Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Thunderbird 900

Air Miles Andy Still Feeding At The Trough

Recommended Posts

Airmiles Andy 'wastes £150,000 flying to Saudi': Taxpayers fund his private jet for three-day trade mission

The Duke of York was accused of wasting taxpayers’ money last night after spending up to £150,000 on chartering a private jet to fly to Saudi Arabia and back.

Just two months after he stepped down as the UK’s global trade ambassador, Prince Andrew flew to the kingdom earlier this week to promote British business.

But rather than take a scheduled flight, the prince – dubbed ‘Airmiles Andy’ because of his penchant for long- distance luxury air travel – hired a return-trip private jet.

Sources said he had ‘commitments’ last weekend which made it impossible for him to catch a scheduled flight. They declined to elaborate further.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040143/Prince-Andrewwastes-150-000-flying-Saudi-Taxpayers-fund-private-jet-day-trade-mission.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airmiles Andy 'wastes £150,000 flying to Saudi': Taxpayers fund his private jet for three-day trade mission

The Duke of York was accused of wasting taxpayers’ money last night after spending up to £150,000 on chartering a private jet to fly to Saudi Arabia and back.

Just two months after he stepped down as the UK’s global trade ambassador, Prince Andrew flew to the kingdom earlier this week to promote British business.

But rather than take a scheduled flight, the prince – dubbed ‘Airmiles Andy’ because of his penchant for long- distance luxury air travel – hired a return-trip private jet.

Sources said he had ‘commitments’ last weekend which made it impossible for him to catch a scheduled flight. They declined to elaborate further.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040143/Prince-Andrewwastes-150-000-flying-Saudi-Taxpayers-fund-private-jet-day-trade-mission.html

A completely erroneous 'non-story', I can tell you. Although I cannot provide a 'linky'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LiveinHope..."A completely erroneous 'non-story', I can tell you"

Well go on then mate. Tell us. Have you got a hotline to this Royal parasite? :lol:

If this is a non-story then what is the truth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airmiles Andy 'wastes £150,000 flying to Saudi': Taxpayers fund his private jet for three-day trade mission

The Duke of York was accused of wasting taxpayers’ money last night after spending up to £150,000 on chartering a private jet to fly to Saudi Arabia and back.

Just two months after he stepped down as the UK’s global trade ambassador, Prince Andrew flew to the kingdom earlier this week to promote British business.

But rather than take a scheduled flight, the prince – dubbed ‘Airmiles Andy’ because of his penchant for long- distance luxury air travel – hired a return-trip private jet.

Sources said he had ‘commitments’ last weekend which made it impossible for him to catch a scheduled flight. They declined to elaborate further.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040143/Prince-Andrewwastes-150-000-flying-Saudi-Taxpayers-fund-private-jet-day-trade-mission.html

"Idiot of the week" you say

I'll type the piece again:

"Just two months after he stepped down as the UK’s global trade ambassador, Prince Andrew flew to the kingdom earlier this week to promote British business"

I am not going to enter a slanging match. I just suggest you read the piece and see its inherent inconsistency. Cheerio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LiveinHope, I apologise for my rant.

I see the inconsistency, however, that does not answer the question.

Quite simply, did Prince Andrew, in whatever official capacity, cost the UK taxpayer £150,000 by flying to Saudi in a private jet?

If the Saudis paid for it or a UK business fine, otherwise, it is nothing short of a disgrace if this trip was paid for out of public funds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LiveinHope, I apologise for my rant.

I see the inconsistency, however, that does not answer the question.

Quite simply, did Prince Andrew, in whatever official capacity, cost the UK taxpayer £150,000 by flying to Saudi in a private jet?

If the Saudis paid for it or a UK business fine, otherwise, it is nothing short of a disgrace if this trip was paid for out of public funds.

Ok, ta

Let's take the DM's careful writing (spin) out of the story and concatenate the sentence as I wrote it in bold above. i.e. accept that 'Andy' was flown to Saudi Arabia to Represent British Business, perhaps having dropped the title to try to get some clear air from the sensationalist press.

If the UK tax payer funds an 'ambassador' to fly to a country, in this case Saudi Arabia (a country where they do appreciate the 'Royal' treatment) to 'assist' UK business deals, then I think that is probably 150K well spent. Of course the inward investment in UK jobs etc., must be greater than 150K; this is always a punt and should also be viewed when all the trips are considered in the round i.e., some you will win and some you will lose, speculate to accumulate.

If either a 'single' UK business, or a group of UK businesses view 'air miles Andy' as a benefit in securing a deal, and they can persuade the Gov't (BIS) to fund his trip on their (and our) behalf, then fair enough. You may disagree with the system (or the choice of person), but in effect the business(es) must have made a persuasive case for 'his' use; flight costs at UK expense, entourage etc. In effect it's a Gov't subsidy for business, goes on in every country around the world, whether a tax break, easing of planning etc. If the trip is wrong it is a failing of BIS. I am sure Andy would sooner be playing Golf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, ta

Let's take the DM's careful writing (spin) out of the story and concatenate the sentence as I wrote it in bold above. i.e. accept that 'Andy' was flown to Saudi Arabia to Represent British Business, perhaps having dropped the title to try to get some clear air from the sensationalist press.

If the UK tax payer funds an 'ambassador' to fly to a country, in this case Saudi Arabia (a country where they do appreciate the 'Royal' treatment) to 'assist' UK business deals, then I think that is probably 150K well spent. Of course the inward investment in UK jobs etc., must be greater than 150K; this is always a punt and should also be viewed when all the trips are considered in the round i.e., some you will win and some you will lose, speculate to accumulate.

If either a 'single' UK business, or a group of UK businesses view 'air miles Andy' as a benefit in securing a deal, and they can persuade the Gov't (BIS) to fund his trip on their (and our) behalf, then fair enough. You may disagree with the system (or the choice of person), but in effect the business(es) must have made a persuasive case for 'his' use; flight costs at UK expense, entourage etc. In effect it's a Gov't subsidy for business, goes on in every country around the world, whether a tax break, easing of planning etc. If the trip is wrong it is a failing of BIS. I am sure Andy would sooner be playing Golf.

I'm sure he got in a round or three btw (I'm sure Andy would rather be at one of his special underage parties as well) - "Clear the air from the sensationalist press !" You're kidding right ? "Sources said he had ‘commitments’ last weekend which made it impossible for him to catch a scheduled flight. They declined to elaborate further." Pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure he got in a round or three btw (I'm sure Andy would rather be at one of his special underage parties as well) - "Clear the air from the sensationalist press !" You're kidding right ? "Sources said he had ‘commitments’ last weekend which made it impossible for him to catch a scheduled flight. They declined to elaborate further." Pathetic.

So is it the 'person' that you (and perhaps Thunderbird) objects to strongly, or the spending of 150,000k to promote British business? I am not sure is is just the transport of Andy that would have cost 150,000K and the trip would have been at the organisation and request of BIS, and not the Duke of York, who is just cargo.

I would quite expect that 'other commitments' was a a simple 'p1ss off I've got better things to do than answer your questions' to the journalist, although we will never know. I also very much doubt if Andrew flew alone, it would have been part of a delegation and I am fairly sure that at that level, everyone would have had other commitments to make the way the trip was organised worthwhile.

Out of curiosity, if you were in BIS, how would you promote British business abroad ? Would you have a VIP leading a trip and if so, who would you choose to give some prestige when visiting leaders of countries that appreciate a bit of 'rank' ? and how much would you spend ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LiveinHope, I have no problems with VIP's going on these type of business trips.

I do have a problem however with Prince Andrew being seen as an appropriate VIP. This after recent revelations of him being massaged by a teenage girl employed by a paedophile.

A paedophile who seems to have had quite a close friendship with him and his mad ex wife...

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/41965190/ns/today-today_people/t/ferguson-got-k-loan-wealthy-pedophile/

Duchess of York admits accepting £15k from paedophile Jeffrey Epstein; 'Stand behind him,' pleads secret e-mail from Prince's press secretary.

The Duke of York paid the price for his association with a convicted paedophile as the Government decided to downgrade his role as Britain’s trade ambassador.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/8365239/The-Duke-of-York-pays-for-his-links-to-child-sex-offender.html

What annoys me, and I'm sure most other people, is not just his sense of entitlement but his incredible arrogance.

An arrogance that almost seems to know no boundaries.

Someone should give this oaf an almighty kick up the backside and teach him the basic rules of diplomacy.

We are all living in very troubled economic times. Most people understand this, but not everyone.

When Prince Andrew decides to extract his head out of his arxe and behave a bit more appropriately he might earn a bit more respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LiveinHope, I have no problems with VIP's going on these type of business trips.

I do have a problem however with Prince Andrew being seen as an appropriate VIP. This after recent revelations of him being massaged by a teenage girl employed by a paedophile.

A paedophile who seems to have had quite a close friendship with him and his mad ex wife...

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/41965190/ns/today-today_people/t/ferguson-got-k-loan-wealthy-pedophile/

Duchess of York admits accepting £15k from paedophile Jeffrey Epstein; 'Stand behind him,' pleads secret e-mail from Prince's press secretary.

The Duke of York paid the price for his association with a convicted paedophile as the Government decided to downgrade his role as Britain’s trade ambassador.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/8365239/The-Duke-of-York-pays-for-his-links-to-child-sex-offender.html

What annoys me, and I'm sure most other people, is not just his sense of entitlement but his incredible arrogance.

An arrogance that almost seems to know no boundaries.

Someone should give this oaf an almighty kick up the backside and teach him the basic rules of diplomacy.

We are all living in very troubled economic times. Most people understand this, but not everyone.

When Prince Andrew decides to extract his head out of his arxe and behave a bit more appropriately he might earn a bit more respect.

The DoY doesn't send himself on these trips. Perhaps his back office lobby for him to have this role, but at the end of the day, and for whatever reason, he has been, and still is, selected as an appropriate VIP by HM Govt for certain business trips.

Therefore as you say, your argument should be directed at BIS as you do not think he is an appropriate choice of VIP.

All the original DM story provides is an obfuscation of facts to create an illusion that it believes will sympathise with the views of its readership "Air Miles Andy sponging on the taxpayer". Any business trip of a similar nature with a different VIP is likely to have cost around 150k, and then you have to also factor in the prestige value of a Royal presence in Saudi Arabia.

I am not defending the DoY, but the DM journalism is so poor it is not worth consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DoY doesn't send himself on these trips. Perhaps his back office lobby for him to have this role, but at the end of the day, and for whatever reason, he has been, and still is, selected as an appropriate VIP by HM Govt for certain business trips.

Therefore as you say, your argument should be directed at BIS as you do not think he is an appropriate choice of VIP.

All the original DM story provides is an obfuscation of facts to create an illusion that it believes will sympathise with the views of its readership "Air Miles Andy sponging on the taxpayer". Any business trip of a similar nature with a different VIP is likely to have cost around 150k, and then you have to also factor in the prestige value of a Royal presence in Saudi Arabia.

I am not defending the DoY, but the DM journalism is so poor it is not worth consideration.

Isn't he a multimilliionaire thanks to British taxpayers? I.e. reverse Robin Hood -> taking money off the poor to give to the insanely wealthy to keep them in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't he a multimilliionaire thanks to British taxpayers? I.e. reverse Robin Hood -> taking money off the poor to give to the insanely wealthy to keep them in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

Yep, money-wise he's a lucky lump of tissue by birth. Wouldn't want the accompanying 'terms and conditions' myself.

But that has nothing to do with the ad-hominem DM story. Why not report differently:

"Prince Andrew was sent as part of a business delegation to Saudia Arabia on a trip that cost 150K, which suggests he continues to be used in his role as UK Business Ambassador despite recent reports to the contrary".

Then argue whether the DoY is the right choice by all means. I would say that a Royal probably was worthwhile on this trip and judged to be so by BIS. I am sure the businesses who asked for the trip would also have had a say about the presence of the DoY, and probably requested his presence.

It probably didn't matter which Royal btw, but The Boss and Charles probably to high up, Anne too busy and a woman, Wills has a job and also too high profile, Edward to junior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would quite expect that 'other commitments' was a a simple 'p1ss off I've got better things to do than answer your questions' to the journalist, although we will never know.

Do you not feel we have a right to know ? The irony is that 150k for this flight pales into insignificance compared with their other "costs". Who would I send ? No idea whatsoever,do I need to have such an opinion ? How much should it cost ? Well thanks for asking. Ultimately you'd find a way to defend "Andy's" position come what may. I have nothing more to say,thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you not feel we have a right to know ? The irony is that 150k for this flight pales into insignificance compared with their other "costs". Who would I send ? No idea whatsoever,do I need to have such an opinion ? How much should it cost ? Well thanks for asking. Ultimately you'd find a way to defend "Andy's" position come what may. I have nothing more to say,thank you.

What a ridiculous post.

If you read what I have said, I have been entirely consistent. Not once have I sought to defend 'Andy' as a business ambassador.

But, you cannot blame him for a 150K flight when he is requested to go to Saudi Arabia as part of a business delegation. By all means criticise the choice of person by BIS, even the need for a VIP, or the cost, but in the context of the trip you cannot criticise the person for the flight or its cost, which the story sought sensationally to do.

I can tell you that the businesses involved would have requested Andy's presence, and so they obviously thought him worth it, warts 'n all.

And the vague answer which can be taken as a 'p1ss off I've got better things to do' to the journalistic question, would have likely come from BIS, just to clarify. And, as to your question do we have a right to know?, well probably, but it is so trivial that I would prefer the Gov't focus on drumming up foreign business than answering such self serving journalistic questions, personally. Treated with the contempt it deserved imo. As I said, the businesses involved would have requested 'Andy' and I am happy to let them be the judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, money-wise he's a lucky lump of tissue by birth. Wouldn't want the accompanying 'terms and conditions' myself.

But that has nothing to do with the ad-hominem DM story. Why not report differently:

"Prince Andrew was sent as part of a business delegation to Saudia Arabia on a trip that cost 150K, which suggests he continues to be used in his role as UK Business Ambassador despite recent reports to the contrary".

Then argue whether the DoY is the right choice by all means. I would say that a Royal probably was worthwhile on this trip and judged to be so by BIS. I am sure the businesses who asked for the trip would also have had a say about the presence of the DoY, and probably requested his presence.

It probably didn't matter which Royal btw, but The Boss and Charles probably to high up, Anne too busy and a woman, Wills has a job and also too high profile, Edward to junior.

As a Royal, his role is to help the UK.

He should have paid the £150k for the flight from 'his own' pocket, i.e. from all the monies he and his family have got from the rest of the population for centuries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Royal, his role is to help the UK.

He should have paid the £150k for the flight from 'his own' pocket, i.e. from all the monies he and his family have got from the rest of the population for centuries.

To clarify, I'm not complaining that he was chosen to go and went.

What I'm not happy about is that yet again the bankrupt taxpayers of this country are funding multi-millionaires, in this case one whose role should be to go AND PAY FOR IT HIMSELF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Royal, his role is to help the UK.

He should have paid the £150k for the flight from 'his own' pocket, i.e. from all the monies he and his family have got from the rest of the population for centuries.

That is a different argument.

I would argue though that being able to trot out a 'Royal' is often desirable. It is a strange world that makes this necessary, however.

Now, given that it is a strange world, is the lack of freedom that these 'lumps of tissue' endure (there but for the grace of God go I) recompensed by their inherited wealth. Should they endure the lack of freedom and pay for the privilege as you argue? OK, great education, never having to earn a crust, but would you trade places ? I would walk away for the freedom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify, I'm not complaining that he was chosen to go and went.

What I'm not happy about is that yet again the bankrupt taxpayers of this country are funding multi-millionaires, in this case one whose role should be to go AND PAY FOR IT HIMSELF.

If you take that argument to its extreme it makes no sense. And as I say, it will have been the businesses that asked for His participation and they will have had to justify it to BIS. In effect a subsidy to them.

What you are asking for is a different funding model for the Royal. OK. Different argument. What the OP was about was the disingenuous DM story. Posters on these fora are usually pretty hot on poor journalism and VI spin when it comes to the housing market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the vague answer which can be taken as a 'p1ss off I've got better things to do' to the journalistic question, would have likely come from BIS, just to clarify. And, as to your question do we have a right to know?, well probably, but it is so trivial that I would prefer the Gov't focus on drumming up foreign business than answering such self serving journalistic questions, personally. Treated with the contempt it deserved imo. As I said, the businesses involved would have requested 'Andy' and I am happy to let them be the judge.

Contempt huh - you really are something else aren't you. This clearly is a trivial event to yourself - but not so trivial that you can't for some reason let it go,I wonder why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contempt huh - you really are something else aren't you. This clearly is a trivial event to yourself - but not so trivial that you can't for some reason let it go,I wonder why.

As you seem to attack the person rather than the argument I'll sink to your level and say that you were quite right in your previous post

"[you] have nothing more to say"

Why can't I let it go? because I am running a tedious computer programme in the background that I need to keep an eye on and I like accurate reporting; the DM in the OP was disingenuous, unsurprisingly. I also happened to be surprised at what seemed to me to be a lack of understanding about the how the DoY is used in a business role; this appeared apparent by the OP taking the DM story without question at face value. I agree, I should have given up with this thread a long time ago probably and amused myself instead with the OT at "unsustainable future" where you don't appear to post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 334 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.