Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Here is a way the Govt can save money.

20 replies

jodevizes · 04/07/2010 15:38

Here is a way the Govt can save money, make the oily swine pay for it himself, and cut the expenses.

If we have to pay for his protection, then find the cost of an ordinary hotel and Blair can pay the extra if he wants them that close.

I think the only protection we should pay for is a policeman outside the door of his house, if he wants to jet around the world, he should fund it out of his vast profits.

OP posts:
Ryoko · 04/07/2010 16:33

I must have missed that news story, what exactly are you talking about?

Caoimhe · 04/07/2010 16:35

I think she's talking about Tony Blair.

Ryoko · 04/07/2010 20:17

I take it she means we are paying for everything he does, despite the tosser being (thankfully) unemployed.

I want to a link to know how much we are paying.

(Yes I know he is spost to be some kind of peace ambassador to the middle east but thats obviously a lie as he vanishes off the face of the earth every time something happens in the region).

Portofino · 04/07/2010 20:19

I thought ALL ex PMs continued to get some level of security provided for them. Tis as it should be surely...?

Ryoko · 04/07/2010 20:26

Why? they don't have any power anymore they are just old farts, hardly going to matter to the world if someone murders them once they are out of office, it's no different to any other high profile person, I don't see Andrew Marr getting free police protection.

Chil1234 · 04/07/2010 20:45

You know it's a slow news day when Tony Blair's bodyguards make the front page of the Mail on Sunday....

nymphadora · 04/07/2010 20:48

All ex PMs get security. But there should be some sort of limit. Security at home & one holiday a year, that sort of thing. Any other travel covered by themselves.

I assume it's more a state secrets thing than for their benefit though.

FolornHope · 04/07/2010 20:48

by not having an ambassador to the vatican fgs

herbietea · 04/07/2010 20:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

strandedatsea · 04/07/2010 20:50

It should be written in to any PM's contract that, on retirement as PM they will live quietly in the countryside, take up water colour painting or some such genteel pursuit, and NOT make any kind of profit from the job they used to do.

If they chose to ignore this and take up all the high-cash earners like lectures and book deals, plus the "ambassador" type roles that continue to keep their profiles high, then they should do so at their own expense. Including security.

toccatanfudge · 04/07/2010 20:52

ALL ex PM's get a yearly sum of money until they die (can't remember how much, or where I read it but it's definitely true)

sanfairyann · 04/07/2010 20:54

brilliant idea. then once a few of them have been assassinated no-one will want to do the job any more and we'll save even more money.

BelleDameSansMerci · 04/07/2010 20:56

Oh, I'm all for this if that wretched hag Thatcher gets hers withdrawn too...

Lotkinsgonecurly · 04/07/2010 21:03

All PM'S get at least 5 years protection (it may be 10 minimum) after their term at all their houses.

Apparently Thatcher and John Major still have theirs.

A couple of weeks ago, the armed ones outside Dave's house didn't notice a landrover being stolen from the smallholding opposite. !!

Ryoko · 05/07/2010 19:49

More likely they just didn't give a damn.

Original poster
jodevizes · 07/07/2010 15:18

Now it looks as if we are going to be stumping up millions so that the head Peado can come and lecture us on abortions, gay marriages and birth controll. Bloody cheek.

OP posts:
Ryoko · 07/07/2010 22:17

11% of the population want him so make them pay for it, they can pass the collection tin round on sunday.

BadgersPaws · 08/07/2010 09:33

"11% of the population want him so make them pay for it, they can pass the collection tin round on sunday."

So the state should only pay for security for a visiting dignitary if they pass some arbitrary level of popularity?

Quite ridiculous.

I'm no fan of the Pope, the Catholic Church or organised religion in general but I do think that we have an obligation to provide security to visiting heads of state.

However....

Is the Pope really a head of state?

How do the costs for this visit compare to the costs of visits of other dignitaries?

nymphadora · 08/07/2010 14:38

But he is going visiting people which isn't normal for heads of state.

Haven't seen Obama travelling the country to talk to random groups of people

BadgersPaws · 08/07/2010 15:19

Presidents and their Wives have during their visits popped to pubs, schools and shops.

www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/nov/21/usa.politics

I would doubt very much that the Pope is just going to randomly stroll around, it will be planned as much as Bush going to the pub was.

Is his visit really going to be that different in nature from the visit of any other head of state?

Does anyone who what the security bills for the last few Presidential visits were/

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread