Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Bernster, Sep 4, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Nothing new in that I know but the morning news has just reported that three quarters of Britain believe that the tax payer should not foot the bill for the Popes visit. Well I am neither a Kathlik or religious and don't really care either way but a little digging shows that it was a pole of 2008 people. Where? I don't know, Bradford maybe! it just strikes me that the BBC always attack the establishment whatever it may be, based on the flimsiest of evidence or stats. **** off BBC stick to making wildlife programs and stop telling us what to think.
  2. Theos, the organisation who did the survey are a pro-religion organisation so they're unlikely to conduct a biased anti-religion survey

    That well know bastion of left-wing thinking the taxpayers alliance objects to the cost as well

    "The Taxpayers' Alliance, which calls for a low tax society, said "no visitor should cost UK taxpayers such a huge sum of money."

    The TaxPayers' Alliance - Media Coverage: Reuters: Cost of Pope's UK visit rises sharply
  3. Fair enough. It's primarily an opportunity for British Catholics to see the Pope and for him to beatify Cardinal Newman.

    But he's also a head of state. Should we bill him for the cost of his visit? If so, should that policy be extended to all heads of state? How much did Gordon's extended photo opportunity with Obama cost us last year? Or Tony's photo op with Dubya? Or Ken Livingstone's multiple photo ops with Hugo Chavez. I bet every copper in London was working overtime.

    Let Frankie Boyle have the final word.


  4. Didnt Britain's catholics get the opportunity to see the Pope in 1982? The first such visit since before Henry VIII! Incidentally the Catholic Church picked up the tab for that visit.
  5. I do not know who picks up the bill for 'State visits' - probably the tax-payer.

    This is a private visit by His Holiness in order to meet and be seen by his followers and to conduct Roman Catholic business, despite the fact that he will meet The Queen and the prime minister.

    The fact that His Holiness is also a Head of State complicates the situation - in my simple mind it does.

    As a distinguished and important visitor to this island I am certain that we, the tax-payers, should bear the cost of his security. That is to say we should pay for Police and other agencies engaged in safe-guarding the Pope and his entourage. I do not think we, the tax-payers, should pay for other aspects of the visit such as accommodation, travel and communications.
  6. Actually he was officially invited by the Queen - so it is an official state visit, so the tax-payer has to foot the bill. Just because he's a religious head of state instead of a political one, doesn't make any difference.
  7. The invitation was engineered by Broon the Incontinent. It stems from Scottish labour internal politics. There are two Labour factions in Scotland, Catholic and Presbyterian. Reid was leader of the Catholic faction (Glasgow). Broon the Incontinent wanted to stitch up Reid, and head off any challenge to his "leadership" of labour, so he invited the Pope for a state visit, therefore ensuring that the state would foot the bill.

    In fairness, there are about 4.5 million left footers in the UK. The RC Church contributes significantly to education, the voluntary sector, and aid programmes both in the UK and overseas. They are not in the habit of blowing up tube trains to register their views, and have long provided a disproportionate number of recruits to the forces. Why not cut them some slack and let them have their Papal Visit?
  8. He is a Head of State, invited to this country by HMQ. We should extend every courtesy to him, we are not barbarians.