Cummings and goings...
Discussion
I suppose he could be playing 4D chess but it does seem to be just a bit of a rant.
This was quite amusing though:
7/ Pundits: not doing ANeil 'a huge campaign blunder'
Me: why the fu*k wd be put a gaffe machine clueless about policy & government up to be grilled for ages, upside=0 for what?! This is not a hard decision...
Pundits don't understand comms, power or management. Tune out!
This was quite amusing though:
7/ Pundits: not doing ANeil 'a huge campaign blunder'
Me: why the fu*k wd be put a gaffe machine clueless about policy & government up to be grilled for ages, upside=0 for what?! This is not a hard decision...
Pundits don't understand comms, power or management. Tune out!
Government hitting back with a counter allegation.
Is that all they have? Or is that a warning shot to Dom.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/c...
Is that all they have? Or is that a warning shot to Dom.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/c...
hyphen said:
Government hitting back with a counter allegation.
Is that all they have? Or is that a warning shot to Dom.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/c...
From what I recall, he's made no secret of his desire to slash & burn rules & regs in an emergency situation, so not sure it's quite the dynamite they might imagine. Whether that's the right thing to do, personally, no, but it fits with his history.Is that all they have? Or is that a warning shot to Dom.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/c...
It seems more like the civil service than the government. I think there are more and more civil servants getting fed up with the corrupt behaviour of this government. All the people who supported Cummings and his anti civil service crusade, this is what he means when he got angry. All the rules and processes in place that make sure that public money is spent in a transparent and accountable way. How annoying!
If anyone is interested in the reality of the behaviour of the government I recommend listening to the Page 94 podcast from The Private Eye on the Paul Foot Awards for investigative journalism.
If anyone is interested in the reality of the behaviour of the government I recommend listening to the Page 94 podcast from The Private Eye on the Paul Foot Awards for investigative journalism.
hyphen said:
Government hitting back with a counter allegation.
Is that all they have? Or is that a warning shot to Dom.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/c...
This was the data team that provided necessary data to the Guardian itself, the BBC, other media and the public throughout? It was a good shout at a start of a pandemic I'd say. You could put out a flaming Guardian and they'd still complain the water wasn't wet enough.Is that all they have? Or is that a warning shot to Dom.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/c...
Dunno if it's a crack at him particularly or just the usual suspects with their usual drums tbh.
andy_s said:
hyphen said:
Government hitting back with a counter allegation.
Is that all they have? Or is that a warning shot to Dom.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/c...
This was the data team that provided necessary data to the Guardian itself, the BBC, other media and the public throughout? It was a good shout at a start of a pandemic I'd say. You could put out a flaming Guardian and they'd still complain the water wasn't wet enough.Is that all they have? Or is that a warning shot to Dom.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/c...
Dunno if it's a crack at him particularly or just the usual suspects with their usual drums tbh.
Electro1980 said:
So what if they provided data to others? That doesn’t mean Cummings trying to bypass controls on public money is acceptable. Controls exist for a reason. This current government seem to think rules don’t apply to them and it is leading to corruption right at the heart of our government.
Maybe, but this is a bad example of that. It also doesn't preclude that there was grifting on other things. Perhaps I have a memory glitch, but I don't remember any headlines shouting for 'more process' in February last year.
'So what' is self-evident.
Electro1980 said:
“More process”? Process is what stops the f
kups with unusable PPE and massive loss of money. Crisis is exactly when you need to follow process, not ignore it.
Who is talking about PPE? kups with unusable PPE and massive loss of money. Crisis is exactly when you need to follow process, not ignore it.Do you think the 'normal process' [pretty sclerotic at the best of times] is always appropriate in a crisis even if it adds weeks or months to convert intent into action? The Courts don't seem to think so [previous judgements], and I don't either, having some experience with crisis.
The 'lack of accounts the previous year' may have hung them up and the process/selection would have to start again, maybe they should have put out a tender in the Guardian and formed twelve sub-committees to over-see everything so we didn't waste half a million out of a £300billion budget. Yeah, I can see the headlines...
--
There will/may be good examples of grift - I'm almost sure there will be, but this, to my mind, isn't one of them particularly:
"The group chose to follow its own due process and later applied formally to DHSC and was awarded a grant."
I’m talking about PPE, because the fkups with companies that provide stuff that was unusable was because they were not vetted.
As for crisis, that’s exactly when you need solid processes and need to follow them. This isn’t about going to tender etc. This is about doing due diligence. Tender exemption rules and processes exist for a reason. Cummings was trying to just pay money to someone because he thought it was a good idea and was panicking. You are adding silly examples to try to prove your point, but you clearly don’t understand crisis management or the processes that Cummings was trying to ignore.
kups with companies that provide stuff that was unusable was because they were not vetted.As for crisis, that’s exactly when you need solid processes and need to follow them. This isn’t about going to tender etc. This is about doing due diligence. Tender exemption rules and processes exist for a reason. Cummings was trying to just pay money to someone because he thought it was a good idea and was panicking. You are adding silly examples to try to prove your point, but you clearly don’t understand crisis management or the processes that Cummings was trying to ignore.
Electro1980 said:
I’m talking about PPE, because the fkups with companies that provide stuff that was unusable was because they were not vetted.
As for crisis, that’s exactly when you need solid processes. This isn’t about going to tender etc. This is about doing due diligence. Tender exemption rules and processes exist for a reason. You are adding silly examples to try to prove your point, but you clearly don’t understand crisis management or the processes that Cummings was trying to ignore.
Yes, PPE can be argued over if you like, but that isn't what's being argued about here.kups with companies that provide stuff that was unusable was because they were not vetted.As for crisis, that’s exactly when you need solid processes. This isn’t about going to tender etc. This is about doing due diligence. Tender exemption rules and processes exist for a reason. You are adding silly examples to try to prove your point, but you clearly don’t understand crisis management or the processes that Cummings was trying to ignore.
No, I don't understand crisis management despite a degree in it and 20 years as a practitioner.
Electro1980 said:
So what if they provided data to others? That doesn’t mean Cummings trying to bypass controls on public money is acceptable. Controls exist for a reason. This current government seem to think rules don’t apply to them and it is leading to corruption right at the heart of our government.
That's deeply disingenuous. The procurement process does indeed exist for a reason, but it is singularly ill suited to unexpected and emergency situations.Remember that the official procurement process meant that the government cancelled orders for ventilators in the middle of the pandemic.
Remember that the official procurement process meant that vital PPE was shipped from China with a three month lead time.
It's a lazy narrative that the government doesn't think rules apply to them - that just avoids examining those rules to see if they still make sense in the current environment. That doesn't absolve them of proper oversight and attention, but the automatic assumption that the accumulated cruft of rules should be sacrosanct, particularly in an emergency is false.
Electro1980 said:
I’m talking about PPE, because the fkups with companies that provide stuff that was unusable was because they were not vetted.
I'm very interested to see the investigation into PPE. Exactly how 'bad' it was seems to be very unclear. kups with companies that provide stuff that was unusable was because they were not vetted.I know two companies that were trying to provide PPE - with large contracts on the table. They couldn't get the right gear in time and never received a penny. So though there were "large contracts" being offered, that didn't mean (at least in those two cases) that anyone walked away with the money without having first provided working PPE.
Tuna said:
Electro1980 said:
I’m talking about PPE, because the fkups with companies that provide stuff that was unusable was because they were not vetted.
I'm very interested to see the investigation into PPE. Exactly how 'bad' it was seems to be very unclear. kups with companies that provide stuff that was unusable was because they were not vetted.I know two companies that were trying to provide PPE - with large contracts on the table. They couldn't get the right gear in time and never received a penny. So though there were "large contracts" being offered, that didn't mean (at least in those two cases) that anyone walked away with the money without having first provided working PPE.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff