Ex-Prime Ministers' Cost Allowance

[El Guapo]

I was not aware of this, but ex-prime ministers can help themselves to piles of taxpayers' money long after they have left No. 10.

More Here

Maggie Thatcher 2006-2011 £535,000
John Major 2006-2011 £490,000
Tony Blair £273,000

Ker-ching.

[Vimto156]

bloody hell... I wish my old employer gave me half a million quid for turning up for a dinner or spending an afternoon or two writing some letters. But wait it's better than that i'm paying for this! Brilliant! I couldn't think of a better way of spending this money at all...

[thinfourth2]

That horrible theiving lefty blair ripping off the tax payer for a quarter of million

But that darling Thatcher is so kind and considerate she only took half a million isn't she lovely

[andymadmak]

thinfourth2 said:

That horrible theiving lefty blair ripping off the tax payer for a quarter of million

But that darling Thatcher is so kind and considerate she only took half a million isn't she lovely

Oh do shush!

I think more detail is required in this. For example, does this claim include paying for the staff/offices that may be required to answer the considerable body of correspondance that I am sure all ex PMs get? Does it include the expenses incurred in relation to official engagements they are required to attend? How do the sums break down?
Facts are required before we leap to the cannons. (even before we shoot Blair, sadly)

[thinfourth2]

I wonder what winky will claim.


is the form valid if you use crayons instead of a black ball point pen?

[Marf]

thinfourth2 said:

That horrible theiving lefty blair ripping off the tax payer for a quarter of million

We'll gloss over the millions of pounds of tax he's avoided since leaving office though.

[jas xjr]

I think it may be down to the level of protection required even after retirement.
Having said that I might have thought Blair would have required a lot more protection than the others

[E36GUY]

jas xjr said:

I think it may be down to the level of protection required even after retirement.
Having said that I might have thought Blair would have required a lot more protection than the others

This. An ex-PM isn't suddenly off peoples' target list because they are no longer in the job. They all get police protection pretty much forever

[catso]

jas xjr said:

I might have thought Blair would have required a lot more protection than the others

But deserves rather less...

[anonymous-user]

I wondered how long it would take until this little article would get posted on here. Funny how PHers rush to offer rational defence of potential thievery or troughing at the top, to the right at least, yet it's all manic rantings, i.e. Sky TV and cider, when it's aimed at people at the other end of the social scale.
Directors pay up 50 percent on the year too! They deserve it, they earned it!?

[NoNeed]

thinfourth2 said:

That horrible theiving lefty blair ripping off the tax payer for a quarter of million

But that darling Thatcher is so kind and considerate she only took half a million isn't she lovely

To be fair it has taken thatcher 5 years compared to Blairs 2.



I dont know why I even typed that, they are all riding the fking gravy train I am paying for.

[andymadmak]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Thievery at the top? As I said in my earlier post, some more evidence is required! But if there has been abuse, then the perpatrators need to be punished. Left or right wing.

Directors pay up 50%? In some companies perhaps. Not all, I can assure you of that!

[rover 623gsi]

El Guapo said:

I was not aware of this, but ex-prime ministers can help themselves to piles of taxpayers' money long after they have left No. 10.

More Here

Maggie Thatcher 2006-2011 £535,000
John Major 2006-2011 £490,000
Tony Blair £273,000

Ker-ching.

Major brought this in back in 91 - I seem to recall at the time there were reports that several ex-PMs like Wilson, Heath and Callagahan were not especially well off and this was one reason why it was introduced. Possibly back then there wasn't the money to be made from book and tv deals, after-dinner speaking and various directorships but nowadays it seems like a piss-take. It also kinda weakens the argument that pulic servants (such as council leaders) should never be paid more than the prime minister given that modern day PM can draw such hugs sums for the rest of their lives - I mean Cameron could be an Ex-PM before he's even 50.

[AndrewW-G]

El Guapo said:

I was not aware of this, but ex-prime ministers can help themselves to piles of taxpayers' money long after they have left No. 10.

More Here

Maggie Thatcher 2006-2011 £535,000
John Major 2006-2011 £490,000
Tony Blair £273,000

Ker-ching.

The costs are in relation to former PM's dealing with correspondence and attending functions. .. . . .so that’s £100k a year to staff their office, pay for stamps, stationary, telephones etc. and the odd trip to so government do.

For once I'd suggest that it's not actually that much, when you take into account that they may employ at least a couple of people (so thats at least £60k + the costs of providing an office for them to work in) and no doubt get a mountain of letters sent to them.

[dandarez]

andymadmak said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Thievery at the top? As I said in my earlier post, some more evidence is required! But if there has been abuse, then the perpatrators need to be punished. Left or right wing.

Directors pay up 50%? In some companies perhaps. Not all, I can assure you of that!

The figures are for FTSE 100 companies. It comes from Incomes Data Services (IDS) who said this took the AVERAGE pay for a director (NOT the boss!) of a FTSE 100 company to just short of £2.7m! - austerity, eh?

The rise is higher than that recorded for the main person running the company, a chief executive.

C. Execs pay 'only' rose by 43% over the year, according to this study.

David Cameron has just said the report was 'concerning', and called for 'big companies to be more transparent when they decide executive pay'. Yeah, as if they'll listen to you CMD.

At the normality end, salaries rose by just 3.2%.

Latest consumer price inflation figures showed inflation at 5.2%.

And they wonder why the majority of Joe Public no longer gives a toss.

[sixspeed]

andymadmak said:

Oh do shush!

I think more detail is required in this. For example, does this claim include paying for the staff/offices that may be required to answer the considerable body of correspondance that I am sure all ex PMs get?

Yes, it does.

[Fittster]

rover 623gsi said:

Heath .

Always thought Heath suspiciously well off. Yacht racing is a very rich man's support, where did the money come from to pay for that?

[DonkeyApple]

dandarez said:

The figures are for FTSE 100 companies. It comes from Incomes Data Services (IDS) who said this took the AVERAGE pay for a director (NOT the boss!) of a FTSE 100 company to just short of £2.7m! - austerity, eh?

The rise is higher than that recorded for the main person running the company, a chief executive.

C. Execs pay 'only' rose by 43% over the year, according to this study.

David Cameron has just said the report was 'concerning', and called for 'big companies to be more transparent when they decide executive pay'. Yeah, as if they'll listen to you CMD.

At the normality end, salaries rose by just 3.2%.

Latest consumer price inflation figures showed inflation at 5.2%.

And they wonder why the majority of Joe Public no longer gives a toss.

Well. Director pay is determined ultimately by the non execs and the shareholders.

The shareholder is usually your pension fund.

So the questions to ask are:

1. What is incentivising the non execs to approve this?

2. Why are the fund managers accepting this on the shareholders' behalf?

Once you start tabling the possible answers to those questions you can overlay them with the question: why are total fees and costs of a pension fund similar or greater than the performance?

[Derek Smith]

jas xjr said:

I think it may be down to the level of protection required even after retirement.
Having said that I might have thought Blair would have required a lot more protection than the others

Their day-to-day protection is paid for out of the public purse. An ex-PM lives on my old ground and had no-one full time. If the alarm went off in his prems then there was a set callout to it. This has since changed, but how I don't know. But then, the person was not under great threat.

Thantcher and Blair, however, are more in the frame I would suggest and are likely to have some degree of full-time response paid for by you and me.

[crankedup]

Still at least 'we are all in this together'. So that' private function speeches, gold plated pension, expenses for life and the list no doubt could go on. One can only imagine the gold mine that is the E.U.