Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
Seems a bit like




but then about a fortnight later


:hayee:
The people being very offended by the EU Art.16 triggering, being almost completely silent on the UK IM bill is quite telling.

As is the 'lets move on, we've all forgotten' crowd clinging desperately to the EU error, which they rectified in hours.
 
I'd suggest perhaps the supply of vaccines to the people of Europe is pretty urgent, no? It wasn't the right thing to suggest, but it wasn't exactly done on a whim.

Merely pointing out that the potential invoking of an article to send food to people is not the same as invoking the same article to deny people a vaccine and build a hard border in the process...but it depends what your standards are I suppose.

I would think that getting supply of vaccine to the people of the EU is pretty urgent. So why the EU arsed about for 3 months needs answering, as does the unbelievably stupid idea to publicly rubbish the vaccine that they are desperate to buy.....
 
The people being very offended by the EU Art.16 triggering, being almost completely silent on the UK IM bill is quite telling.

As is the 'lets move on, we've all forgotten' crowd clinging desperately to the EU error, which they rectified in hours.
When "we" do it we're doing it for noble reasons, unlike those smelly forens.
 


But he had 4 years to prepare and he can use free, sovereign bees now

Only if they carry their blue passports. Stupid bees



The people being very offended by the EU Art.16 triggering, being almost completely silent on the UK IM bill is quite telling.

As is the 'lets move on, we've all forgotten' crowd clinging desperately to the EU error, which they rectified in hours.

Must be galling for those in the EU after having to listen the rank hypocrisy our Government after many moments of pontifications on how it was prepared to break international law... Do as we say not what we do has no bounds.

However, saying that what Urusla von der Leyen was contemplating, it was wrong and reeks of high handedness, and frankly speaks volumes about her politics, center right, she would sit in Conservative Party if she was a politician in the UK.

Moving on from that contemplation of Article 16 proves many of the troupes about the EU wrong, it can act decidedly and quickly even if its ultimately wrong and obviously can listen to member states in this instance, Ireland and can quickly row back. So slow and bureaucratic it is not.
 
I suppose it depends on what is more important, speed or cost.....
Did you miss the bit about giving a Tory donor a few hundred million for PPE that didn't work? This isn't about buying things effectively, it's about giving huge contracts to firms with no track record of supplying those products, just because they're donors to the party you're in.
 
Did you miss the bit about giving a Tory donor a few hundred million for PPE that didn't work? This isn't about buying things effectively, it's about giving huge contracts to firms with no track record of supplying those products, just because they're donors to the party you're in.
The phrase 'ashamed of nothing, offended by everything' springs to mind.
 
To be fair, the firm probably had a contract where they said they'd do their best. We really wanted surgical masks rather than Lone Ranger ones, but you tried hard. Here's £300 million.
The problem really is the transparency of the contract. It may be that the donors are more aware of the possibility and requirements, by virtue of connection, but without knowing what was defined in the terms, it looks like money is being given to pals in each instance.

Obviously there are instances of contracts not being met as expected and yet there seem to be no consequences to that either
 
Did you miss the bit about giving a Tory donor a few hundred million for PPE that didn't work? This isn't about buying things effectively, it's about giving huge contracts to firms with no track record of supplying those products, just because they're donors to the party you're in.

Sorry Bruce, I’ve been dipping in and out between lessons with my granddaughter. My answer to you was in respect of your first sentence. I hadn’t watched the video, which I have now done. Personally I believe the the PPE was a complete fiasco, money was thrown around like confetti and perhaps for the right reasons, but not necessarily to the right people. When you are desperate for stuff and normal supply routes cannot provide (Germany refusing to export PPE for instance) you need to try something different. I am not aware of normal PPE supply companies who were not included in this process, there the issue seems to be the additional routes, mates, colleagues or whatever that set up quickly or did something for which they may not have had a background. However the country could not afford the time to go through normal procurement processes and it is a fact of life that a drowning man does not particularly care from where the newly arrived life buoy was manufactured or supplied from.

My view on this is simple and non political, review each and every contract, were the goods delivered as requested and in a suitable quality and value for money cost/price bracket. If the answer is yes, then move on. If the answer is no then investigate further for any acts of illegality either from the ordering or supply point of view. Anybody not delivering the goods or found to be overcharging, having not returned monies to the government should be prosecuted....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top