On this basis, you'd be drawn to think that maybe you are a little more expensive but so long as you demonstrate credentials and proposals to a high enough quality, then you'd still be in with a shout. However, on the financial scoring, the cheapest price is scored at 100% of 40% available and the highest cost at 0% of the 40%.
So, if ten companies bid for a contract and one scores maximum on 60% for credentials and proposal yet is the most expensive by even as little £100, they will not win the contract. The best company for the work looses.
What the current government have failed to do is address this situation - something they said they'd do when they took over at No 10.
P-Jay said:
Did I hear this morning it's going to cost FORTY MILLION POUNDS to re-run the tender process?
How the titty f
king virgin Mary is that possible?
Just caught the end of the news and, the unions were saying it would be closer to Sixty.How the titty f
king virgin Mary is that possible? ETA: I do hope they have not mislaid my bid that came to something like £5mill.
Edited by Laurel Green on Wednesday 3rd October 12:53
£40m is not the cost to rerun the process, its the cost to remburse the 4 bidders for the money they have already spent. The cost to rerun it will have another zero on the end, as they have to pay for two enquires, virgin a management fee to keep things going, redraught all the paperwork and and and.....
P-Jay said:
Did I hear this morning it's going to cost FORTY MILLION POUNDS to re-run the tender process?
How the titty fking virgin Mary is that possible?
According to Railway Magazine Virgin spent £14m putting together their bid for WCML and presumably First Group spent something similar on theirs. As the bid process will have to be re-run from scratch the DfT will have to reimburse them for the money wasted. In addition there are several other franchise bids currently running which have been put on hold and may have to be re-submitted so there may be further costs to train operators that will have to be reimbursed.How the titty f
king virgin Mary is that possible? I am surprised that anyone would credit any politician with the ability to devise a system of tendering.
That is what the departmental civil servants are charged with and expected to do, but as we see once again, they are woefully inadequate.
Oh well, lessons will be learned. Until next time.
That is what the departmental civil servants are charged with and expected to do, but as we see once again, they are woefully inadequate.
Oh well, lessons will be learned. Until next time.
Until people in power spend OUR money as if it were their own, this will never cease.
I can hear the process trundling along now behind the scenes, blame game in full swing; couple of reasonably senior civil servants will get culled with Pension enhancements etc and pay offs.
Two months later, those same retired Civil Servants will be back working for one of the train companies or contracting in their old roles but the mob will appear appeased! Strewth, when and where will it all end?
I can hear the process trundling along now behind the scenes, blame game in full swing; couple of reasonably senior civil servants will get culled with Pension enhancements etc and pay offs.
Two months later, those same retired Civil Servants will be back working for one of the train companies or contracting in their old roles but the mob will appear appeased! Strewth, when and where will it all end?
REALIST123 said:
DJRC said:
The Houghton family breakfast table this morning:
Mrs Houghton: Shall we hold an Xmas party this yr darling?
Mr Houghton: Well you can take Justine fking Greening off the list for a start!
Mrs Houghton: Yes, she does seem to have made an auspicious move in Depts doesnt she? Do have fun at the cabinet meeting today.
Mr Houghton: Im going to bloody kill her!
Houghton?Mrs Houghton: Shall we hold an Xmas party this yr darling?
Mr Houghton: Well you can take Justine f
king Greening off the list for a start!Mrs Houghton: Yes, she does seem to have made an auspicious move in Depts doesnt she? Do have fun at the cabinet meeting today.
Mr Houghton: Im going to bloody kill her!
Patrick Houghton was someone I worked with at my last job! He's half British, half Swiss...he will be amused I got him mixed over a trains policy
Be interesting to see the wider impact of this. McLoughlin seems to be getting a lot of stick, but I think he deserves credit for being so open about the failure, even if his hand was forced by Branson. Could this see the eventual unwinding of the whole franchise process I wonder? If there are admitted flaws in the DfT model, it has to call into question all other awards, surely?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff