ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums - should the tax payer fund Margaret Thatchers funeral ?

ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/index.php)

- Serious Debates & News (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=61)

- - should the tax payer fund Margaret Thatchers funeral ? (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=223438)

should the tax payer fund Margaret Thatchers funeral ?

should the tax payer fund Margaret Thatcher funeral ? 10.04.13

its very controversial,
tongs will be wagging,
publicity needs not to be commercial,
because the turn out won't be sagging.
the "upper class" adored,
extravagant, pompous, with a endless tab,
walking the "walk" you must applaud,
not forgetting her gift of the gab.
with the good there's a down,
its a red light that's not green,
the "miners" felt the brown,
but still attending the funeral is the "Queen".
i watched Margaret's daughter,
"I'm a celeb" was a insight,
a good lady with no alter,
Carroll was a pure delight.
the "funeral" is hard to swallow,
the cost is ragging,
will the send off cause wallow,
because "bitterness" will be s ageing.
time to close the door,
all stand and be quiet,
is this moment very sore,
when to rest we lay the "llady" who started the "poll tax riot".

( i am very sorry if anyone find these words hard to read. battling with all what i have just said above i find myself asking - word this country be is the state it is in if we had a strong leader like her ? i predict not - and these are the words i hope brings comfort to my negative poem. but what do you think ? was she good for this country ? )

This is really bugging me actually. She specfically said she did not want a state funeral, so they decide to give her the next step down from it. Something she clearly didn't want, and something this country cannot afford allegedly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherie (Post 5928932)

Exactly ..... :thumbs:

As a non-Brit it's really not my place to have an opinion about such specific matters. I do hope that she is treated with dignity though.

I believe that she deserves to be treated with dignity.

another thread
one is enough

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex (Post 5928937)

As a non-Brit it's really not my place to have an opinion about such specific matters. I do hope that she is treated with dignity though.

Ibelieve that she deserves to be treated with dignity.

Sshe is obviously a target in death so it puzzles me why a very public parade has been arranged given she didn't want it. Surely here wishes should have been paramount?

No, it should be paid for from her estate, by her Family as with other families in the UK and if a really lavish funeral is desired then the Conservative party should fund it from their own funds not the taxpayers.

I see no reason whatsoever for the Military to be involved in this funeral,to me that is ridiculous,Margaret Thatcher had no real military connection.
I am really surprised the Queen will be attending too,I do not think that appropriate.
She should not be there adding even more to security costs,by all means make a broadcast marking her perceived achievements of Margaret Thatcher but not be at this funeral.

She was the first female PM of the UK and longest serving one.
Just, by a year or so though,she has rightly had the accolade of endless media coverage and documentaries on TV and tributes made in that way.
This planned funeral as it is, is out of order in my view and should not receive a single pence of taxpayers money as to it.

No other PM has hd that except for Winston Churchill who was there all through world war 2, no one would dispute he should have got that kind of funeral but not Margaret Thatcher,nor any other PM before her or after her either.

Being fair to Margaret Thatcher too, she herself would likely be horrified at the planning of this funeral the way it has been.
She would have gloried in the TV coverage accorded to her time as PM on TV since her death but she herself likely would not want her funeral to be turned into this farce.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arista (Post 5928947)

another thread
one is enough

This is specifically about her funeral though and who should be paying for it, the other thread is about her lifetime and legacy. It was confirmed on the news last night that the Thatcher family would be contributing a portion I want to know who is paying the rest don't you?

Expecting the taxpayer to foot the bill for her funeral is ridiculous, it's not as if the Thatchers don't have the money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chewy (Post 5928968)

Expecting the taxpayer to foot the bill for her funeral is ridiculous, it's not as if the Thatchers don't have the money.

I agree,I don't think the taxpayer should be funding a single bit of it.

William Hague going on today about the rebate she won from the EU ages ago as a just reason for spending money on such a lavish funeral in these difficult times, again shows how out of touch this Govt and Cabinet are with ordinary people.

Margaret Thatcher's estate still a family secret

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...-family-secret

Quote:

Margaret Thatcher, who was keen to promote herself as the humble grocer's daughter throughout her career, died surrounded by wealth and luxury at the Ritz in London – a guest of longtime supporters and media tycoons the Barclay brothers, who own the exclusive hotel.

But behind the opulence, the precise details of the Thatcher estate remain closely guarded by her family, and her wealth – although great – appears to be less extensive than some commentators had expected.

One current cabinet member and supporter of the former prime minster believed she was increasingly reliant on wealthy friends, saying: "My impression in latter years was that she was looked after by rich supporters."

Before moving into the Ritz, where it was reported that Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay, owners of the Daily and Sunday Telegraph were footing the bill, Thatcher had lived in one of London's most exclusive neighbourhoods.

The five-bedroom house in Chester Square, Belgravia, where properties can fetch more than £6m, was her home for more than two decades. However, it is unclear whether this property will form part of her estate.

Thatcher's husband, Sir Denis, took out a 10-year lease on the house for £700,000 in 1991, which was renewed a decade later. According to the Land Registry the property was bought in 2006 by Bakeland Property Company Ltd, based in the British Virgin Islands, for £2.4m, although Thatcher lived there until a few months before her death. On Tuesday a spokesman for the family refused to answer any questions about her estate, including the Chester Square property, saying the former prime minister had never spoken publicly about her private financial situation. The spokesman added that the family were keen for the details to remain private.

However, colleagues said there were suggestions the house may have been paid for by one of Thatcher's wealthy friends.

"Whether she owned Chester Square I am not sure," said the minister. "Someone may have bought it and given it to her for the use thereof."

Thatcher was engaged in a series of lucrative ventures before her health began to deteriorate, from speaking engagements in the US and far east to her role as a global consultant for Philip Morris tobacco, reportedly worth hundreds of thousands of pounds a year.

Two years after she was forced out as prime minister, she was estimated to have a personal wealth of £9.5m.

In her prime she was able to demand £40,000 a time for appearances on the international speakers' circuit, beloved of former prime ministers and presidents. And almost a decade after leaving Downing Street, she was still able to attract tens of thousands for a speaking engagement in the US.

Her autobiography, published in 1993, secured a £3.2m advance from HarperCollins – part of Rupert Murdoch's empire – and she negotiated a separate deal worth £250,000 for the Japanese rights. A decade later when Sir Denis died it was reported that he left £1m in trust to her and their children, Sir Mark and Carol.

According to Mark Hollingsworth's book Thatcher's Fortunes: The Life and Times of Mark Thatcher, the family's finances – and numerous offshore accounts – were masterminded by the late Sir Michael Richardson, "the most powerful investment banker of his generation."

"After Margaret Thatcher left No 10, her favourite investment banker became more active in managing her finances," wrote Hollingsworth. "He was intimately involved in negotiating her multimillion-pound contract to publish her memoirs … and oversaw the offshore trusts."

Denis was worth a few bob, too :

Quote:

Denis Thatcher, already a millionaire when he met Margaret, financed his second wife's training as a barrister, and a home in Chelsea; he also bought a large house in Lamberhurst, Kent, in 1965. His firm employed 200 people by 1957, but he sold it to Castrol on 26 August 1965 after suffering a mild nervous breakdown in 1964. He received a seat on Castrol's parent board, which he retained when Burmah Oil took it over in 1966. He retired from Burmah in June 1975, four months after his wife won the Conservative Party leadership election.

In addition to being a director of Burmah Oil, he was chairman of the Atlas Preservative Co, vice-chairman of Attwoods plc from 1983 to January 1994, a director of Quinton Hazell plc from 1968 to 1998 and a consultant to Amec plc and CSX Corp. He was also a non-executive director of retail giant Halfords during the 1980s.

I was employed by QH and was told that DT was on a retainer, as a non-executive director, of at least £250k pa plus expenses.

He also had fingers in more pies than mentioned above.

It does seem this way like it's one last finger to the public, something more low key would not have incited so much furore, and as said that was her wish.
this will be a catalyst for some to demonstrate against the 'austerity cuts' in the face of this sickening show of false sentiment.
The sad thing is that whoever does will not be seen a championing the thoughts and feelings of many but a disrespectful 'philpott'. This is how far we have come since the days of Thatcher.....Full circle.

Quote:

with the good there's a down,
its a red light that's not green,

http://i.imgur.com/IHEwd.gif

How much does everyone think a state funerl is going to cost, in real terms? Probably less than it costs the country to keep all our alcoholics and junkies on benefits for a day. And why the hell shouldn't the military be involved? The military had respect for Thatcher and she had respect for them. This woman did get us a HUGE rebate from the EU, I don't see why that shouldn't be mentioned now. Like her or hate her, she was a great stateswoman and politician. As for the call that she was unpopular, I'd remind everyone that she never lost an election. She was in power for over a decade.

''Probably less than it costs the country to keep all our alcoholics and junkies on benefits for a day''
And there it is the view that everyone on a welfare benefits is a drug and alcohol addicted scrounger....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 5929000)

''Probably less than it costs the country to keep all our alcoholics and junkies on benefits for a day''
And there it is the view that everyone on a welfare benefits is a scrounger....

I think it says white clearly the words ALCOHOLICS AND JUNKIES. It doesn't say that everyone on welfare is a scrounger. It's very, very specific.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5928997)

I would imagine the security alone will run into millions, it's a smack in the teeth to anyone who has had their disability allowance cut that on 1st April the country was broke and these cuts were vital, two weeks later we can host a lavish funeral for someone who expressly said they didn't want it. There are many other ways her supporters can pay their respects without lining the route to St Paul's.

It's not my country's money so I don't have much of an opinion on it but If she did say she didn't actually want one then it seems ridiculous to go against her wishes and spend so much of the Tax Payers money on something she didn't even want.

You say "lavish" like they're all going on somewhere afterwards to party.

It's all very well saying, oh it will cost more than the benefit cuts to the disabled. You could say that about anything. It's a fraction of what we send to India. It's a fraction of what we send to Africa, where we'vebeen digging wells for the last two hundred years and yet they're still drinking dirty water. If there wasn't anything to moan about, the Thatcher-haters would invent something.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherie (Post 5929017)

Excellent point cherie, this is rubbing salt in a festering wound, whatever respect the military had for her (if any) is not really the issue here.
The only factor is the expense incurred, those who wish to mourn would do so whatever sum was spent surely?

I made the comment about the military. Why would you weave in your little comment in your reply to Cherie's post?

Oh actually, yeah... I remember why you do that now.

It's the minority ***** making a fuss over this funeral. As usual.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5929034)

Yes of course it is a fraction of what is spent on other things, though I assume there will be soup and sandwiches afterwards for visiting dignitaries, are they really going to send the Queen et al home on empty stomachs? :joker:

It is the principal here. A. She didn't want it. B. We are in times of austerity (allegedly). C. If it is tax payers money there is quite likely to be a lot of protest which may or may not end in people being injured which could have been avoided had she had a private ceremony. I really don't get it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5929034)

Ok if you don't like lavish how about ceremonial? It is all very well attempting to justify it too, are you now suggesting that we suspend aid to developing countries to fund this?

Well now lets see.... Due to her misguided greedy selfish policies Britain has ended up where we are today.......Broke !!! whilst Mrs Thatchers families combined wealth probably runs in the tens of millions .So if you are asking if the Tax payer should fund a Public Funeral with Full military honours I would have to say NO..!!!!