Ministerial taxi service

[JessTheDog]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4900580.stm

The profligacy of the trough-snouts truly knows no bounds. The question is: does the RAF pay for this or do the politicians get asked for their own UIN?

The hypocricy of Beckett is particularly noteworthy - environment secretary, my foot!

Ministers' RAF flights revealed

Tony Blair was flown in RAF jets 299 times, at a cost of £467,000, between June 2001 and February 2005, figures have revealed.
Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett took 106 RAF flights between 2002 and 2004 the figures show - including many to East Midlands airport near her home.

Officials say the flights are cheaper than buying tickets on commercial airlines and meet ministerial rules.

But the Conservatives said most people would be "astonished" at the news.

Conservative transport spokesman Chris Grayling said: "I think most people will be astonished at the way ministers seem to be using the Queen's Flight as a private taxi service.

"Ministers, including Gordon Brown, have been using it for short hops to Brussels, Margaret Beckett has been using it to drop her home in the East Midlands and the prime minister has been taking it on holiday with him.

"Of course ministers will always need to use official aircraft on occasions but these figures create the sense that the system is being abused."

But a Downing Street spokesman said Tory prime ministers Margaret Thatcher and John Major had always used RAF flights for their holidays.

"In fact, Tony Blair is the first prime minister in recent years to use commercial flights, having done so for his holidays since 2000, other than one occasion where security advice was to the contrary."

The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said many of Mrs Beckett's meetings in Brussels "often end at unpredictable hours in the middle of the night when there is no alternative transport available".

The spokesman added that "returning to the UK immediately allows attendance at high level meetings early the next morning and represents savings on hotel accommodation".

The environment department spokesman added: "Conscious of the environmental impact of aviation, all ministerial flights during the EU presidency last year were carbon offset as were emissions from all other sources."

[threepointonefour]

One word ...

B******S.

[granmarriott]

Reported just the other day

All 3 parties always end mired in the same sort of sleaze,

Conservatives caught with hand in other woman's knickers

Liberals caught with hand in other man's Y fronts

Labour caught with hand in everyone's pockets, tills, pension funds etc

[airborne_artist]

" all ministerial flights during the EU presidency last year were carbon offset as were emissions from all other sources."

Just what does this mean in real English? What a load of c@ck :{

[ZH875]

It means that instead of taking a fuel burner home, they took it to the meeting instead.

[Talk Wrench]

One word ...
B******S.

Ditto times two to the power of ten.

Sometimes, the Bliarites really surpass themeselves with quotes like.

The environment department spokesman added: "Conscious of the environmental impact of aviation, all ministerial flights during the EU presidency last year were carbon offset as were emissions from all other sources."

And,

"Of course ministers will always need to use official aircraft on occasions but these figures create the sense that the system is being abused."

And,

"Of course ministers will always need to use official aircraft on occasions but these figures create the sense that the system is being abused."

Try telling that to the airmen, troops and naval types as well as entitled families ,who have been left stranded at OOA deployments and postings at the expense of corrupt, using, selfish ministers, who then turn around to praise " our hard working troops and their supporting families."

If this is New Labour, Mr Bliar, why doesn't anyone in the forces vote for you?

Because we never did and seeing the spin and rhetoric on JTG's
post, we never will.

The Labour Party.

Education, Education, Education.

More like Corruption, Corruption, Corruption.

Coupled with,

A lot of "anti mil, but we love you really, go and die for our ego" thrown in.

I am not political and although this is a rant, I hope I won't be banned from this site for expressing my anger at the idiots who use and abuse US.

Sorry in advance.

Or have I just become a victim of political correctness at the behest of common sense and feeling. :yuk:

Talk Wrench

[Melchett01]

The environment department spokesman added: "Conscious of the environmental impact of aviation, all ministerial flights during the EU presidency last year were carbon offset as were emissions from all other sources."

Really. Rant on. If this govt wanted to be really environmentally friendly, they would spend less time worrying about aircraft emissions and more time worrying about the damage being caused by all the methane from the bull$$ite they constantly spew forth and all the hot air coming out of Downing Street. No wonder the ice caps have been melting at an ever faster rate since 97.

If they just shut up for once, even for only 5 minutes, that would help the environment no end. And I could remove my ear plugs and stop feeling nauseous. Rant off.

[fergineer]

Well the NZ Prime Minister with two of her top Ministers, her PA and 2 police types arrived here in my little town in an Air New Zealand Link Beech 1900 along with 13 other fare paying passengers.....no police outside no security, not even the mayor, she mixed with the other punters in the terminal, we don't have seperate arrivals and departures......4 hours later the same thing both on scheduled flights and both arrived/departed within 5 mins of their allocated times......as one of the locals here put it....."we dont put anyone on a pedestal here"........what a nice pleasant change it was...she then visited the local school still with no banners or people screaming "get out of the way PM approaching".........Can you ever see Blair doing that!!!!
Happy days

[Winco]

Talk Wrench,

I could not agree with you more old man, it is an utter disgrace and I am ashamed at the open abuse our politicans abuse our servicemen and women.

Funny how they allrely on the services for 'their' jollies, and yet when it comes to pay review time for you chaps, its a somewhat different opinion they have of you.

Shame on you Bliar and all your corrupt cronies.

The Winco

[rafloo]

I can't see aproblem with this. Its keeping us in a job...and how else are our elected leaders expected to travel?

At least Mr Blair isn't using these flights to go on holiday like the Tories used to.

[Onan the Clumsy]

They'll be smiling on the other side of their faces when they get bounced by Jerry :cool:

[PhoenixDaCat]

It annoys me that the defence of this govt is always "they did it too, they did it too" as though it makes it alright. It's an admission of guilt.

[The Swinging Monkey]

RAFLOO

do you really think its keeping us in a job?
It might be keeping one tiny part of one tiny sqn in a job, but for the rest of the RAF, its just a drain on their already depleted and overstreched aircrew and groundcrew.

Let the ba$tards pay out of their own money, or join the queue like the rest of us at Heathrow!

Kind regards
TSM

[Pontius Navigator]

Just what does this mean in real English? What a load of c@ck :{

It is actually green speak.

"UK emited XXXXXX Tons of carbon in 1999. Now we have emitted XXXXXX-y. My flight to Brussels was equivalent to y-z therefore our emission level of XXXXXX-y+z represents a saving of carbon emission of y-z."

In real speak, we actually wasted z-tons of carbon.

[jayteeto]

Rafloo, hopefully that WAS tongue in cheek??:p
He IS using it for holidays!!

Apologies if I am being dull.....

[FJJP]

Officials say the flights are cheaper than buying tickets on commercial airlines...

Oh, really? How much to run a 125/146 - £2000/hr? £3000/hr? Plus landing fees, crew allowances, etc. Cost of a round trip to Brussels and East Midlands anyone [Royal Sqn care to give us the figures]? Then compare the cost of a drive up the M1 [time would be about the same door-to-door].


Conscious of the environmental impact of aviation, all ministerial flights during the EU presidency last year were carbon offset as were emissions from all other sources.

And they'd have saved even more carbon emissions if they has left the Royal ac on the ground and used a scheduled civilian ac instead. Then compare the carbon emissions from a Royal Aircraft with those of a ministerial Jag up the M1.

The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said many of Mrs Beckett's meetings in Brussels "often end at unpredictable hours in the middle of the night when there is no alternative transport available". ..."returning to the UK immediately allows attendance at high level meetings early the next morning and represents savings on hotel accommodation".

If they took the same number of holiday days off as the rest of the population, there would be more time for meetings to be scheduled that don't clash with each other - that's called planning, by the way. And don't the EU allowances cover flights and HOTAC?

But I don't know why we're wasting breath or bandwidth on this lot - they are not in the slightest bit interested in public opinion, and will do what they want anyway. That's the trouble with having a government with no standards and a big majority. Centralised rule by fear keeps the back benchers in line.

Jackonico - any of your colleagues want to run an article with the real figures?

So snout in the trough it is then + spin... Bolleaux!

[chevvron]

Doesn't 2-jags use a Jaguar - perhaps not, he wouldn't fit.

[airborne_artist]

I read an article on-line this am which I now can not find which justified using the Royal Squadron for Ministers on cost grounds. Brown + six hangers-on return to Brussels was priced at £1,300, with Eurostar costing £1,750. I can't believe that MoD is doing its costings/prices correctly if it can own, crew, maintain and fly a 146 for £650/hr. A Bell 206 costs £350/hr, without a pilot!

[alfred_the_great]

1st, an admission, my unit managed to get a Royal Flight 146 as a bit of a reward for the lads post deployment etc etc, so I may be biased....

2nd, working on the basis the Flight would've been maintained, the Pilots paid etc regardless if it was flying or not. Therefore, the only addition cost would've been the fuel used. Now, being a matelot and not a WAFU type, how much would the fuel alone cost?

3rd, I have to say anything like the Royal Flight (and the Royal Yacht) is on a use it or loose it basis. If we only allowed the major Royals to use it, on official business, then how on earth could be justify it? And despite your feelings on the present incumbents, they are respectively the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer (in case you'd forgotten!) of this country - the post itself deserves the use of the Royal Flight.

[airborne_artist]

2nd, working on the basis the Flight would've been maintained, the Pilots paid etc regardless if it was flying or not. Therefore, the only addition cost would've been the fuel used. Now, being a matelot and not a WAFU type, how much would the fuel alone cost?

Not true, as many of the components on the a/c are lifed/serviced on an hours basis, so marginal use still = cost, and also brings forward the frequency of majors etc. when the a/c is not available, for which there is a potential cost of an available replacement.

[GeeRam]

What a shame the proud history one of the leading scoring fighter squadrons of the Battle of Britain is reduced to being a polly taxi service.
Mind you at least they are still operating from the same airfield that the top scoring squadron flew from.....:)
No doubt such history is lost on the tos**rs taking advanatge of this facility:*

[FJJP]

GeeRam, exactly who are you classing as to**ers?

It is difficult to have served for almost 40 years without becoming slightly aware of the history of the Royal Air Force. And being reduced to a polly taxi service? You really have no idea what tasks 32 Sqn carry out in support of not only the executive arms of the Royal Family, government and the military, but other operational units. They are a highly flexible and important transport squadron. Also, there are many sqns in the Royal Air Force that have roles that are radically different to those they had during WW2 and other eras. Keeping the sqn alive in new roles has always been a feature of the evolving Air Force.

And exactly what do you mean by 'taking advantage of this facility'? When I last looked I discovered that it is a discussion forum, where individuals may insert their views of the subject under discussion.

Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones, which is precisely what this government does with monotinous regularity. You cannot continue to hammer people and bang on about standards on one hand at the same time as bust open those same standards with the other. It's called hypocracy. Hence the discussion.

[South Bound]

FJJP

I think you read GeeRam's message incorrectly - read's to me as if he is calling the Politicians abusing the Queen's Flight T****rs, not Queen's Flight itself! (If I am wrong, then I agree with you, but I am sure GR will be back in a bit to clear it up!)

[jonesthepilot]

You bunch of wingers! When you signed up to take the Queens shilling you committed yourselves to doing what you are told, when you are told. That is known as obeying an order. Your only option if you don't like it is to resign. Put up or shut up!

[Kitbag]

You bunch of wingers! When you signed up to take the Queens shilling you committed yourselves to doing what you are told, when you are told. That is known as obeying an order. Your only option if you don't like it is to resign. Put up or shut up!

A well thought out response from Wales :confused: . Perhaps if people don't comment on the profligate waste that we sometimes see, the lack of spending on urgently required equipment to equip operational fleets (see Nigegilbs thread re the Herk) then we would truly have Armed Forces to be proud of: 'I do it 'cos I'm told to' is to deny the intelligence of the people in the system:hmm: .

Of course when you try to resign a la the doc currently being CM'd that doesn't seem to work either, until the situation gets out of hand and people have to dig their heels in rather than admit there is something wrong.

Daring to challenge the 'thats the way we've always done it' way of running the Services is an essential natural evolutionary response. To run away from such a challenge, i.e. to get out or resign, is not, I would suggest, the way to get things changed, or develop Senior Officers.

Sorry 'bout the rant but sometimes I feel the rage building inside:ok:

[South Bound]

JtP, crikey matey chill out a bit. This is just a forum where people are able to vent their frustration with things, and that is what people are doing. No-one is suggesting going on strike, and everyone will continue to do their jobs with an outward smile, but it doesn't mean they have to like it.

[rafloo]

Tony Blair is the first prime minister in recent years to use commercial flights, having done so for his holidays since 2000, other than one occasion where security advice was to the contrary.


and the other comment regarding travel...

"Let the ba$tards pay out of their own money" ....why should they? When have you ever paid for duty travel out of your own pocket?
Lets face it boys, we are all much the same....agreed, we probably dont travel as much but I bet there are servicemen and women who probably do travel as much and we don't expect to travel cattle class, so why should they?

[GeeRam]

FJJP

I think you read GeeRam's message incorrectly - read's to me as if he is calling the Politicians abusing the Queen's Flight T****rs, not Queen's Flight itself!

Exactly........

I thought it was damn obvious actually....:rolleyes:

[The Swinging Monkey]

RAFLOO

The fact is that we DO travel cattle class!
Have you ever travelled AT to Basra? maybe the other sunny sand pits we frequent? Perhaps you would care to enlighten us all as to which Air Force you are in?
We are NOT all the same, and if you are a serving officer then you must know that.
When was the last time you took your wife and sprogs on holidfay courtesy of the Air force??

Jones, you need assessment mate - go see the MO pronto Tonto!

Kind regards
TSM

[rafloo]

I have never taken my wife on Holiday using RAF Transport...But, there again I'm not the Prime Minister. I'm not a terrorist target. I'm not the head of the Governement. I'm not responsible for making policy and decisions of the government.

However, having travelled to the US many times whilst in my last job, I always travelled Business...except once, when flying with Virmin and we travelled Upper Class.

You are correct though. We are not the same. We are servicemen who do as we are told and act upon orders. Politicians are not and deserve every perk they get. If you would prefer to be in receipt of the perks politicians receive...then you know the answer.

[ACW599]

Out of interest, who tasks 32 (TR) Sqn? Presumably there are rules about who in government can task them and under what circumstances, in which case the issue becomes one of whether or not the rules were broken.

Surely ministers or whoever can't just ring up EGWU and demand to be taken from A to B irrespective of circumstance? Isn't there some distinction as to whether they're acting as UK Government plc or purely as politicians?

[buoy15]

Alfred Bonny Lad
We are not talking about using, more about abusing
Watch the cakes, we don't want them to burn them and filll the atmos with too much carbon do we?
Do you suggest we rename 32(R) Royal Flight - 32(P) Presidential Flight?
We could go the whole hog here with a re-paint job and call it "Sleezy Jet",
but with this airline you get all the trimmings
So, a simple scenario. You go to a surgery via your constituency, or to an essential euro meeting, ( Italy springs to mind), where you will be staying in a payed-for 5* 'freebie pad' for a fortnight (which coincides with your holiday - how lucky is that!). At the end of that meeting (2 weeks), 32 Sqn suddenly arrive to take you home, to save the cost to the tax payer of you having to stay in a hotel overnight, plus the cost of losing a day's work, ie (being on the train or stuck in the traffic) How lucky is that?
So that's ok and value for money?
This gravy train PM and his QC wife have already declared openly and publicly "They have no nostalgia for by-gone eras" whislt trying to sack 1000 years of history and the Lord Chancellor. Meanwhile, she is earning fortunes on the back of supporting Human Rights through obscene Legal Aid payments - plus giving touring speeches at $20000 a shot wherever 32 Sqn take her
A Downing Street spokesperson says no one was available for comment as they are on holiday somewhere on the continent with 32(R) Sqn

[Dogfish]

I seem to be a bit slow today, must be the booze I had last night. I thought that 32 Sqn were the ''Queens Flight'', have I missed something? Since when did the members of the ''B liar, which project?'' qualify as royalty? Somebody please tell me that HRH Lizzy Windsor is still head of state or has that changed while I have been asleep? Politicians get outrageous allowances for transport so they should stop using the RAF as a bloody taxi service.:mad: :*

[SirToppamHat]

ACW599 asked:
Out of interest, who tasks 32 (TR) Sqn?
I am going back a few years, but when I was at STC, 32(TR) Sqn was tasked by the Comms Fleet Tasking Agency (CFTA). This was, IIRC, a sort of off-shoot from the 2 Gp Ascot organisation in B Block (1st Floor?), but I don't think there was any direct link between the 2. I suspect there have been a lot of changes since then (I left in 2003), but I would imagine something similar is still in place?

One thing I do recall was that the people in CFTA were generally of the view that they were under-tasked by the forces as a whole. Sure, there are always lots of complaints about having to be bussed long distances within the UK to meet flights out of AT bases (Lossie-Bz springs to mind), but the suggestion was they were not asked to provide support, so did not do so. Of course the other side of the argument relates to cost - I guess if the Staish has a coach and a couple of drivers available for the cost of the diesel, he or she is unlikely to fork out several thousand quid to have the guys taken to Bz by 146! Whether such trips can be covered as trg flights is another issue.

Sorry, rambled on a bit there.

Back to the thread.

rafloo wrote:

When have you ever paid for duty travel out of your own pocket?


Err only every time I've used my own vehicle, when the mileage rate is about 55% of that which even the tax man considers reasonable! MPs' allowances and expenses? Bring them on. :mad:

STH

[old developer]

There are very few (if any) instances where the coach transport is provided by a Station MT section, it normally done by civvie coach firms, at full comercial rate.
OD

[rafloo]

I think that 32 lost the tag "Queen's" in 1995 fella....There now called "The Royal" Squadron and are tasked to not only carry "The Royals" (Not the Marines).......but also VIP's.


STH....."Err only every time I've used my own vehicle"...why would you use your own Vehicle for duty travel?

There are very few (if any) instances where the coach transport is done by a Station MT section, it normally done by civvie coach firms, at full comercial rate.....Thats cos its cheaper to rent rather than buy a bus. If it were cheaper for the MOD to buy a bus rather than rent one.....err?


Finally...."So, a simple scenario. You go to a surgery via your constituency, or to an essential euro meeting, ( Italy springs to mind), where you will be staying in a payed-for 5* 'freebie pad' for a fortnight (which coincides with your holiday - how lucky is that!). At the end of that meeting (2 weeks), 32 Sqn suddenly arrive to take you home, to save the cost to the tax payer of you having to stay in a hotel overnight, plus the cost of losing a day's work, ie (being on the train or stuck in the traffic) How lucky is that?
So that's ok and value for money?"....That sounds like normal procedure for Jaguar squadrons.

[ACW599]

>I am going back a few years, but when I was at STC, 32(TR) Sqn was tasked by the Comms Fleet Tasking Agency (CFTA)<

Does Heron Flight convey anyone other than Naval personnel? If so, did (or do) CFTA task them as well?

[NURSE]

this is of course the same government that spun to force the royal family away from using the 'Royal Flight' we seen now why so they could use it more. B@st@rds

[West Coast]

Is it really that far out that the head of state, especially one from a country as prominent as the UK would unfettered access to aircraft?

One of the perks of the job.

[Spiro]

Hi guys

Always watched and never really posted but as someone who is very in the know about 32(The Royal) Sqn heres my bit

1. The Queens flight ceased to exist in 1995
2. The Sqn does roughly speaking, 10% royal/30%ministerial/60%military flying
3. Every flight is scrutinised before CFTA accept the booking and the party doing the booking has to pay for the hours they acrue on the jets(818 pound an hour for a 125 etc)
4. The sqn has spent the majority of the last 5 years heavily involved on Herrick and Telic with at least one jet in muscat/thumrait/PSAB/basra/al udied etc.
5. We also do Comp A's/extraditions and lots of other crap that we never get any credit for.

Just a shame that people only ever see "royal" in the title. The royals/ministers spend way more time with netjets as we are always on deployment.

Just info for those who want to make informed posts!

[cazatou]

As someone who accumulated 4414 Hrs flying whilst employed as an aircraft Captain/Training Captain/ Flight Instructor/Local Examiner/MG/IRE on 32 Sqn; I can assure you that the system did not change when Governments changed. Nor, during my time, was it just Politicians who had the benefit of our services.

One of our lesser known tasks was to provide a casualty evacuation service for seriously ill new born babies from mediterranean garrisons. We could get an incubator in though the over-wing escape hatch on a HS125.

The Mk1 Andover could, and did, carry out casualty evacuation of those unfortunate enough to suffer severe injury in places like NI. That aircraft could carry up to 4 "Iron Lungs" or 18 stretcher cases plus Medical Staff.

The Sqn also fulfulled a major Comms role for the RAF and other Services as well as providing a transport facility for "high Profile" visits to the Forces of other nations. I remember taking the RAF Staff College Course of 1989 to Moscow and joining them on their visits to Kubinka Airbase and Monino Air Museum.

The Sqn provided a year round service for personnel returning to UK on "Compasionate A " grounds.

When I joined the RAF every Command had its own Comms Sqn - that's when you saw abuses of the system; and Politicians didn't get a look in.

[SSOT]

Well said spiro and cazatou.

P.S. I once heard that if it floats, flies or fu£ks - it's cheaper by the hour

[Spiro]

Well said spiro and cazatou.
P.S. I once heard that if it floats, flies or fu£ks - it's cheaper by the hour

Funny that...you sound like you currently serve on 32....viva la sqn! and will probably drink coffee with you tomorrow without either of us knowing it!

[Two's in]

The vulnerability of your own glasshouse to large rocks is usually determined by how many $10,000 Burger runs you have ever done to the nearest (or furthest) PX/BX, not forgetting to get something for the missus and kids while you're on that particular Long Navex, or how many Akrotiri bound training exercises you have been on or planned, or the duration of your longest WX check on a bright sunny summers morning.

I couldn't agree more that these all factors add to the quality of service life in a very positive way, and that the stinking, communist hordes are busily trying to erode all of this, but come on, isn't it just a bit rich to be surprised by this behavior or act as if our own use of Joe Taxpayers money was always exemplary and beyond reproach (or Sun reporters in Spain)?

[antipodean alligator]

Well the NZ Prime Minister with two of her top Ministers, her PA and 2 police types arrived here in my little town in an Air New Zealand Link Beech 1900 along with 13 other fare paying passengers.....no police outside no security, not even the mayor, she mixed with the other punters in the terminal, we don't have seperate arrivals and departures......4 hours later the same thing both on scheduled flights and both arrived/departed within 5 mins of their allocated times......as one of the locals here put it....."we dont put anyone on a pedestal here"........what a nice pleasant change it was...she then visited the local school still with no banners or people screaming "get out of the way PM approaching".........Can you ever see Blair doing that!!!!
Happy days

She would have flown Air Force if she hadn't of destroyed it!

[BEagle]

And as for the "It's his train set" argument......

Was once scheduled to fly a standard North Sea towline exercise from the Covert Oxonian Aerodrome one Friday - and on the way back, drop in to Waddington to pick up the COxA Stn Cdr plus AN Other. No problems with that - a useful training approach for the crew plus it was on our route in any case.

Shortly after we took off, an engine decided it was past its scrap-by date and failed. So, a bit of dumping and back to the mushroom farm. That was that, we thought.

But no. His Imperial Staishness decreed that (in addition to the unscheduled engine change), we were to generate another jet so that we could fly from the COxA to Waddo and back in order to pick him up. It should be noted that he had his own car and driver already in Lincolnshire as he'd been at a conference at Cranwell (where, rumour hath it, he'd had his ar$e firmly kicked by a VVSO!)..... So we did. We managed to find another co-pilot and an air engineer; finally at about 1500 we set off, picked up His Nibs plus some Air Vice Marshal who lived in the Cotswolds and flew them back. It must have been some pretty urgent business that he had to be back for, or so we thought. Meanwhile his driver drove the car back solo from Cranwell......and his next task? To pick the Stn Cdr up from his 'urgent business' - Happy Hour in the OM.

So it was 'his train set'. But the unnecessary extra work inflicted upon the ground crew who were already involved in an unscheduled engine change hardly justified him saving about 30 min by not driving back in his staff car.

[sooms]

Especially liked the last paragraph of the BBC article. Does this mean the next time the Tristar/VC10/C130 goes bust taking me and my buddies home from the sandpit we can expect a fleet of HS125/Bae 146 to rush to our rescue?

Seriously though, we're just as guilty 'swings lantern'. Back in the 80's I remember being called into work on a friday night to open the airfield OOH for a HS125 move,2pob in, in from Northolt, out to Edinburgh 2pob,10 mins later, not withstanding the crew/operating costs must have a cost a few thou. Anyway, found out the following monday that the reason we'd opened up was because AOC somebody or other was in Edinburgh and had been invited to a dinner. No Number 5's so a 125 had been laid on to take them to him. Kept me out of the pub I suppose.

At the opposite end of the spectrum I remember an AOC's AFI at one of the East Coast ranges when the AOC turned up with his wife in their own car towing a caravan! They were doing all the ECR's in a week and making a bit of a holiday of it. Slightly detracted from the seriousness of it though.
Mind you... I wonder if he was claiming Rate One's???????

[JessTheDog]

Hit the git where it hurts...in the wallet! :E

By the way:
Bliar - hours in the air courtesy of the Armed Forces = hundreds
Bliar - hours spent visiting wounded personnel and bereaved families = zero

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,17129-2131931,00.html

Blair 'liable for tax bill over use of Royal Flight'
By Andrew Pierce

Tory critics are seeking an inquiry into ministers’ personal benefits in kind

INLAND Revenue officials will be asked to investigate whether Tony Blair and government ministers enjoyed tax benefits by using the Queen’s Flight for personal or party political purposes.
The Tories will table a series of written questions next week demanding to know what discussions the Treasury will hold with the Revenue over whether using the flights operated by the RAF’s 32 Squadron amounted to benefits in kind.

A leading tax consultant has told The Times that the Prime Minister is liable for extra tax on his family holiday flights, such as the £31,000 trip to Sharm el-Sheikh in 2004, even if he used the Queen’s Flight for security reasons. The questions will also focus on whether Mr Blair benefited from using the flights to attend three Labour Party conferences in Blackpool and Scotland.

There are strict Whitehall rules banning the use of taxpayers’ money for party political events. Downing Street insisted that the Prime Minister had also conducted government business on the trips.

Downing Street confirmed yesterday that Mr Blair had used an RAF helicopter during the general election campaign to fly to MG Rover’s Longbridge plant after the collapse of the company. Mr Blair and Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, were flown to the West Midlands by the RAF. Downing Street insisted that it was a legitimate use of an RAF flight, as it was government business to secure agreement on a £150 million support package for workers who had lost their jobs.

[buoy15]

West Coast - W*nker
Are you suggesting Bliar is Head of State?
If so, you should take your head for a sh*t
Whilst your at it, rinse your mouth out with a strong solution of caustic soda

[rafloo]

Blimey...now you've opened a can of worms....but rather than swear and shout at the poor chap, perhaps you could form an argument as to why he should not be considered the head of state and why the real head of state is neither been elected nor wanted and why we pay through the nose for them.

It should be a fundamental right of the people of this country to elect their Head of State rather than the office being the sole prerogative of one family. The denial of this right debases our democracy and fails to apply the principle of accountability throughout our constitutional system. Elected heads of state are accountable for their actions and subject to the people in a way that no hereditary monarch can ever be.

Vive La Republic.

[airborne_artist]

why he should not be considered the head of state and why the real head of state is neither been elected nor wanted and why we pay through the nose for them

I'd have thought the loans/donations for peerages issue is quite enough to show how our Queen is far better than His Sleazyness. Look at the French if you want another example.

[rafloo]

Exactly. France is a good example of how a well run Republic can work.

Its time that we abolished the Monarchy and elected our leader rather than suffering with the offspring of successive Monarchs.

It is time to claim the right to our own country and to choose our Head of State

[airborne_artist]

France is a good example of how a well run Republic can work

France, a Socialist state, with greater class-divisions, more jobs for the boys, and politically-induced financial mire than even the Scots can manage. Unless you've been to a Polytechnique you don't get above HEO in the Civil Service, or any serious senior job in the former or current nationalised industries.

It's not all topless girls at St Tropez you know :E

[WebPilot]

Exactly. France is a good example of how a well run Republic can work.




Or not.......

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/03/27/wfran27.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/03/27/ixportal.html

[Biggus]

I think rafloo is on a bit of a roll. He has posted about 10 comments on a variety of threads today, with some fairly contentious remarks.

On a fishing expedition, looking for an arguement? To seriously say we should be more like France!!??

[JessTheDog]

perhaps you could form an argument as to why he should not be considered the head of state and why the real head of state is neither been elected nor wanted and why we pay through the nose for them.

Bliar is elected - as MP for Sedgefield in 2005, and as leader of Labour sometime in the mid-1990s. He is not elected as PM. The British public have no say - only the voters of Sedgefield (may it rot) and the Labour members who elected him in the 90s.

[Scud-U-Like]

Oh come on. We would all fly in luxury if we could get away with it.

I seem to recall a bunch of aircrew from a certain Sqn at a secret Hants helo base, upgrading to first class (at the behest of their Gulf War hero Sqn Cdr, contrary to regs and at an additional cost of £33k) for a flight to attend an EX across the pond. That was swept under the carpet. Perhaps we need a few 'freedom of information' enquiries closer to home.

[FJJP]

I guess Tucano engineers in Yorkshire are civis, then...

[cazatou]

Well, I guess the reason why Ministers and their Deputies do not fly Civil Air is amply demonstrated by the "Bomb Scare" on a RYANAIR aircraft diverted into Prestwick. One small piece of paper left by a buffoon on a previous flight cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds.

WHY?

Because you cannot assume it is a hoax.

Now, would you like to work out the potential confusion if some (say) 40 Ministers or their deputies (or even Senior Civil Servants) were forced to divert because of "Bomb Threats"?

Or what if it was a "Coup Attempt"? Sorry, I forgot; we don't do that sort of thing in UK......Do we?

[ratty1]

Well, I guess the reason why Ministers and their Deputies do not fly Civil Air is amply demonstrated by the "Bomb Scare" on a RYANAIR aircraft diverted into Prestwick. One small piece of paper left by a buffoon on a previous flight cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds.



Ryanair dont fly to where tony wants to go........................

[airborne_artist]

The RAF has been revealed as having transported the Prime Minister and other cabinet ministers at great public expense either on official visits to which they could have flown on scheduled civilian flights or to holiday destinations. Never in the field of human conflict had so much been paid for by so many for so few.

I sought the reminiscences of one of the pilot-heroes of these operations, the boisterous, handlebar-mustachioed Squadron Leader "Jumbo" Shaw-Freebie. He reclined, gin and tonic in hand, in the mock cockpit with adjacent fuselage that he has constructed in the wisteria-girt garden of his home in Godalming.

"Yes," he chucked. "I remember those ops so well. Every summer, we used to drop Blair and his wife on an estate in Tuscany belonging to some rich Eye-tie who also claimed to be prime minister - Italy's, I mean.

"The Eye-ties used to give us a pretty hairy reception as we flew in - caviar everywhere. We just dumped Blair and that Cherry-woman on the place, and headed home to Blighty.

"Of course, some of the lads I set out with sometimes didn't come back. They swigged too much of Silvio's Chianti and passed out. Back at Biggin Hill, I'd have to write to their parents or their sweethearts. It was a reminder that tourism can be bloody awful. I wish today's yobbos would remember those sacrifices.

"But, for most of the time, we didn't think of that sort of thing. We were young. One minute, we'd been playing cards at base. Then, over the loudspeaker, we'd hear the order to scramble. Not long after that, we'd be dropping Margaret Beckett over the Ruhr.

"Her last words to us would be something like: 'This is a ministerial visit. Eurostar was booked up. There's no question of exploiting the taxpayer.' Then we'd release her from the bomb-hold, and that would be it.

"Of course, nowadays you get these eggheads and pansies who claim that she might have hit innocent civilians when she reached the ground, and that we were war criminals.

"But with the scheduled flights full of oiks and chavs, how else was she going to reach the German agriculture minister in reasonable comfort?

"Ah, those were the days! After that, civvy street wasn't the same. But I'm glad the younger generation hasn't got to go through it."

[TBSG]

Exactly. France is a good example of how a well run Republic can work.

Its time that we abolished the Monarchy and elected our leader rather than suffering with the offspring of successive Monarchs.

It is time to claim the right to our own country and to choose our Head of State

You must be joking. I would far rather have our unelected monarchy, where duty and responsibility are understood and practiced, rather than an elected president of any party. Trooping the Colour for Tony Bliar - heaven forbid.

And how you can really believe that France provides a shining example of a modern democracy is completely beyond me - they are most certainly far more class-ridden than us.

[brickhistory]

Exactly. France is a good example of how a well run Republic can work.

Its time that we abolished the Monarchy and elected our leader rather than suffering with the offspring of successive Monarchs.

It is time to claim the right to our own country and to choose our Head of State

As a 'cousin,' as so often referred, no vote (other than with our feet 200+ years ago) on your Royalty (although dumping the centuries of history seems a shame), to hold France up as "how a well run Republic can work" seems a poor choice.

Let's see, they are on their "Fifth Republic" I believe?

As for the use/mis-use of government a/c by politicians, on our side of the big water, it is much the same for both parties. Both with Air Force One and by our congress on their 'fact-finding' missions using USAF VIP a/c. That does not count the smaller a/c they often demand once in-theater.

Wish you could get a Concorde as your Head of State's official a/c. That would be impressive!

[West Coast]

"it is much the same for both parties"

And for the Generals as well. Don't want to be seen anywhere near the C12 with your golf clubs these days.

[Archimedes]

Blair Force One Clear For Take Off - Sunday Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2136639,00.html)

Would appear that the Celestial Navigator has already decided that he deserves something bigger than a BAE 146...