All is well in Mr Browns world

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#3
Nice to see he's going to South America. Would that be because most other countries have told him to fcuk off?
 
#4
jagman said:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Gordon-Brown-Says-Bank-Of-England-Governor-Mervyn-King-Backs-Him-On-The-Economy/Article/200903415248537?lpos=Politics_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_4&lid=ARTICLE_15248537_Gordon_Brown_Says_Bank_Of_England_Governor_Mervyn_King_Backs_Him_On_The_Economy

So far detatched from reality it deserves to be in the NAAFI rather than current affairs.
Somehow or another Mervyn King is supporting the PM with his comments according to Mr Brown.....
It is almost beyond belief. What has been noticable over the past few months of reading the onlne comments, is that the number of people supporting this Government appears to have dwindled to zero.

Either that or there is one person with multiple sign-ons commenting on all threads.
 
#6
Not content with wasting a fortune(£20million+) on the G20 Summit,he wants to grandstand abroad,prior to the meeting,at great cost to UK taxpayers-Why?
 
#7
muhandis89 said:
Not content with wasting a fortune(£20million+) on the G20 Summit,he wants to grandstand abroad,prior to the meeting,at great cost to UK taxpayers-Why?
Because he is a deluded,bi-polar,buffoon.

PS The estimates for the G20 are now running at £50million!
 
#8
"Grandstanding"? It's funny, if the UK's premier visits an overseas ally, (especially our number one ally) at a time of massive, mutual financial difficulty, he's seen as "Grandstanding". If he doesn't go, he's seen as rude.
The costs of getting him over there aren't massive at all. They are in fact very, very small, especially in the grand scheme of things. A dozen hotel rooms for a couple of nights, a dozen tickets on BA. Sundry costs on top of that. It's not a lot of money in national terms. In fact it's peanuts.
 
#9
Mugatu2 said:
The costs of getting him over there aren't massive at all. They are in fact very, very small, especially in the grand scheme of things. A dozen hotel rooms for a couple of nights, a dozen tickets on BA. Sundry costs on top of that. It's not a lot of money in national terms. In fact it's peanuts.
Did you see the 5 star nosh they were eating at A Breakfast With Gordon Brown? And they won't be slumming it at the YMCA hostel either or flying Easyjet. You know the recent scandal regarding MPs expenses? This is the type of trip where those expenses are abused and not made accountable. If the whole thing could be done for £20m as opposed to £25m then why isn't it? Why can't this be done? For the sake of the taxpayer.
 
#10
PandaLOVE said:
Mugatu2 said:
The costs of getting him over there aren't massive at all. They are in fact very, very small, especially in the grand scheme of things. A dozen hotel rooms for a couple of nights, a dozen tickets on BA. Sundry costs on top of that. It's not a lot of money in national terms. In fact it's peanuts.
Did you see the 5 star nosh they were eating at A Breakfast With Gordon Brown? And they won't be slumming it at the YMCA hostel either or flying Easyjet. You know the recent scandal regarding MPs expenses? This is the type of trip where those expenses are abused and not made accountable. If the whole thing could be done for £20m as opposed to £25m then why isn't it? Why can't this be done? For the sake of the taxpayer.
Because odious as he is, he represents HMQ and this country, this does mean some sort of style. You wouldn't expect HMQ to stay in a travelodge, neither should you expect her PM to do so.
 
#11
CQMS said:
Because odious as he is, he represents HMQ and this country, this does mean some sort of style. You wouldn't expect HMQ to stay in a travelodge, neither should you expect her PM to do so.
Style? Is that your only reason for 5 star food, accomodation, travel and expenses? To show a bit of style? If Travelodge can be made secure then why not? It's our money they are spending. I hope you are not a budget manager where you work.
 
#13
CQMS said:
Because odious as he is, he represents HMQ and this country, this does mean some sort of style. You wouldn't expect HMQ to stay in a travelodge, neither should you expect her PM to do so.
Quite right CQMS.

PandaLove: Whether you like it or not, the head of a country does not stay in a travel lodge.
"Breakfast with Gordon Brown" was paid for by the Americans, being that he is a visiting head of state. Is that OK? Are you sure the chocolate croissants are not still choking you with rage?

His costs to get to the USA were minimal, thanks to moaning fags like you. In the past, the UK premier would have flown on a dedicated RAF aircraft, flying the flag. Now, that costs too much (according to your type) so he charters a small section on BA. How good is that for security? Is several thousand pounds still costing too much?

How about if Obama flew on Delta Airlines? Can you imagine that? Is that fitting for one of the most powerful heads of state in the world?

Are you aware that the UK are just about the only nation in "Europe" without a dedicated jet for the head of state?

The Latvians can manage it!.... also:

The Slovakians
The Slovenians
The Romanians
The Ukranians
The Czech republic
The Polish
The Irish
The Lithuanians
The Austrians
The Germans
The Spanish
The French
The Dutch
The Portuguese.....

There are many more. You see how embarrassing that is?

The UK are the only European country that does not have a dedicated transport aircraft for it's head of state. To you that might say "Value for money".

To me it says "Embarrasing". And it's thanks to moaning cunts like you.
 
#14
muhandis89 said:
He's travelling on a chartered BA aircraft!
That is correct. That does not mean HE has chartered it. It means his office has booked a small portion of the seating, and joe public has travelled on the remainder of seats, to save money.
Do you feel better? If so, you're a cunt.

Whatever you think about our premier, (and I don't like him) he should be transported around the globe on a dedicated, secure aircraft. No other nation does it our current way. It's fucking dangerous.
 
#16
Mugatu2 said:
There are many more. You see how embarrassing that is?

To me it says "Embarrasing". And it's thanks to moaning cunts like you.
Mugatu2, are you Lord Irvine by any chance?

The more cnuts and fags like me choke on their Weetabix over such issues as wasteful expenses the more likely they will be brought to account. You seem to be more concerned about our PM looking the part and not being embarrased. With 2 million out of work and more to follow I'd be more concerned about the G20 getting the job done and done without too much fuss and expense.
 
#17
I happen to agree with Mugatu2 it IS embarrassing for a leader of a country such as the UK to be traveling around by public transport.

Even our Canadian PM gets his own transport jobby. Note the lack of "glitter & Gold" but still highly respectable for a top leader.


The VIP configuration aircraft, No. 001, is configured for use by the Prime Minister, the Queen and other high dignitaries. It has a spartan bedroom, sitting room, office space, and a shower approximately the size of a small phone booth. The executive suite includes a satellite telephone, two computer work stations and a small refrigerator. The rear portion of the aircraft is a normal passenger cabin, used to carry regular military passengers, members of the VIP party, or reporters. As Captain Yvan Veillette, the squadron's information officer, stated of the interior: "It's no more luxurious than a good motor home."[4]
 
#18
Drifting off the point here guys. The issue was about the PM going off to drum up support for his 'moral capitalism', whatever the feck that is. Yes, he is doing the rounds to gee up the G20 to stump up funds, but I was reflecting on this today, as one does, you know how it goes, world economic disaster, how can I organise a threesome, was that a good circuit training session, the usual things that go through ones mind. And having just left a very large international oil and gas company, it was interesting to note that our Dutch and Norwegian colleagues, when it came to recession measures discussions, were going, recession, what recession? Is something we have, due to press pressure/City greed/I don't know what?
 
#19
Spank-it said:
I happen to agree with Mugatu2 it IS embarrassing for a leader of a country such as the UK to be traveling around by public transport.
No one is asking him to do that. Anyway, what's wrong with public transport? It's good enough for the PMs 60million bosses, i.e. the public.
 
#20
PandaLOVE said:
Spank-it said:
I happen to agree with Mugatu2 it IS embarrassing for a leader of a country such as the UK to be traveling around by public transport.
No one is asking him to do that. Anyway, what's wrong with public transport? It's good enough for the PMs 60million bosses, i.e. the public.
Ok. Personally I don't give a fcuk. I suppose you want the Queen to be using the tube to get from Buck House to Windsor Castle too ?
 

Latest Threads

New Posts