I Don't Believe All These Numpties Moaning About 10 Million

[Iluvspikey]

being spent on Margaret Thatcher's funeral - don't they realise, if they hadn't have gone, then it wouldn't have had to cost so much for security.
You get people who want to protest peacefully - okay fine, but you always get your what I call 'rent-a-mob' who want it to errupt into a running battle with the police causing carnage in it's wake. Every eventuality has to be covered

[LazyGun]

What O_G says. It will be interesting to see the final costs, when they are released " in due course".

And principles always matter, be it 10 million or 100 billion.Thatcher would be the first to agree on that.

[Titehead]

who cares? we spend a gazillion on workshy scum every week!

[2sp_]

So all servicemen and women are Conservatives?

Really?

[sir.prize]

Titehead - you sure your username is spelled correctly?

[LazyGun]

@Titehead. No, we don't. Ridiculous over-exaggeration on your part,which is consistent with all your other posts.

Targeting all recipients of benefits as "workshy scum" is factually incorrect, is tiresome to hear, and the only people that genuinely believe that only have 1 functioning brain cell.

[factor-fiction]

I read somewhere that the funeral was based on plans agreed with the previous (Labour) government. I can't recall the Labour leadership team complaining about the waste of several million on this funeral, and I suppose it would be hypocritical in a sense if they did because they have been telling the government to spend more to help the economy- and employing people to clean the streets can't be a bad thing can it?

Maybe Cameron should have made it clearer that he had agreed to honour the previously agreed plans in order to divert some of the criticism away from the government- or he should have been more robust about stressing the benefits of spending the money. Maybe the sales of TV rights, digital downloads of ding dong'', tourism etc will mean it costs nothing really.

[joko]

i'm not sure I believe it cost £10m, to be honest.

i first heard it was £1m, then it was £3m, then 5 then 8 and now 10.

can anyone provide a link to a reliable source that can confirm it was £10m?

i know how people spread crap on forums and facebook etc.

is there any proof?

[askyourgran]

Not sure of the true cost will be as much as that, Mark and Carol Thatcher are paying for some of it. All those foul mouthed ranters would have argued the toss whatever the cost. As the OP says, considering their threats and behaviour this week the cost of security is bound to add to the bill, particularly as the Queen and foreign heads of state etc attended.

[emmie]

2sp, i am sure that most on duty wouldn't have ever known MT, some not even born when she left office, and would they object to going to war, no, that is what they are paid to do. They take an oath of allegiance, to serve and protect, not sure of the entire wording but it goes something like that, you can hardly cherry pick the things you like or don't like to do. As to cost, if it does work out 16p a head hardly likely to make a dent in one's pocket.

[emmie]

FF, you are correct, this matter was discussed some 5 years ago, and the coalition weren't even thought of then, let alone come to fruition.

[tamborine]

The only costs were the private outfits & transport owned by guests.

Everything else is Gov owned & paid for by tax payers. All servicemen, police, horses, equipment etc are all in active use 24/7.

[Titehead]

I suggest you have a go at reading what is written LG, where did I say that all benefit claimants are work shy scum? Are you saying there are none then?

[LazyGun]

I read the tripe you wrote, Titehead, and your inference is clear. Trying to hide behind semantics is not something you are very good at.

[Titehead]

so I have an implied "all" then do I?