GrannyGravy13
I am not supporting Mr.Hancock’s behaviour.
I can understand how at the beginning of the pandemic that contracts were awarded here there and everywhere in order to procure PPE the world and its wife were all trying to buy the same items.
Seriously? This isn't like having a leaky boiler and being desperate to get hold of a plumber who will come out on Christmas Eve.
Lives were at stake, and there were British companies offering to provide PPE. As in companies who had experience of providing PPE, and routinely tendered for the (ever diminishing number of ) PPE contracts for the NHS. Given the cuts over the past ten or more years, they would have been raring to go. Surely they would be an obvious first choice in the circumstances?
But no. Ignoring the many companies who were geared up to provide PPE, he contacts his girlfriend's brother. And his publican. Come on. I'm all for cutting a bit of slack for human error, but that is (in both cases) a few steps too far.
As for the cameras, the HOC will (rightly) have them all over the place, as it will be a security target. I don't find that remotely suspicious. What is more interesting to me is the timing. May 6th is a long time ago in politics. It could be that it was only yesterday that the security company reviewed the footage on the cameras, but that is a strange timelag - I would have thought it would be done more regularly and often. It seems to me more likely that they were uncovered at the time, and someone has been sitting on them ever since.
Now, who could that have been? Someone who thought Hancock was a bit hopeless, but knows that if he (Hancock) were to be sacked for incompetence it would show that leadership skills at the top of governement are on the patchy side? Granted, an air of shocked outrage would sit better on someone who had an unimpeachable record when it came personal and professional integrity, so the suspects are few, but if the mystery person were to publicly write it all off as a peccadillo and persuade Hancock to resign to spend more time with his family, if they are still speaking to him, maybe that would keep the voters happy?
If this mystery man (or woman) were able to offer little sweeteners such as promises of lucrative positions down the line, all to the good - these things blow over when the next big story hits, and can be buried under more interesting news stories, particularly if the chap (or woman) concerned had a modicum of media influence. ?