G4S expects full Olympic Games payment

[Danthus]

They should be paid according to the terms of the contract minus the costs incurred with the troop deployment and policing costs.

People will not like that but you can't go ripping up agreed contracts because it suits.

As a side note we are seeing Buckles true colours.

 

[DJMK4]

Didnt G4S pay something like 54 million to the MOD before because they had to draft in troops

 

[Destination]

You understand that the army would have to be asked to intervene? And if we were told to, we would do.

Indeed you would, but there would be major politican ramifications to deploying the army on mainland Britian for the sake of crowd control.,
There is no way thats ever going to happen.
For security sure, to put out fires when the firemen strike sure, for national emergencies, flooding etc, sure.
No politican will order them into mainland crowd control,as it would be political suicide, it isn't their role, it never was, and they shouldn't be asked to do something they are not trained for.

This is and was a policing matter, and as such it was dealt with (albeit late) by the police.

 

[Destination]

Didnt G4S pay something like 54 million to the MOD before because they had to draft in troops

Not that I am aware of.
I believe they made a donation to 4 military charities, but not anywhere near £54M.

 

[arctine]

Olympics... no actual threat, just preventative measures needed, rally army in no time at all.

Little scrotes go on the loot en masse, army nowhere to be seen.

That's not a lack of ability, that decision just wasn't made.

Also, it was mainly the RAF, NAVY and Royal Marines at the Olympics. Stop giving their credit to the army ffs.

 

[DJMK4]

May have misread, might have been they were expecting 54 milion or thereabouts somewhere

 

[Stolly]

Olympics... no actual threat, just preventative measures needed, rally army in no time at all.

Little scrotes go on the loot en masse, army nowhere to be seen.

You think you want to live in a country where the military has a role in public order amongst the civilian population.

I think you don't know how governance works in this country, and you don't understand what you are asking for.

 

[piggeh]

Its simple, they have a contract and they will be paid by what that contract says and they should have damages clauses for failure to perform which should be enforced to the full.

Yes, I was going to post the same. The quote is taken out of context. "We'll be paid what we are contractually entitled to" quite easily allows for the payment to be deducted for any damages clauses and service level penalties. His comment does not state "we expect the full whack", just what they are contractually entitled to, which is not the same thing.

 

[dowie]

Didn't they have to pay for the troops to be there?

Seems like that would eat into the profits right? Must work out to be a similar cost to the taxpayer if we're not directly paying for the troops.

Please do correct me if I'm wrong, i've not been following it closely.

If they're paying for the troops and have taken a 50 million hit then its not entirely unreasonable to pay them the rest... then again it was a shambles so I don't blame the govt for wanting to negotiate the payment down a bit

 

[dowie]

You think you want to live in a country where the military has a role in public order amongst the civilian population.

I think you don't know how governance works in this country, and you don't understand what you are asking for.

The military does have a public order role and can provide aid to the civil authorities as and when required.

 

[Nexus]

I think it was obvious that this was going to come back up once the Games were over, as it was clear that neither party wanted to have this being the focus during them.

I think Nick Buckles has gone on the attack now because its over and he likely has pressure from share holders. This fiasco has hurt their company reputation and could mean they start to lose contracts, especially government ones when up for renewal.

Personally I think they should be paid for what they provided, and nothing more. They didn't for-fill the contract, so shouldn't be getting anymore public money for their failings.

On another personal note, of all the people I encountered working during the games, it was the G4S marshall types who were the jobsworths.

 

[dowie]

Also, it was mainly the RAF, NAVY and Royal Marines at the Olympics. Stop giving their credit to the army ffs.

most venues I went to had soldiers everywhere and quite a few Royal Marines... didn't see too many RAF or Navy personnel on the gates or in the stands. Obv HMS Ocean was in the Thames... and some RAF Reg guys had posed for some press photos in a puma...

To say it was mostly the other services is a bit flawed though.

 

[[TW]Fox]

If we think about it this makes sense - the security was provided and should be paid for - G4S paid for the presence of the troops themselves, not the taxpayer.

LOCOG agreed to pay £x to secure the games. The games were secured, and £x is therefore due. It was a farce but sorting the farce is something G4S paid for themselves.

 

[dowie]

On another personal note, of all the people I encountered working during the games, it was the G4S marshall types who were the jobsworths.

I'd second this... also a colleague worked at the games as a volunteer... the G4S guys in general seemed to have a poor reputation, he had nothing but praise for the military guys who were providing security.

 

[Danthus]

If we think about it this makes sense - the security was provided and should be paid for - G4S paid for the presence of the troops themselves, not the taxpayer.

LOCOG agreed to pay £x to secure the games. The games were secured, and £x is therefore due. It was a farce but sorting the farce is something G4S paid for themselves.

I would assume there would be penalties written into the contract? Other than that I agree.

 

[Nexus]

most venues I went to had soldiers everywhere and quite a few Royal Marines... didn't see too many RAF or Navy personnel on the gates or in the stands. Obv HMS Ocean was in the Thames... and some RAF Reg guys had posed for some press photos in a puma...

They did at the Olympic Park gate security.

They pretty much had sections of tents run by the various forces, when I went in last Tuesday and on Sunday they were all RAF on the side I went into. Obviously there are so many security channels you can go through, its easy not to see it. Obviously the Army had the biggest presence across all venues.

 

[arctine]

most venues I went to had soldiers everywhere and quite a few Royal Marines... didn't see too many RAF or Navy personnel on the gates or in the stands. Obv HMS Ocean was in the Thames... and some RAF Reg guys had posed for some press photos in a puma...

To say it was mostly the other services is a bit flawed though.

I can assure you, of the 17000 people in the Op Olympic contingent, 7000 of them were RAF and RAF regiment personnel.

The RAF, RN and RM were working Stratford gate 4 weeks before the Army/TA arrived and stayed another 4 weeks after most of them but not all.

The army did not make up the majority of the troops, the RAF did.

My source, I was one of them.

 

[[TW]Fox]

I would assume there would be penalties written into the contract? Other than that I agree.

If there are penalties in the contract then they should be implemented - if not, the amount agreed is due to G4S provided it was G4S who paid the full cost of the military support.

 

[Danthus]

If there are penalties in the contract then they should be implemented - if not, the amount agreed is due to G4S provided it was G4S who paid the full cost of the military support.

Yep.

 

[I_M_Weasel]

The army did not make up the majority of the troops, the RAF did.

Well done RAF, in the mean time the army were fighting a war.