Ken's comments on Metronet
On May 12, 8:08 pm, Boltar wrote:
On May 12, 5:36 pm, "zen83237" wrote:
He also the Mayor of London and a more responsible attitude might be
expected. I wonder what the reaction would be if the Defence Secretary said
that BAES should go bankrupt just because he a personal hatred of BAES.
If BAES had taken over control of the military from the MOD in some
non recindable multi decade contract by order of the treasury and
subsequently caused a number of battles to be lost by their
incompetance then I bloody well hope the defense secretary would say
something.
That isn't the analagy that I made. Yours would would be the same as
Metronet taking over TfL. Its Defence Secretary. The Defense Secretary
is in the USA.
Shouldn't Ken take it up with his mates Tony and Gordon. The contracts were
let legally.
Thats debatable. Its the responsibilty of the government to get the
best deal for the nation from all aspects. Clearly this isn't the case
for PPP as far as metronet is concerned since its cost more and
delivered less than LU would have done in the same circumstances.
Thats dabatable.
Since this was all fairly predictable given the state of the national
railways it could be argued that gordon brown and the treasury
deliberately forced this bitter pill onto london knowing full well the
end result and therefor their actions could be seen to be illegal
since they go against governmental mandate.
B2003
The contract still followed the correct tendering process and was
legally let.
Kevin
|