Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35782736)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ers-money.html

Isn't it about time Blair paid for his own security? It's not as though he's short of a quid or two is it...

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35782775)

All prime ministers whether former or current have security so there is nothing new there.

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35782775)

All prime ministers whether former or current have security so there is nothing new there.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35782787)

The arrangements as they stand, have operated on the assumption that the recipient doesn't extract the urine. Overseas trips here and there are fair enough, but Bliar seems to practically live aboard a Lear jet. His security must be costing more than every other living ex-Prime Minister combined.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35782774)

Is anyone that bothered about him to warrant security ?

Originally Posted by Julian (Post 35782793)

One can only hope the security have a lapse and someone takes the smug git out.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35782800)

He's the man Iraqi mothers tell their kids about to scare them into behaving.

"Be good or the Blair will get you!"

He's probably the only person in the world a whole bunch of people would want to personally nuke. If he were out in the middle of a nowhere in a desert that desert would swiftly become radioactive glass.

That would just be what whichever Vanguard class submarine is on patrol at the time would do.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35782817)

IWhat sort of rabid rantings would we be hearing from the loony left members of the CF cast

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 35782845)

A quick Google came up with this. It's a bit out of date but back in 2002 the Telegraph was reporting that securuty for John Major was costing some £1.5million per year - or just under £29k per week.

Cheers

Grim

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35782807)

Blimey ,pleased I'm not an ex PM called Blair :)

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 35782831)

Probably pretty similar to the sort we're hearing from you on the right ;)

Cheers

Grim

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35782848)

Yes its a bit strange the Daily Telegraph's memory seems to conveniently forgotten that but what else can you expect from the Daily Mail's new rival.:)

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35783110)

None of them hardly pay for their own trips so it does not really matter whether its a capitalist or Socialist as it ain't going to change whether we want it too or not as many on power abuse their power as much as they can get away with and they ain't going to give that up in a month of Sunday's are they.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35783102)

Really? Right of what?

---------- Post added at 15:00 ---------- Previous post was at 14:51 ----------



I don't recall Major jetting off around the globe feathering his nest and buying up property to quite the same extent the Bliar has been but what do you expect from champagne socialists eh... That's what's upsetting a lot of people. A multi-millionaire so called 'socialist' who claims to be in touch with the ordinary man and care about poverty who can easily afford to pay for his own business trip security but doesn't. You'd expect this sort of thing from dodgy bankers and FIFA officials not a self appointed working class hero. There's a word which sums it up - hypocrisy and it applies here just as much as it did to certain sleazy Tories who, prior to 1997, were preaching morals to the rest of us whilst behaving in the most appalling manner.

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 35783127)

But it was the independent watchdog (IPSA) who awarded the pay rise, not MP's awarding it themselves. It puts them in a hard position though. Accept and look greedy, turn down and reject the independent body they put in place to make it "fair".

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35783140)

One ex-MP, no Lords, no professional politicians...

http://parliamentarystandards.org.uk...executive.aspx

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35783102)

Really? Right of what?

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35783102)

I don't recall Major jetting off around the globe feathering his nest and buying up property to quite the same extent the Bliar has been but what do you expect from champagne socialists eh... That's what's upsetting a lot of people. A multi-millionaire so called 'socialist' who claims to be in touch with the ordinary man and care about poverty who can easily afford to pay for his own business trip security but doesn't. You'd expect this sort of thing from dodgy bankers and FIFA officials not a self appointed working class hero. There's a word which sums it up - hypocrisy and it applies here just as much as it did to certain sleazy Tories who, prior to 1997, were preaching morals to the rest of us whilst behaving in the most appalling manner.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35783145)

You are joking, they've all sat on quangos you don't get any more of a professional politician than that, held high up positions in the civil service attached to government etc etc

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 35783154)

Right of the 'Looney Left' you seem so obsessed about (see the quote below).

Grim

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 35783154)

Missing or ignoring the point. In 2002 John Major was reportedly costing nearly twice as much as Tony Blair but I suppose that's OK as there's not as much point scoring to be had from John.


Grim

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35783168)

So what,there are only 2 choices ,have IPSA ,not a perfect solution but it is the best we can hope for and things are a lot more transparent now or go back to having MP's voting their own pay rises ,fiddling expenses and generally taking the pee .Also you have to have a wage that attracts people from less well off backgrounds ,it serves no purpose to have a House of Commons full of millionaires

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35783187)

So what, so they're not independent that's what. The old boys network alive and well scratching each others backs and sitting on each others remuneration committees, it stinks.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35783173)

So that needn't necessarily be right of very much then - right.

Obsessed? Oh really... How many quotes out of over 16,000 posts makes an 'obsession'. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35783173)

Missing the point that it isn't the amount or the entitlement but the fact that he's a hypocrite which was the original point. Do try and keep up.

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 35783154)

Right of the 'Looney Left' you seem so obsessed about (see the quote below).



Missing or ignoring the point. In 2002 John Major was reportedly costing nearly twice as much as Tony Blair but I suppose that's OK as there's not as much point scoring to be had from John.

Cheers

Grim

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35783215)

Want some fish with that chip on your shoulder.:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35783215)

Want some fish with that chip on your shoulder.:rolleyes:

The current system is infinitely better than having MP's voting their own pay rises ,a large amount of allowable expenses have been taken away and we have a fair salary that is comparable to similar private sector jobs,a salary that will encourage less affluent people to take up politics

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35783237)

Interesting debating point if somewhat dull, anyone who thinks the system stinks pretty much as highly as it did before has a chip on their shoulder, no far better to accept their bs about attempting to encourage poorer and better people into politics.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35783362)

Instead of banging on about everybody being in everybodies pocket when there is no evidence that is the case offer up a better solution

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35783373)

What's the point. They get caught basically thieving and instead of being punished get their pals to give them a pay rise. You couldn't make it up. If they cared what the public thought of them and their office they'd take 1% like they forced on other public sector workers.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35783388)

Still think the original thread title was correct: Bliar for hire.

Summed it up better.

So who will own up to changing it?:D

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35783388)

Still think the original thread title was correct: Bliar for hire.

Summed it up better.

So who will own up to changing it?:D

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35783560)

Well it wasn't Mick and it wasn't Paul ... so I have no problem changing it back. :D

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35783560)

Well it wasn't Mick and it wasn't Paul ... so I have no problem changing it back. :D

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35783569)

you must have a labour supporter on the team :shocked:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35783560)

Well it wasn't Mick and it wasn't Paul ... so I have no problem changing it back. :D