The Student Room Group

Thatcher, Major and Blair Still Claiming Taxpayers Money

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15486792

Margaret Thatcher has claimed £535,000 of taxpayers money over the last 5 years.

Also, ex PM John Major and Tony Blair have also claimed money, years after leaving office.

In the past five years, the three former number 10 incumbents have cost the taxpayer in total more than £1.7m in public duty allowances.

What do people think of this? Should ex PM's be being paid sums of tax money after they've left office?

Scroll to see replies

Tony Blair should be exiled, stripped of citizenship, shipped to The Hague, and all his assets seized as evidence in a war crimes investigation.

Other than that I'm cool with paying PMs money. I do believe that Brown, Major and Thatcher were doing what they genuinely believed was right for the country, which is all you can really ask them to do, and we should support our statesmen and women.
Not a penny should go to them after they cease being MPs. They should have police protection but that is all.
Original post by ebmaj7
Surely £535,000 is a bit more than merely 'supporting' our statesmen and women?


There's bigger fish to fry. This just smacks of "LETS BASH THATCHER BECAUSE I DONT LIKE HER"-ism. Maybe we could limit or change the fund somehow, but those who serve as PM put themselves through hell on our behalf a lot of the time and I don't think we should just cut ex-PMs off altogether.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 4
Avatar for Hopple
Hopple
18
I'd be more in support of it if it were means tested :colone:

What do they get the money for? The article says answering letters and public appearances, but I'd like to see a breakdown of how much they get per event/letter.
Reply 5
Avatar for Jacktri
Jacktri
2
Original post by barnetlad
Not a penny should go to them after they cease being MPs. They should have police protection but that is all.


They shouldn't get police protection they don't need why would someone kill the ex leader there is no benefit.
Original post by Jacktri
They shouldn't get police protection they don't need why would someone kill the ex leader there is no benefit.


Have you ever asked someone from north of the Watford Gap about Thatcher?

Some of the answers can be quite funny. Something about "dancing on the old witch's burning grave whilst simultaneously ****ting and pissing on it."
Reply 7
Avatar for drobinson
drobinson
OP
Original post by Aphotic Cosmos
She's been off the job for 20 years. That's only approximately £21.5K a year.

There's bigger fish to fry. This just smacks of "LETS BASH THATCHER BECAUSE I DONT LIKE HER"-ism.


That wasn't the intention of the thread. Otherwise Blair and Major wouldn't of been included.

It's about the principle of paying PM's money after they've left office and whether its right or not. I think you've taken the original comment you quoted immediately out of context. The poster didn't even mention Thatcher.
Reply 8
Avatar for milkytea
milkytea
16
Prime Ministers work very hard and generally receive scant appreciation from the public for it. I think £100k per year is possibly slightly too large an amount to pay them at this time, but it's not really an issue to get up in arms about, in my view.


Original post by Aphotic Cosmos
Tony Blair should be exiled, stripped of citizenship, shipped to The Hague, and all his assets seized as evidence in a war crimes investigation.


This smacks of "LET'S BASH BLAIR BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE HIM" -ism.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by drobinson
That wasn't the intention of the thread. Otherwise Blair and Major wouldn't of been included.

It's about the principle of paying PM's money after they've left office and whether its right or not. I think you've taken the original comment you quoted immediately out of context. The poster didn't even mention Thatcher.


I was actually meaning to refer to the BBC article, which specifically mentions Thatcher in it's short-form title on the "Most Read" section of the website. Then again, it's the BBC, so I'm not surprised.
Reply 10
Avatar for Jacktri
Jacktri
2
Original post by Aphotic Cosmos
Have you ever asked someone from north of the Watford Gap about Thatcher?

Some of the answers can be quite funny. Something about "dancing on the old witch's burning grave whilst simultaneously ****ting and pissing on it."


Then we should execute all ex PMs to save the country money and the PMs will be happy to do it because it is their duty.
Reply 11
Avatar for drobinson
drobinson
OP
Original post by Aphotic Cosmos
I was actually meaning to refer to the BBC article, which specifically mentions Thatcher in it's short-form title on the "Most Read" section of the website. Then again, it's the BBC, so I'm not surprised.


Ahh, then I apologise :colondollar:

Yes the BBC article is clearly fishing for anti-Thatcherite support, despite the fact between them Blair and Major have claimed more.
Reply 12
Avatar for Jarred
Jarred
18
500k is NOTHING. It is a teensy amount of money, literally nothing, not even a drop in the ocean, it's more like 1 electron in comparison to the whole universe.
It's nothing to get up in arms about. To put things into perspective, we pay more than 120 MILLION pounds everyday in debt interest. 500k over 5 years is basically the equivelent of you throwing away a couple of two pence pieces. I say this as a libertarian, someone who usually likes to complain about government spending.
Original post by drobinson
Ahh, then I apologise :colondollar:

Yes the BBC article is clearly fishing for anti-Thatcherite support, despite the fact between them Blair and Major have claimed more.


No problem mate, I probably should have made it clearer in the post anyway :o:
Original post by Jarred
500k is NOTHING. It is a teensy amount of money, literally nothing, not even a drop in the ocean, it's more like 1 electron in comparison to the whole universe.
It's nothing to get up in arms about. To put things into perspective, we pay more than 120 MILLION pounds everyday in debt interest. 500k over 5 years is basically the equivelent of you throwing away a couple of two pence pieces. I say this as a libertarian, someone who usually likes to complain about government spending.


This.

Also, I've read several versions of this article and nowhere does it say what it was for, if they're former PM's they will need police protection and possibly bullet proof vehicles etc this I think could easily account for the amounts claimed.
Reply 15
Avatar for The_0001
The_0001
Original post by Jarred
500k is NOTHING. It is a teensy amount of money, literally nothing, not even a drop in the ocean, it's more like 1 electron in comparison to the whole universe.
It's nothing to get up in arms about. To put things into perspective, we pay more than 120 MILLION pounds everyday in debt interest. 500k over 5 years is basically the equivelent of you throwing away a couple of two pence pieces. I say this as a libertarian, someone who usually likes to complain about government spending.


I couldn't care less if it was £1k or £1m. Tax payers money is tax payers money. The ministers' should always scrutinise how much is being spent on what.
Original post by The_0001
I couldn't care less if it was £1k or £1m. Tax payers money is tax payers money. The ministers' should always scrutinise how much is being spent on what.


BBC News
Mr Maude said: "The public duties cost allowance is kept under review."


I think it's pretty clear that they are.
Reply 17
Avatar for chrislpp
chrislpp
15
Do we get paid in full when our temporary jobs come to an end?

No.


Should they?

No.
What are they meant to be doing after leaving the role of PM? Take Thatcher for instance, being a Baroness, that's paid right? Is this taxpayer's thing on top of it? There's no reason for Blair to claim anything seeing as he's a UN, EU and USA envoy to the Middle East.
At the end of the day, the amount a PM gets paid is really tiny if you compare it to the salaries of CEOs of major banks and corporations, which are nowhere near as difficult to run as a democratic country.

If they claim a bit more cash, it only reflects the difficulty of the job they did, which, unlike most jobs, hangs over them for years after they leave office.
(edited 12 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you