Virgin lose West Coast franchise to First Group

[crankedup]

Vote of thanks to Branson. Another week another balls-up revealed.

[Du1point8]

crankedup said:

Vote of thanks to Branson. Another week another balls-up revealed.

Absolutely.... Damn the public sector and their useless people costing the taxpayers £40million.

Whats going to be next.

[TallbutBuxomly]

Eric Mc said:

RedTrident said:

Ooops. Looks like this government is going to carry on fking things up for themselves. At this rate Labour don't need to win the next election, the Tories seem capable of losing it all by themselves.

Funny, but it seems that it is the government who are investigating this affair. Is that a sign of ineptitude or correct behaviour?

Eric mc is the first person on this thread today to get it right. Would you rather gov of old strategy of seeing a fkup and burying it. Hell in this case that would for the cons have been by far the best idea since they stand a good chance of losing the 2015 elections and this would most likely surface only afterwards when it really wouldn't be a problem.

I would rather we lose 40 million now than hundreds of millions 3/4/5 years down the line when it surfaces that the contract was incorrectly awarded.

[Blue62]

TallbutBuxomly said:

Eric mc is the first person on this thread today to get it right. Would you rather gov of old strategy of seeing a fkup and burying it. Hell in this case that would for the cons have been by far the best idea since they stand a good chance of losing the 2015 elections and this would most likely surface only afterwards when it really wouldn't be a problem.

I would rather we lose 40 million now than hundreds of millions 3/4/5 years down the line when it surfaces that the contract was incorrectly awarded.

The only reason there has been such a frank announcement is because Virgin went to court, forcing the department for transport to go over their numbers with a little more care, thereby exposing their howling gaffes. They really had no option other than to come clean once they realsied they would be taken to the cleaners when it got to court, this is not some new dawn of open government mate, quite the opposite, they've moved quickly to put the blame on the civil servants, how refreshing. The £40m is the tip of the iceberg, that's just recompense for the original bidders.

[P-Jay]

ralphrj said:

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.

Jesus, can't they just re-review the bids already made, or, and lets be honest this is how it will end up after much more waste and time - hand it back to Virgin on the basis they put forward on their bid.

[TallbutBuxomly]

Du1point8 said:

crankedup said:

Vote of thanks to Branson. Another week another balls-up revealed.

Absolutely.... Damn the public sector and their useless people costing the taxpayers £40million.

Whats going to be next.

I think Branson could play a cracker of a pr card at this point and re iterate his offer to continue running the trains on a not for profit basis to allow for a rebid process.

I would like to point out that I told people Branson wasn't just stomping his feet because he didn't get what he wanted. Much like with the BA and Camelot situation process was bent and he was being wronged and he wasn't willing to take it lying down.

My primary concern over this is that I deeply suspect that Mrs greening had her hand in the pockets of FGW based on she not only refused point blank to review the situation or review it but in fact tried to push to get it all signed off as soon as possible to avoid it being reviewed.

[172ff]

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?

Probably all the (private sector) consultancy time. I bet the big 4 will have a hand in this somewhere. Coinin' it in.

[Du1point8]

172ff said:

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?

Probably all the (private sector) consultancy time. I bet the big 4 will have a hand in this somewhere. Coinin' it in.

What big four is that then?

What are you wittering on about with private sector consultancy? The £40 million is to be paid back to the private companies that spent that much handing/preparing their own tenders in the first place and now the civil servants involved have fked up.

[V8mate]

Du1point8 said:

172ff said:

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?

Probably all the (private sector) consultancy time. I bet the big 4 will have a hand in this somewhere. Coinin' it in.

What big four is that then?

What are you wittering on about with private sector consultancy? The £40 million is to be paid back to the private companies that spent that much handing/preparing their own tenders in the first place and now the civil servants involved have fked up.

A large proportion of which will have been paying their advisors.

[DJRC]

Blue62 said:

TallbutBuxomly said:

Eric mc is the first person on this thread today to get it right. Would you rather gov of old strategy of seeing a fkup and burying it. Hell in this case that would for the cons have been by far the best idea since they stand a good chance of losing the 2015 elections and this would most likely surface only afterwards when it really wouldn't be a problem.

I would rather we lose 40 million now than hundreds of millions 3/4/5 years down the line when it surfaces that the contract was incorrectly awarded.

The only reason there has been such a frank announcement is because Virgin went to court, forcing the department for transport to go over their numbers with a little more care, thereby exposing their howling gaffes. They really had no option other than to come clean once they realsied they would be taken to the cleaners when it got to court, this is not some new dawn of open government mate, quite the opposite, they've moved quickly to put the blame on the civil servants, how refreshing. The £40m is the tip of the iceberg, that's just recompense for the original bidders.

Erm...isnt the DfT staffed by the Civil Service?

[Du1point8]

V8mate said:

Du1point8 said:

172ff said:

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?

Probably all the (private sector) consultancy time. I bet the big 4 will have a hand in this somewhere. Coinin' it in.

What big four is that then?

What are you wittering on about with private sector consultancy? The £40 million is to be paid back to the private companies that spent that much handing/preparing their own tenders in the first place and now the civil servants involved have fked up.

A large proportion of which will have been paying their advisors.

Which they did nothing incorrect, if it cost £40 million for the companies to write their tenders then I still dont understand what relevance it is that they might have used private sector consultancies.

The person who posted that seems to imply that the £40 million was costs the public sector had to pay for employing private sector consultancies.

Which is incorrect and seems like a rant against private sector consultancies being expensive for public sector hire and the reason why it cost so much.

[Blue62]

DJRC said:

Erm...isnt the DfT staffed by the Civil Service?

Yes it is and the minister responsible has blamed the department.

[Deva Link]

Du1point8 said:

Which they did nothing incorrect, if it cost £40 million for the companies to write their tenders then I still dont understand what relevance it is that they might have used private sector consultancies.

The person who posted that seems to imply that the £40 million was costs the public sector had to pay for employing private sector consultancies.

Which is incorrect and seems like a rant against private sector consultancies being expensive for public sector hire and the reason why it cost so much.

Surely private sector consultancies will have been heavily involved in devising the tendering process and parameters?

[Eric Mc]

How can he be responsible when he wasn't the Minister at the time all this happened. He has just taken over the department - he has spotted a problem - and he is sorting it out.

Sounds to me like he is doing what he should be doing.

[Du1point8]

Deva Link said:

Du1point8 said:

Which they did nothing incorrect, if it cost £40 million for the companies to write their tenders then I still dont understand what relevance it is that they might have used private sector consultancies.

The person who posted that seems to imply that the £40 million was costs the public sector had to pay for employing private sector consultancies.

Which is incorrect and seems like a rant against private sector consultancies being expensive for public sector hire and the reason why it cost so much.

Surely private sector consultancies will have been heavily involved in devising the tendering process and parameters?

Show evidence of what happen and you can state that... At the moment the department has fked up and that is it until its investigated as to how it has messed up so bad on figures.

[P-Jay]

Du1point8 said:

V8mate said:

Du1point8 said:

172ff said:

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?

Probably all the (private sector) consultancy time. I bet the big 4 will have a hand in this somewhere. Coinin' it in.

What big four is that then?

What are you wittering on about with private sector consultancy? The £40 million is to be paid back to the private companies that spent that much handing/preparing their own tenders in the first place and now the civil servants involved have fked up.

A large proportion of which will have been paying their advisors.

Which they did nothing incorrect, if it cost £40 million for the companies to write their tenders then I still dont understand what relevance it is that they might have used private sector consultancies.

The person who posted that seems to imply that the £40 million was costs the public sector had to pay for employing private sector consultancies.

Which is incorrect and seems like a rant against private sector consultancies being expensive for public sector hire and the reason why it cost so much.

I guess you mean me as the original poster. My shock was nothing more or less than that £40m (I dread to think what that translates into Doctors, Teacher, Miles of road or whatever) of public money has been wasted, as in, completely unrecoverable, bosch out-the-door, never to be seen again.

And I admit I have nothing but a layman’s understanding, but a tender, even one that costs millions of pounds to complete is a document stating what they're prepared to do, for what costs and what penalties they'll accept for failing to meet targets etc. I fail to see, if the government are now saying they got it wrong, why this all has to be done again, the core information is the same.

[Deva Link]

Du1point8 said:

Show evidence of what happen and you can state that... At the moment the department has fked up and that is it until its investigated as to how it has messed up so bad on figures.

..and the two investigations that have been announced will rely heavily on consultants.

[DJRC]

Blue62 said:

DJRC said:

Erm...isnt the DfT staffed by the Civil Service?

Yes it is and the minister responsible has blamed the department.

Well er...who else would be to blame if not the sodding dept???? Id be fking livid with them if it was my dept!

[V8mate]

Du1point8 said:

V8mate said:

Du1point8 said:

172ff said:

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?

Probably all the (private sector) consultancy time. I bet the big 4 will have a hand in this somewhere. Coinin' it in.

What big four is that then?

What are you wittering on about with private sector consultancy? The £40 million is to be paid back to the private companies that spent that much handing/preparing their own tenders in the first place and now the civil servants involved have fked up.

A large proportion of which will have been paying their advisors.

Which they did nothing incorrect, if it cost £40 million for the companies to write their tenders then I still dont understand what relevance it is that they might have used private sector consultancies.

The person who posted that seems to imply that the £40 million was costs the public sector had to pay for employing private sector consultancies.

Which is incorrect and seems like a rant against private sector consultancies being expensive for public sector hire and the reason why it cost so much.

I've just let a PFI; each bidder who stayed the course spent about £5-6m. The bulk of that will have been their advisor costs.

Whether you think that lawyers at £2500 per person per day is expensive... is your call.

[Blue62]

Eric Mc said:

How can he be responsible when he wasn't the Minister at the time all this happened. He has just taken over the department - he has spotted a problem - and he is sorting it out.

Sounds to me like he is doing what he should be doing.

Sorry, he is the minister responsible for that department, ergo responsible minister. I didn't mean that all this was his fault.

I note that you're giving him the credit for spotting the problem though, same guy who can't carry the can because he's been in the job 5 minutes, he's spotted the problem, apportioned blame and now he's sorting it out, you seem to have the inside track Eric.