display name Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Yet again it's pretty thin stuff that we knew anyway. Mone was careful to make Barrowman's links to PPE clear (from the same article): Now of course this is very cleverly worded - it doesn't make it clear whether Barrowman benefits financially from this 'consortium' - but the Cabinet Office didn't seem keen to probe deeper. Similarly Mone told them: Again this is technically true and looks entirely innocent providing you don't know that she and Barrowman had been engaged since 2018 (they didn't marry till later than this in 2020). Obviously no one in the Cabinet Office ever looked at the papers so they would be completely unaware of the relationship. Would that be the wedding during the lockdown period of late 2020? Edited February 7 by display name Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 24 minutes ago, The Phantom said: The bit about not being a shareholder or entitlement to benefit is true and accurate. Having no 'conflict of interest' however is stretching it. I've had to do a few non-conflict of interest declarations over the years. It's always been made pretty clear that this would include involvement of spouse, family or close friends in the transaction. Well exactly. But she's been very precise in saying what she considers conflict of interest. Of course if the Cabinet Office had really wanted to know what was going on they would have then asked for assurance about whether Barrowman was financially benefiting from PPE Medpro, directly or indirectly. But they didn't and no doubt didn't ask similar questions of other 'fast lane' participants. All both sides in the exchange seem interested in was plausible deniability. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 1 hour ago, P.K. said: Shameless: "The emails between Mone and the Cabinet Office show that within a fortnight of Mone’s approach to the ministers, civil servants were progressing PPE Medpro’s offer to supply equipment. However they were also seeking full disclosure about Mone and Barrowman’s relationship to the company. "In an email to Mone, one civil servant, who was working in the Cabinet Office on the government’s emergency response to the Covid outbreak, wrote: “I have … been asked if you could provide a one-line statement to cover the lines we discussed so that we can document the declaration of no conflict.” "Mone replied: “In relation to PPE Medpro Limited, I can confirm that I have no conflicts whatsoever in helping the company to achieve orders through the NHS. I am neither a shareholder of the company nor am I entitled to any financial remuneration or financial benefit whatsoever. You can put this on the record." “My role is to help the NHS deliver on its PPE targets and to ultimately save lives of patients, medical workers and carers.” https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/feb/07/leak-reveals-michelle-mone-told-government-she-would-not-benefit-financially-from-ppe-firm-medpro She said the truth at that time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/03/04/barrowman_shadow_fraud/ Hmmm. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anyone Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 But you have to consider that Dan Neidle has a thing about nailing Mr Barrowman for whatever agenda he happens to have. The IOM is merely collateral damage in his campaign against Barrowman. Lots of others profited from PPE. I do wonder where Dan went to school and which uni he went do. I suppose I could google it but I can’t be bothered. And how much is squirrelled away in London , Switzerland , America and all those other paragons of fiscal transparency. Quite a few bob I would imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 5 hours ago, Anyone said: But you have to consider that Dan Neidle has a thing about nailing Mr Barrowman for whatever agenda he happens to have. The IOM is merely collateral damage in his campaign against Barrowman. And how much is squirrelled away in London , Switzerland , America and all those other paragons of fiscal transparency. Quite a few bob I would imagine. Yeah Neidle seems a little bit obsessed for some reason. Delaware is the worlds biggest tax haven. 17 hours ago, TheTeapot said: https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/03/04/barrowman_shadow_fraud/ Hmmm. Interesting. I've been asked by clients to incorporate IOM Cos with the same names as their onshore counterparts. In their cases I think it's always been through a lack of imagination or forethought. I've always refused, or at least put '(IOM)' in it, as I could guarantee at some point there is going to be some confusion between the two; wrong bank accounts, contracts etc. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twitch Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 6 minutes ago, The Phantom said: Yeah Neidle seems a little bit obsessed for some reason. Delaware is the worlds biggest tax haven. Yes but perception is often more powerful than reality. And the Isle of Man is getting stuck with this label. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_Christian Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Luxembourg is pretty special when it comes to taxes too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Steve_Christian said: Luxembourg is pretty special when it comes to taxes too. Funnily enough I was doing some stuff with an Anstalt last week and it's been years since I've seen one. The IOM Foundations were a (not terribly successful) effort to grab some of this business. Edited March 5 by The Phantom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Colombe Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Dan Neidle is ace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piebaps Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 3 hours ago, The Phantom said: Delaware is the worlds biggest tax haven. London is actually the biggest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 I really don't give a flying F7ck About this story 90% of the male, and plenty of the female posters on here would. So what are you moaning about 🙂 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Blade Runners been on the Mild again 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 2 hours ago, Blade Runner said: I really don't give a flying F7ck About this story 90% of the male, and plenty of the female posters on here would. So what are you moaning about 🙂 What a very odd post. Do you not get out with real people, and specifically real women very often? Creepy as fuck 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.