FabGuys.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

The best place to meet real guys.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

The Chosen 9 Club

Jump to newest
 

By *evanian OP   Man
3 weeks ago

Gogledd Ddwyrain Cymru

The UK is currently supporting no fewer than eight former Prime Ministers, soon to be nine when Starmer joins them. That will be an all-time record. Yet few realise taxpayers fund them for life.

Each former premier can claim £115,000 a year of public money to run an office. Blair, Brown and Major have each drawn more than £1 million under this arrangement.

The starkest case is Liz Truss, who qualifies for the same lifetime allowance after 49 days in office. Taxpayers could ultimately fund her for millions in return for just seven weeks at No 10.

On leaving Downing Street, every Prime Minister also receives a lump-sum severance payment worth 25 per cent of their annual ministerial salary.

The real cost, however, remains hidden. Armed protection for former Prime Ministers runs into millions per year, but the Government does not disclose the actual figure. Taxpayers meet the bill, yet we are not told the amount.

The safety of former leaders is not in question. The question is whether taxpayers should underwrite former Prime Ministers in perpetuity, including those who served only briefly, while public services remain under strain. Should their respective political parties not bear some responsibility for supporting them too?

The revolving door at Downing Street carries a price tag. Taxpayers are paying it, even as each member of The Chosen 9 Club enjoys considerable personal wealth.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *tmguylookingMan
3 weeks ago

Chesterfield

Thats a very good and valid point you've made there... I suspect not many people know about this. And even though I have a 'healthy' though not overly informed interest in politics, I hadn't realised there were so many ex PMs still alive, though with the rate we've been getting through them in recent years I'm not surprised lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *luteus maxMan
3 weeks ago

North of Havant

If salaries were performance rated, most would owe us money.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *optobottomrctMan
3 weeks ago

RCT

The establishment loves to reward itself at our expense regardless of success or failure. And if you are an Ex Prime Minister by definition youre a failure.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *elfordsubMan
3 weeks ago

Telford

Maybe they should only be entitled to any of that if they complete a certain amount of time in the job. The actual time inbetween elections preferably.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *3versMan
3 weeks ago

glasgow

It's a pittance, running the former PM offices is just over a million pound per year, a tiny drop in the ocean - it costs the taxpayer about 30p each per year.

As for security costs - who knows.

Having a PM for 7 weeks or 7 years, shows there is accountability at the top and we're not living in a dictatorship.

I think it’s a small price to pay to live in a democracy

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *orobi7Man
3 weeks ago

loughborough

Theyre all millionaires, and none of them should be taking a wage once they leave office

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ldmanMan
3 weeks ago

Rawcliffe Bridge.

The swamp deepens ever more!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ocalMan
3 weeks ago

North West

In fairness to John Major he himself had his personal security toned down.

I can't remember the exact dates but around 15 years ago he sat in front of some kind of committee to have some of his security backed off, I have no idea who sits on this committee or how it's deciding members are chosen.

John Major argued that he does not need special branch following him around 24/7 as a lot of protocol and secrets he knew as PM had changed, the committee disagreed with him and his security remained the same, he tried again around 5 or 6 years later and this time it was agreed that some of his security could be toned down, so there is times that he is out and about doing his leisurely thing and he hasn't got special branch officers 30ft away.

Apparently if you want to become PM you have to agree that for the rest of your life you have security around you, must be awful trying to go dogging.

The yanks have similar, all POTUS and the first lady have to agree that for the rest of their life they will have the secret service around them 24/7, living in their home with them and where ever they want to go the secret service have to OK it first

After Ronnie's death, Nancy Reagan wanted to move to a smaller house, the secret service said no as the house she wanted was to small for her security team to live in with her.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *DC2000Man
3 weeks ago

Coningsby


"In fairness to John Major he himself had his personal security toned down.

I can't remember the exact dates but around 15 years ago he sat in front of some kind of committee to have some of his security backed off, I have no idea who sits on this committee or how it's deciding members are chosen.

John Major argued that he does not need special branch following him around 24/7 as a lot of protocol and secrets he knew as PM had changed, the committee disagreed with him and his security remained the same, he tried again around 5 or 6 years later and this time it was agreed that some of his security could be toned down, so there is times that he is out and about doing his leisurely thing and he hasn't got special branch officers 30ft away.

Apparently if you want to become PM you have to agree that for the rest of your life you have security around you, must be awful trying to go dogging.

The yanks have similar, all POTUS and the first lady have to agree that for the rest of their life they will have the secret service around them 24/7, living in their home with them and where ever they want to go the secret service have to OK it first

After Ronnie's death, Nancy Reagan wanted to move to a smaller house, the secret service said no as the house she wanted was to small for her security team to live in with her."

Hasn't Trump removed security detail from Biden and Obama or wasn't he able to do it? I read he had done so, given they're Democrats. Maybe it was toned down.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xmareMan
3 weeks ago

Norwich

Far be it from me to suggest that ex-PMs should have no security at all.

1. Most of them have leveraged their premiership into a nice little private sector number and can afford security if they want it. (The idea that we are paying Blair anything at all for any purpose is just plain ludicrous. He should be paying us massive reparations.)

2. The possibility of being executed during their retirement by vengeful members of the public would encourage PMs to be a little more careful about introducing shit policies during their tenure.

But, oops, looks like I suggested it anyway...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *evanian OP   Man
3 weeks ago

Gogledd Ddwyrain Cymru

In addition to Prime Ministers' severance pay of 25% of their final salary, the £115,000 annual Public Duty Costs Allowance for former PMs, and an estimated £1 million per year in lifetime security costs, former Prime Ministers also qualify for government pensions.

Of the eight currently living former PMs, John Major, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron qualify under the Parliamentary and other Pensions Act 1972. That scheme grants an immediate pension of half their final salary upon leaving office, regardless of age.

This was changed by the Public Service Pensions Act 2013, which placed them in the Ministerial Pension Scheme.

Under this scheme, pensions are based on combined years of service as an MP and Minister and can only be drawn at the standard retirement age. Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak - and also Keir Starmer when he leaves office - qualify under this scheme.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *parky6Man
3 weeks ago

Dunwich / Woodbridge

Interesting post as a tax payer funding the likes of Blair and truss etc

Farage got hammered on BBC this morning over his 5 million gift that he uses for his security as he wasn't entitled to tax funded protection so he is no drain on public finances if he funds it himself

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hiteroseMan
3 weeks ago

Neverwhere

There should be no lifetime funding of ex-PMs. Once they leave office their earning power increases greatly: After dinner speeches, directorships, book deals etc. Not to mention a seat in the Lords for many of them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ocalMan
3 weeks ago

North West

Just to remind those who say we shouldn't pay for their protection once they are retired, we don't protect them for their benefit, we protect them for our collective benefit.

Ex PMs know shit that our enemies would love to know, we protect them from being bundled off in the back of a van(can't use the K word), then torture to divulge state secrets. Not to mention national embarrassment if we can't protect our former leaders.

Add to that we want top people in the top job, as it stands I don't think many highly intelligent, motivated and competent people would want to be the British PM, if they know we don't protect them once they're retired then the pool of potential competent leaders diminishes greatly

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ocalMan
3 weeks ago

North West


" Hasn't Trump removed security detail from Biden and Obama or wasn't he able to do it? I read he had done so, given they're Democrats. Maybe it was toned down."

From what I have read it's not possible for anyone, trump included, to relax the security on ex presidents, even ex presidents and their wives can't have their own security toned down, apparently the rules are rigid, uncompromising and till death, they are told the rules before they become president and first lady, if they don't agree then stand down.

If Trump dies in 4 years or so and say 30 years from now Melania wants to move back to the Balkans then the secret service can stop her or send a team out to physically bring her back if she "escapes"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ampantSlutteryMan
3 weeks ago

Worthing

I'd be happy with taxpayer funded security for Liz Truss if part of their job was keeping her away from microphones to dribble conspiracy theories into.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ourinmydreamsMan
3 weeks ago

Newcastle upon Tyne


"The UK is currently supporting no fewer than eight former Prime Ministers, soon to be nine when Starmer joins them. That will be an all-time record. Yet few realise taxpayers fund them for life.

Each former premier can claim £115,000 a year of public money to run an office. Blair, Brown and Major have each drawn more than £1 million under this arrangement.

The starkest case is Liz Truss, who qualifies for the same lifetime allowance after 49 days in office. Taxpayers could ultimately fund her for millions in return for just seven weeks at No 10.

On leaving Downing Street, every Prime Minister also receives a lump-sum severance payment worth 25 per cent of their annual ministerial salary.

The real cost, however, remains hidden. Armed protection for former Prime Ministers runs into millions per year, but the Government does not disclose the actual figure. Taxpayers meet the bill, yet we are not told the amount.

The safety of former leaders is not in question. The question is whether taxpayers should underwrite former Prime Ministers in perpetuity, including those who served only briefly, while public services remain under strain. Should their respective political parties not bear some responsibility for supporting them too?

The revolving door at Downing Street carries a price tag. Taxpayers are paying it, even as each member of The Chosen 9 Club enjoys considerable personal wealth."
why should they get a penny for being sacked because they can't do the job

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *urvMan
3 weeks ago

christchurch Dorset

Should have done a full term before getting the big pay off

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xmareMan
3 weeks ago

Norwich

I see we are paying Blair (not retired, net worth ~60M) his pension for producing schemes like this:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/national/uk-today/26068079.outrage-shockingly-intrusive-pension-idea-using-nhs-data/

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *IPMANMan
3 weeks ago

West London

There's a surprise.. Emperor Blair is an avaricious cunt....

Who knew..... ?

And John Prescott was castigated for 2 Jags...

How many properties do Mr and Mrs Blair/Booth own directly or indirectly ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ocbigMan
3 weeks ago

Birmingham


"The UK is currently supporting no fewer than eight former Prime Ministers, soon to be nine when Starmer joins them. That will be an all-time record. Yet few realise taxpayers fund them for life.

Each former premier can claim £115,000 a year of public money to run an office. Blair, Brown and Major have each drawn more than £1 million under this arrangement.

The starkest case is Liz Truss, who qualifies for the same lifetime allowance after 49 days in office. Taxpayers could ultimately fund her for millions in return for just seven weeks at No 10.

On leaving Downing Street, every Prime Minister also receives a lump-sum severance payment worth 25 per cent of their annual ministerial salary.

The real cost, however, remains hidden. Armed protection for former Prime Ministers runs into millions per year, but the Government does not disclose the actual figure. Taxpayers meet the bill, yet we are not told the amount.

The safety of former leaders is not in question. The question is whether taxpayers should underwrite former Prime Ministers in perpetuity, including those who served only briefly, while public services remain under strain. Should their respective political parties not bear some responsibility for supporting them too?

The revolving door at Downing Street carries a price tag. Taxpayers are paying it, even as each member of The Chosen 9 Club enjoys considerable personal wealth.why should they get a penny for being sacked because they can't do the job "

Very much this… I get sacked for not performing I get a P45 and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out, this lot get the keys to the castle… thats what enraged me about Mandelson, he had a reputation for dishonesty, he was dishonest, he hung out with known pdfs … and got a wedge of cash when he was fired.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xmareMan
3 weeks ago

Norwich


"There's a surprise.. Emperor Blair is an avaricious cunt....

Who knew..... ?

And John Prescott was castigated for 2 Jags...

How many properties do Mr and Mrs Blair/Booth own directly or indirectly ?"

That's a VERY good question. £3.3M of Cherie's bought-to-let property in Manchester was sold last year. Because Reeves was planning to put NI on rental income!

https://lendlord.io/postcode-data-exposes-the-truth-did-the-blairs-sell-too-soon

But that leaves Blair and the blairspawns' luxury town houses, along with South Lodge, where Tony is about to extend its guest house.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *evanian OP   Man
3 weeks ago

Gogledd Ddwyrain Cymru


"There's a surprise.. Emperor Blair is an avaricious cunt....

Who knew..... ?

And John Prescott was castigated for 2 Jags...

How many properties do Mr and Mrs Blair/Booth own directly or indirectly ?"

It is alleged that the Blairs own 38 properties, which form the basis of their estimated £27 million to £35 million real estate empire.

There has also been controversy over MP expenses:- the Blairs claimed up to £200,000 in mortgage interest expenses over 20 years on Myrobella House under the Additional Costs Allowance.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *evanian OP   Man
3 weeks ago

Gogledd Ddwyrain Cymru


"The UK is currently supporting no fewer than eight former Prime Ministers, soon to be nine when Starmer joins them. That will be an all-time record. Yet few realise taxpayers fund them for life.

Each former premier can claim £115,000 a year of public money to run an office. Blair, Brown and Major have each drawn more than £1 million under this arrangement.

The starkest case is Liz Truss, who qualifies for the same lifetime allowance after 49 days in office. Taxpayers could ultimately fund her for millions in return for just seven weeks at No 10.

On leaving Downing Street, every Prime Minister also receives a lump-sum severance payment worth 25 per cent of their annual ministerial salary.

The real cost, however, remains hidden. Armed protection for former Prime Ministers runs into millions per year, but the Government does not disclose the actual figure. Taxpayers meet the bill, yet we are not told the amount.

The safety of former leaders is not in question. The question is whether taxpayers should underwrite former Prime Ministers in perpetuity, including those who served only briefly, while public services remain under strain. Should their respective political parties not bear some responsibility for supporting them too?

The revolving door at Downing Street carries a price tag. Taxpayers are paying it, even as each member of The Chosen 9 Club enjoys considerable personal wealth.why should they get a penny for being sacked because they can't do the job

Very much this… I get sacked for not performing I get a P45 and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out, this lot get the keys to the castle… thats what enraged me about Mandelson, he had a reputation for dishonesty, he was dishonest, he hung out with known pdfs … and got a wedge of cash when he was fired. "

Indeed! We lose our jobs, we get a P45 and that’s it. No £115k a year for life, no severance, no blank cheque or cushy pension. Yet ex-PMs get all of that, even after 49 days. Truss could cost taxpayers millions for seven weeks’ work. Meanwhile services are cut and people are told there’s no money. It’s the double standard that stings. If the political parties value their ex-leaders, let them pay! Taxpayers shouldn’t underwrite failure in perpetuity. We can keep ex-PMs safe without lifetime handouts. Time limits and transparency would be a start. That’s just basic fairness, that they clearly know nothing about.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top