Search results

I still maintain what I said - in certain industries and certain roles you could get that money in 5 years or so without being exceptional. I don’t think for an MP it is that outrageous money really.

That isn't what I said or implied. To put it into perspective I reckon with 5 years experience in things like Technology / Telecoms sales, Recruitment, Business Operations / Management etc you could get to that kind of earnings as a 'sole contributor'. But the opportunities are out there if you...

£84k isn't that much really. Not overly difficult in many industries to get that kind of money or more by being half decent.

And also I believe doesn't even live in Sussex ?

Gary Neville called this last night. Classic Tory U-Turn

I don't think it is even a Tory thing, a lot of it is just incompetence. There is evidence of known convicted drug dealers running companies on the government approved list. I think very little vetting has been done

Yes along with many other providers. My questioning is the use of the word 'mandatory' - I am not aware of Randox having any kind of monopoly or mandatory use (as someone who travelled to Europe 3 times this summer, I never used Randox) Again not defending it but Randox at least existed before...

I know that - I was just saying they were not mandatory were they? Or did any company fronting tests have to use their labs ?

That is a bit misleading - what does 'makes Randox mandatory for travel' mean? They never had a monopoly or the only service you could use

Agreed. Even Cummings has pretty much said the same thing