Liz Truss.

[NutLoose]

Originally Posted by DuncanDoenitz

So UK plc has a corporate jet with a dirty great Union Jack on the tail.

If we aren't going to use it when Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State and entourage have to travel to the Antipodes then, unless I'm missing the point, exactly when are we going to use it?

Totally agree, you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t… if she hadn’t used it, someone would be bitching about why are we leasing an aircraft that is not being used while spending out on airfares.

[pilotmike]

Originally Posted by NutLoose

This is what you get when you do not buy new outright but lease, at least with the buy option you are left with an aircraft after two years to either sell on or carry on operating, the other advantage would be it would have a warranty so spares etc would be covered..

I really don't believe you're understanding ACMI correctly: M is for Maintenance.

Also, when you buy, you need to pay for the C (Crew) part as well. That doesn't come cheap. And what about the AOC? Had you factored any of that into your comparison?

[Dannyboy39]

Even if it is costing £40K a day - that is still £1.2M over a month. That is new 777 monthly lease rate levels.

You can get mature A321s at the moment for around $175-200K a month right now.

[212man]

No doubt if she had flown on QF (apparently QF to Darwin would have obviated any stops , no matter the A380's appetite for fuel),

it’s a 787 - hence the non-stop flight! Still need a connection to Sydney though……

[rattman]

Originally Posted by 212man

it’s a 787 - hence the non-stop flight! Still need a connection to Sydney though……

Darwin is only a refuel stop in reality, there might be a few passengers getting on/off but that would single digits worth, it then heads to sydney

[212man]

Originally Posted by rattman

Darwin is only a refuel stop in reality, there might be a few passengers getting on/off but that would single digits worth, it then heads to sydney

I know. Not all do it seems

[WHBM]

Originally Posted by chevvron

LBC and BBC both moaning about the Foreign Secretary using '336 for a flight to Oz for a meeting (held annually) with government officials.
LBC are claiming the fligtht cost £500K and included her delegation plus her security team so there were too many going to use a commercial flight.

If I'm not mistaken it was one of these two that reported, when the Bomber Command memorial was opened in London, that the RNZAF had flown over the remaining aircrew who were attending the ceremony in the RNZAF VIP Boeing 757. I don't remember these media whinging about the cost and how they could have come commercial on Air New Zealand - in fact, they whinged instead about how nicely and well the New Zealand former crews were being treated, while the British attendees had to make their own way there.

[Lance Shippey]

I recall sharing a BA flight LHR/MAN with a former British Prime Minister. BA took out 18 seats in rows 1-3 seats ABCDEF whilst he sat in 1C and his secretary in 1D. A/C given T/O clearance from the gate. I also remember giving up my seat AKL/HNL flt with PAN AM to the "Aide" of the King of Tonga as His Majesty would be more comfortable with two seats.
I certainly do not begrudge Liz Truss her delegation, and security from taking the Titan A321. It certainly mitigates the worry of "Will my bags arrive". I still laugh about the old promotional Concorde advertisement. "Breakfast in London, Lunch in New York," and someone spraying on" Bags iin Bermuda".
Well done Liz Truss, I would have expected no less from My Government. and no extra a/c carrying a fleet of limo's and helicopters.

Lance Shippey

[Davef68]

Originally Posted by Lance Shippey

I recall sharing a BA flight LHR/MAN with a former British Prime Minister. BA took out 18 seats in rows 1-3 seats ABCDEF whilst he sat in 1C and his secretary in 1D. A/C given T/O clearance from the gate.

More than one occasion shared the evening LCY-EDI flight with Scottish then-Chancellor/future PM. On one occasion he was in the row in front of me. He was driven straight to the aircraft steps. First time, the sudden presence of armed Police round the aircraft and at the gate was a bit of a surprise.

[Doctor Cruces]

I am not a fan of this government at all, but use of what is essentially a service jet (for the duration of the contract) to fly a Government minister and team on official government business to discuss a highly sensitive topic (if that's what it was) is not a problem.

[Bueno Hombre]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

"Following this nihilistic line of thinking, Ministers should take the bus rather than having chauffeur driven cars"

We'd see an improvement in the Bus Service pretty fast then.

I can remember when Lee Kwan Yew used to fly commercial from S'pore to Jakarta - they reserved the front 3 seats for him, his Secretary and a single Protection Officer - they boarded just before take off and then the plane would drop him off at the Govt. Terminal at Halim before taxying across to the normal terminal at Jakarta - but we got a direct routing so we actually took less time overall.

Yes indeed . Singapore Government still seems to be very excellent and a positive example to other nations.

[Imagegear]

I guess the question for me is, are Ministers indispensable? and also without a deputy leader ready to take over the reigns at short notice?

The reason I suspect the PM of Singapore could do it was to show:

a) That he was not under any threat at that time.
b) That his chain of command was set, trusted, and ready to assume power if necessary

Not necessarily the case for this government.

IG

[212man]

Originally Posted by Bueno Hombre

Yes indeed . Singapore Government still seems to be very excellent and a positive example to other nations.

Their Philosophy (that set by LKY) is to run it like a successful company, attracting the best talent they can for the ministerial roles and paying them private sector market rates. That way, they focus on making the country a success and are not distracted by expenses fiddling or other financial skullduggery. They are the highest paid politicians in the world.

[gr4techie]

Originally Posted by chevvron

LBC and BBC both moaning about the Foreign Secretary using '336 for a flight to Oz for a meeting (held annually) with government officials.
LBC are claiming the fligtht cost £500K and included her delegation plus her security team so there were too many going to use a commercial flight.

Why does she need a security team to go to Oz?

Whats the threat?

Don’t the Aussies have their own police? Even SAS.

[Asturias56]

to stop Aussies coming up and mocking her about cricket?

[cessnapete]

Another "Private jet"

Let's wait for the BBC and Ms Rayner to chastise Boris for using another private jet to Ukraine!

[Asturias56]

"The reason I suspect the PM of Singapore could do it was to show: a) That he was not under any threat at that time. b) That his chain of command was set, trusted, and ready to assume power if necessary Not necessarily the case for this government."

he said officially that Singapore had the best airline in the world and it would be stupid not to use it.

Also he was hot on politicians getting above themselves. One day the Straights Times published a tiny paragraph "Today is the birthday of the First Minister LKY - the staff and owners of the Times wish him a very happy birthday" - it was bottom of page 18 in the smallest type I ever saw used in a newspaper and even that was considered to be a bit risky.

[Uplinker]

Originally Posted by NAROBS

Is face-to-face really necessary....

I don't know if you have ever tried to do a job interview over video? I have twice. It is really awkward and artificial and does not convey body language, presence, authority, even one's clothing etc etc. Crucially, the direct eye contact is missing.
And if you are taking part in complex trade and defence talks, you will have many people on both sides interacting and contributing during the discussions, which is impossible to cover adequately on a 'Zoom' style video link. If satellites are involved, they will introduce a delay, making conversation difficult. Security, (or lack of it), of the video link against eavesdroppers is also an important factor.

If the UK wants to have World influence - and we certainly do need World influence right now - then a 'Zoom' or 'Team' meeting will not cut it. It would be unworkable and would simply look and feel cheap. Also it's quite tricky to sign a document unless you are actually there in person !

This trip involved both our defence secretary and Ms Truss, plus their support teams, for important talks, and is entirely in keeping with our position in the World. Most of us, myself included, have no concept of the sums involved in running a government or a country. Yes, one could buy a very nice house for what this trip cost, but that is not really the point.

[Ninthace]

You've not been a staff officer then? They do all the negotiating work, get the "i"s dotted and the "t"s crossed. write the script for the grownups to talk to and prepare the brief with the answers to the questions that might arise. The bosses just turn up to sign the paperwork, make the speeches written for them and the photo opportunity. If anyone deserves a ride in Boris's winged ego trip. it's the staff.