Forum menu
Presumably any time savings made on the fast bit will be lost as you get in the tube to reach central London
Yes but more than that, the Elizabeth Line doesn't have the capacity to pick up everyone at Old Oak Common and get them into London.
Stupid short-termist ****ers.
If it gets scrapped, the next 10 Governments are going to be spending billions each trying to fix the issues it'll create.
Like Brexit only that was a stupid idea to begin with whereas HS2 is actually a good idea.
tj - who are 'All of the 'big civil engineering companies' you claim to have looked at?
What 'checks' have you undertaken?
What have you done to verify your 'findings'?
You're making some serious allegations without producing a shred of evidence.
Which are the two companies you allege paid bribes to secure HS2 contracts?
I worked for an infrastructure contractor who secured a number of HS2 contracts - both stand alone and JVs - and I will say exactly what dazh said...no bribery, no corruption.
TJ I'm not going to name my employer here as I'm not an official spokesperson. Suffice to say we're one of the leading multi-disciplinary engineering consultancies in the UK/world and have worked on pretty much every major project you can think of. We win contracts on projects like HS2 because we're extremely good at what we do and nothing else. You'll just have to take my word for it. I wouldn't work for them if it wasn't the case.
I would like to add that I have personally seen Daz take brown envelopes stuffed with notes off Mohamed Al Fayed, Christine Hamilton, Elvis, Sir Phillip Green and a selection of Saudi princes, but no representatives from HS2
tj – who are ‘All of the ‘big civil engineering companies’ you claim to have looked at?
What ‘checks’ have you undertaken?
What have you done to verify your ‘findings’?
You’re making some serious allegations without producing a shred of evidence.
Which are the two companies you allege paid bribes to secure HS2 contracts?
Amey and balfour beattie I looked at in context of hs2. Both paid huge bribes IIRC - as recorded in the register of interests etc. Its been legalised as "consultancy fees" "Non exec directorships" " political donations" etc etc. Often also disguised as individuals donating in a private capacity. Both companies are large donors to the tory party in a varioety of ways
Its legalised corruption and they are almost all at it.
Its all in the register of interests and other government published stuff
I think reducing train safety as a way of increasing capacity is a non-starter, and that’s putting it very politely. 🙂
5 people per year killed on coaches and busses
I'd guess the average (which is noisy) on trains and trams is likely higher, so you could trim a large portion of that margin without introducing significant risk
Amey and balfour beattie I looked at in context of hs2
I don't doubt some firms think political donations will win them work although I don't really know how much that is a factor. For a project like HS2 I reckon competence, resilience and the ability to deliver are much higher priorities than political alignment or how much they might have donated to the party in govt. Some companies (like the one I work for) even do this sort of project out of social obligation, rather than because they're going to make huge amounts of money out of it. You can't assume that all companies are the same and have the same motivations as a couple of shady operators.
tj - you're in full 'reds under the bed' mode.
There is absolutely NO evidence of bribery, collusion, cartels, cover pricing or other illegal/questionable behaviours in the development of tender lists, short lists or contract awards for any aspect of HS2 - and that covers contractors, consultants, material suppliers, plant & equipment suppliers and all the rest.
This is nothing other than your personal interpretation of legal activities and payments.
Who do you think was bribed?
How would they influence the tender process - ranging from pre qual through tender development/submission/assessment/evaluation and contract award?
Tender evaluations for a project of this size and complexity would have included external third party experts.
You appear to be saying that political donations and consultancy fees are shorthand for bribery and corruption.
Do you seriously think that any serious bidder for HS2 work would risk any possible award by attempting to bribe and/or corrupt?
The legal consequences would be significant and would result in them being disqualified from tendering for other government sponsored infrastructure and construction works; then there is the possibility of director disqualification.
HS2 is an opportunity for many of the contractors and consultants to demonstrate their skills to a global infrastructure market.
They, categorically, will/would not compromise that opportunity.
Do you really think that, given the number of companies involved and the level of scrutiny, any bribery/corruption could be hidden?
You refer to Amey; do you mean Ferrovial?
Why not look at a full list of HS2 contract awards and see if you can find any further 'evidence' to support your assertions.
You can't rule out the possibility that a company wins a bid fairly but the owner is a Tory supporter anyway. I'm not claiming either way, but you cannot rule it out.
Frank - you are in full denial
companies do not funnel hundreds of thousands to the tories for nothing in return. Of course this is legalised bribery
the UK is politically corrupt from top to bottom
It's probably closer to suggest that policy that benefits large benefactors might be steered to some degree as a result of big donations to political parties.
In any case, if one contractor thought their bid was derailed due to unfair practices they would squeal pretty loudly. They did for the Phase of HS2 I worked on. I worked for a consortium that only got the contract due to an upheld complaint that the original contract winner had unfair advantage with their bid due to insider knowledge.
MOlgrips -= no you cannot rule it out of course but its obvious to those whoa re not willfully blind that this legalised bribery is what greases the wheels
I found one tory being paid £2000 an hour ( if he did his 20 hours a month which I very much doubt) as an advisor to an industry that then got favourable laws passed
NOt HS2 but check this out. Bribery successfully used
I worked for a consortium that only got the contract due to an upheld complaint that the original contract winner had unfair advantage with their bid due to insider knowledge.
thats exactly the siort of advantage your bribes get you.
t’s probably closer to suggest that policy that benefits large benefactors might be steered to some degree as a result of big donations to political parties.
So if you donate money to the tories they will alter policy to suit you
I cannot believe you guys are so willfully blind on this. People do not give these huge sums to the tories for nothing
pay £50 000 to tory funds you get a seat at a table with senior ministers. Pay for access. This one is not even hidden
I'm not blind to it TJ. Whichever party it is, those that donate do so as they think that party best suits their end goal. It's why unions historically pretty much backed Labour not the Torys. As long as as parties are funded this way or there is a cap on donations to what the average man in the street can cough up from his own pocket, it's gonna happen.
tj - I'm not in any form of denial.
Your assertions of bribery would not withstand even cursory legal scrutiny.
You have chosen to not address any of my points; try this one, again - who has been bribed and how was the tender process and contract award influenced?
The multiple work packages comprising HS2 were subject to OJEU regs which means they were open to legal challenge and the tender evaluation results would have been been available to all tenderers for a work package.
How many challenges - successful or not - were made to proposed contract awards?
You appear to be saying that all the contractors and consultants have bribed their way to being awarded contracts.
None of the engineering or construction publications and websites have even hinted at HS2 bribery/corruption/collusion or reported any allegations or suggestions; are you suggesting they're suppressing any allegations or suggestions?
2 plus 2 does not, categorically, equal 5.
Your posts remind me of republican politicians in the US...Joe Biden is corrupt; Where's the evidence? Look at Hunter.
Completely unrelated events.
This is TJ who lives in Edinburgh, the city that managed to spaff £1bn on a single tram line that exactly replicated an existing bus route...
So you can understand why he believes all public infrastructure projects to be similarly dire.
For reference, Manchester built 8 tram lines covering 100+km with 99 stations for not much more than that.
TJ, you sound like you’re about three posts away from going full conspiracy theory and telling the “sheeple” to “do your own research”
You really need to step away from your computer as all you’re doing, again, is turning what is an interesting forum thread in to an argument where you’re right and everyone else is wrong.
tj - using insider knowledge is NOT bribery.
Are you suggesting that the tories orchestrated or influenced an individual's decision to move to another company as it would assist the new employer to (unfairly) influence and win a tender?
I'll read your further posts with a sense of amusement but (probably) won't be engaging further as you're blind to reason and common sense on this one.
Its willful blindness to legalised bribery. Irs rife in uk public life. For example
I have now put up half a dozen examples of this stuff. Just because its been legalised does not mean its not bribery and corruption
Ill walk now because the willful blindness you guys have to this corruption is absurd.
I think you're (TJ) conflating the blatant and open currying of favour through sham directorships and lobbying via Tufton street et al, with the actual awarding of individual contracts on HS2.
Its not direct in that its "I pay you money you give me the contract". But a friendly ear in government makes your success in bidding more likely. There is no direct evidence of this in many cases. Its really hard to show influence peddling and HS2 might well be more secure and transparent than most tho the fact that the major contractors funnel huge sums directly and indirectly into the government gives rise to suspicion and best and provable corruption in many cases as in the half dozen examples I have given.
these folk do not give these huge sums for nothing. don't be naive
MOlgrips -= no you cannot rule it out of course but its obvious to those whoa re not willfully blind that this legalised bribery is what greases the wheels
I'm not denying it, but the world is a much more complicated place than you seem to think. You over-simplify to the point of ridicule at times.
tj - the wilful blindness on this subject is totally on your part.
You have failed to provide any evidence to support your statement that Amey/Ferrovial or Balfour Beatty bribed their way to HS2 contract awards.
References to the NHS or gambling do nothing to support the assertions you continue to make about HS2.
You clearly have a fixation that (all) public sector contract awards are based on bribery and corruption; you refuse to accept informed views from those experienced in construction, engineering and public sector procurement.
You said you were stepping away - but haven't.
Equally, I said I wouldn't engage further with you on this thread - but have, for the last time.
£50k is not a huge sum of money to any company involved in bidding for an HS2 contract unless its the guy supplying 20 portaloos to one of the sites (and thats been subbed down so many times as to be trivial). A lot of companies, both successful and unsuccessful will give money to either both party, or whichever is in power.
But a friendly ear in government makes your success in bidding more likely.
Does it though? Who makes the decisions on where the contracts go? Is it actually ministers, or civil servants? Serious question for anyone who knows. I've only ever been involved with low level decisions where there was clearly no corruption because it was just a bunch of staff talking in a room.
OK Frank - ;last comment in response to this
You have failed to provide any evidence to support your statement that Amey/Ferrovial or Balfour Beatty bribed their way to HS2 contract awards.
I did not say it was direct - indeed I said the opposite. Its indirect. Its about having a friendly ear, its about having someone to mention your company, its about having tenders written to suit your company, its about little tidbits of information you get given about the tender process etc etc. all those little things that make it more likely you get the contract
Both those companies give large sums of money to the tory party and to individual influential MPs. They do not do so out of the goodness of their Heart. They do so because they get advantage out of it
Fine.
You've stated that countless times so please just shut up and believe it.
🤦
Doesnt matter if its direct or indirect, you need to provide some form of evidence to flesh out your claims, otherwise anyone reading is perfectly entitled to dismiss them regardless of their authenticity.
tj - just because you believe the process is corrupt does not make it so.
Facts and evidence are completely absent in your allegations/assertions/statements.
The 4 Fs apply - First Find the ------- Facts.
It would be really helpful IF you had some understanding of commercial contracting, OJEU regs and end-to-end public sector tendering and procurement before wading in with your false statements that HS2 contract awards are based on bribery and corruption.
With that, I'll leave you with your conspiracy theories
I've led on a couple of multi million ££ public sector procurements. TJ, whilst some of what you say may happen to some extent, in some sectors...I can categorically tell you that the contracts i awarded were on merit.
If you have some examples of where you have personally been involved in this corruption, I'm all ears.
(For the record, I can pretty much guarantee that I am at least as left wing/anti Tory/anti corruption as you, but I have worked within the system so speak with some degree of knowledge)
Having been involved in bidding and managing multi-million £ government contracts, I’d say that whilst large companies do employ Government relations specialists, there’s rarely a point where there is a single individual responsible for procurement decisions, particularly with large scale projects where there’s external scrutiny plus Treasury - you’d have to grease a massive number of palms to swing it in your favour.
What you do get is a sclerotically slow and painful decision-making process and that delays to mobilisation do get paid for by government. However, the rates for which the government reimburses the costs of labour is typically fixed through an open-book process - it’s not carte blanche and the actual margins are quite slim. What doesn’t help is political interference where politicians try and influence projects already underway and don’t recognise sunk costs eg a significant amount of planning is done before mobilisation and for HS2 could amount to 30-40% of the total project costs.
Also, in big projects you’re having to deal with civil servants and public officials who often lack the knowledge or experience to make decisions - this can either slow things down, particularly when they change jobs every couple of years, or imbue a false sense of optimism. Secondly, there is an over-dependence on external consultants who come with big fees and soles their intentions aren’t entirely transparent, particularly as they invariably disappear come the actual project delivery.
its about having someone to mention your company
To whom though? Who is making these decisions? Who actually decides who does a particular job?
I think he's assuming that the bosses of the companies are able to get preferential treatment from ministers by buttering them up. But I am not sure ministers actually sign off on these things? What influence do they have?
sc-xc
Full MemberI’ve led on a couple of multi million ££ public sector procurements. TJ, whilst some of what you say may happen to some extent, in some sectors…I can categorically tell you that the contracts i awarded were on merit.
Can you be as confident that this has happened all the way up? What I mean by that is, was the specific procurement goal and its rules set out in a completely fair way? Has a project been designed to favour large organisations, or organisations with specific specialities to the point that very few people can actually bid?
Megaprojects, HS2 by its nature was always going to see big contracts go to a fairly limited pool of very large providers, you could absolutely guarantee your Arups, Balfour Beaties, WSPs, Skanskas etc would be all over it, while a similar spend on a wide spread of smaller enhancements might not, frinstance. Every procurement decision can be completely fair and yet the result can be massively prejudiced right from the initial steps.
(I can say for sure that I've made "fair" decisions that have been shaped before I ever got involved to the point that perfectly good contractors couldn't be considered, and where projects have been designed around a supplier to the point that nobody else can compete. And I'll be honest, I've done it too- with good reasons, but you soon figure out how to do it. Oh I need to get 3 quotes for this job I already want company X to do? Sigh, fine. Oh provider A has actually suggested something that's a really good idea and which we've now funded and I have to make it look like provider B and C have a chance... None of that ever from corruption, but, if I was dishonest and someone had bunged me a little money I could effortlessly have done it, and I could have passed jobs down to other people and got them to do what I wanted in a way that looked innocent. And that at a pretty low level)
Out of interest what do you think will happen under a Labour government? no new infrastructure projects will happen or different companies will do them? If you want a big ass railway or tunnel or road upgrade the expertise pool isn't infinite. The sector certainly isn't blameless or perfect, hell a big Anglo Canadian name in the field has gotten themselves into potentially a world of trouble doing what you say everyone is.
you could absolutely guarantee your Arups, Balfour Beaties, WSPs, Skanskas etc would be all over it, while a similar spend on a wide spread of smaller enhancements might not, frinstance.
I certainly think this is possible. BigCo thinking will lead to BigCo solutions - not necessarily any particular vendor, but a question that's answerable by people that think like you. When you work in a multinational hammer, every solution looks like a nail.
I am also totally happy to believe that major private donors pay money to influence policy. And that HS2 is shit.
But TJ's sixth form common room vision where you get a £300m HS2 contract by promising a minister a job and giving £25,000 to the party...just doesn't bear any resemblance to reality. It's pure bullshit.
Northwind to be fair makes some good points. iv certainly priced up work knowing I'm a box tick for a 'competetive' tender and conversely have written scopes with somebody specific in mind. But that's a loooong way from bribery and corruption like some people are imagining.
In my world you have to be a lot keener on pricing for public sector than private. Margins on smaller scale public sector work are tiny compared to what we might get from equivalent private sector work.
Closest iv ever come to bribery is trying to persuade a drill crew to work past lunchtime on a Friday!
Rishi has been in various local radio interviews in the North West this morning. It was obviously a long way off Liz Truss's absolute car crash round of interviews, but he was repeatedly asked (obviously) about HS2.
He repeatedly did what he always does and answered a completely different question, put his smiley patronising, primary school teacher tone on and started blathering on about 'other investments' in northern infrastructure. This seems to amount to filling a few potholes. By the sounds of it, we're all supposed to be very, very grateful that we're even getting that.
Its pretty obvious the call has been made that HS2 will be a white elephant going from Birmingham to somewhere in the vague vicinity of London, but he's going to wait until after the party conferences to confirm that, demonstrating his usual level of cowardice
But TJ’s sixth form common room vision where you get a £300m HS2 contract by promising a minister a job and giving £25,000 to the party…just doesn’t bear any resemblance to reality. It’s pure bullshit.
apart from that is not what I said. Its about influence and nudge. Its about the things that northwind describes.
I am also totally happy to believe that major private donors pay money to influence policy.
which is the point I was making. NOrthwind covers it well
Arrgghh - I read this again
Saw a story on my facebook newsfeed from the Torygraph about some poor rich person who's had £500,000 of value lost from their estate.
Why does no one ever think of the poor oppressed rich people.
I am also totally happy to believe that major private donors pay money to influence policy.
This is clearly the state of things. I used to work in providing community based eye care services and would routinely bid on NHS contracts, they were extraordinarily tight on bribery and commitment to being open about COI (noted in the minutes of every meeting). But the point still stands that the company I worked for was the beneficiary of influence to open NHS resourcing under the 2012 Lansley reforms, and to suggest that those reforms were just the work of unbiased civil servants just seems wilfully blind to the sorts of influence peddling that goes on day in day out at Westminster. We never did anything as grubby as have to employ the services of a MP to sit on our board, or hand over lumps of cash in car parks, becasue that work had already been done.
The revolving door of politicians and senior civil servants ending up at banks, or think tanks, or investment funds or whatever is naturally never referred to as corruption, it's called the Old Boy network, or any other euphemism. But all these folks went to the same schools, they all know each other, they marry each other, and go to the same clubs...It's obvious what goes on to get public money to the "right sort" of chaps and chapesses
Its pretty obvious the call has been made that HS2 will be a white elephant going from Birmingham to somewhere in the vague vicinity of London
This could be the issue that finishes him off. He probably thinks he's making a 'tough decision' when everyone will be thinking he's about to waste 30bn on a railway line that no one will want to use. If labour had any backbone they'd announce now that they will reverse Sunak's decision and see it through. They won't though because they're in complete thrall to the 'we don't have any money' myth.