General Chat

Kay ????

At least half the cash required ? Mark Thatcher who is alleged to be worth £64. million could finance on his own ! ;-)

I think from the guest list of mournesr can raise at least half the cash on Wednesday,,,,,,,, :-D.

Thanks for postings this Linda , but having read about this proposal I am not convinced this will ever come to fruition.The reason for my doubts are that this will rely on donations and not set up from funds from Lady Thatcher herself.

Read morehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2308950/Museum-library-devoted-Margaret-Thatcher-form-permanent-memorial-Iron-Lady.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

I heard on sky news they are going to build at a library in her name like they have in America its going to cost about £15m and its going to teach our youngesters her values they have got £1m towards it already.

"No, there isn't a vacancy for a new leader"

I found this gem which I hope might raise a smile.

'Mrs Thatcher was a woman of staunch Christian faith and was positively devout in her last years, indeed she had resigned herself to death, and was looking forward to seeing her beloved Dennis again. The thought of the Iron Lady, handbag firmly in place standing at the Pearly Gates proved irresitable for our brilliant cartoonist #### who invited readers to write a caption for his drawing of her confronting St Peter. As a ##### employee I can't win the competition, but I would suggest something along the lines of "Welcome Lady Thatcher, you'll find your husband in the bar." ' !!

I do hope so!

As Winston Churchill's funeral was a State one in 1965, all funerals of former P.M.'s since have been private.

This one is a Military funeral - nearly 50 years later is hardly setting a precedent. H.M. attended Churchill's funeral, she relied on him heavily when she inherited the throne. H.M. must have very good reason to attend Baroness Thatcher's one.

Mayfield, no need to apologise for drifting off the subject, I will only get upset if the thread turns into a "for and against Thatcher bashing saga" as some other threads have :-)

Hi Mayfield,

I'm a bit sensitive about privacy and children - part of my job.

There are a few cases when MMR is contra-indicated and the reasons for that should remain private and not speculated upon. That's maybe why most politicians adopt a "never confirm never deny" posture where their children are concerned.

The press shouldn't be allowed to speculate on the health of children, no matter who their parents are.

OFITG, that's my feeling, as I said earlier.

I agree she was successful in getting the EU drawback, the cost of the funeral still concerns me as does the possibility that this may be used as a precedent in the future.

Hi Guinevere,
I was commenting on the point raised by a previous poster regarding PM's who earn huge amounts after retiring.

Mr Blairs childern's health and personal privacy would not have been compromised in any way by revealing they had received the MMR if they in fact had done, remember people were being given no choice MMR or nothing.

I apologise that the point is off subject, but seeing so many children suffering from measles because parents were scared off having them done, I gave in to the temptation of referring to it.


Mayfield

The funeral costs - I would surmise that they have increased greatly due to anti feeling and threats of protesters.

However, due to Baroness's dealings with EU, she got a drawback in 1984 (which no one thought she would get) and which is still being repaid to this country is currently £5 billion per year.

Considering the amount of overseas aid we give to countries who no longer need it and have said so (India for one) and to countries ruled by despots, the cost of the funeral is buttons.

Kay????, again I am going off topic, but I think that the reports about her house and tax havens are hinting at Mark Thatchers alleged connection with off shore tax havens, we should keep in mind she was a frail old lady who in her latter years was increasingly prone to memory loss, so could be that due to that someone in the family was dealing with her affairs, and let's face it Mark Thatcher was involved in a lot of dodgy dealings ;-)

I think it's likely that she would have used legal tax avoidance methods, it's only recently that it's become a "scandal" to do so.

Personally I dont belive that Mrs T as a mother would leave anything dodgy behind to later be discovered and her children left to face any public glare and backlash.... the property could have always been rented,

Mayfield, what has that to do with Thatcher's funeral?

The health of the children of MPs is none of our business, surely?

Privacy laws and all that. Although that didn't stop the News of the Screws splashing that Brown's son has CF. Dreadful.

Merlin, re tax dodger, not the subject of the thread, but this is the link ;-)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-tax-snatcher-mystery-1828441

Regarding Lindi's post on Mr Blair.
Perhaps the security protection for ex pm's should be means tested the same a benifits for everyone else?

By the by, the measles epidemic in wales.
Had a certain prime minister when he was asked if his kids had had the MMR jab confirmed they had, so confirming he had full confidence in it many more would have taken it up.
Now I wonder why he felt it would be so wrong to reveal the details of his childrens treatment to any one!

Mayfield

My own personal view is that the funeral should have been a semi-private event, with government representatives, a representative of the Queen, and perhaps a Guard of Honour of Pensioners from the Royal Hospital Chelsea, a place she had a close association with, followed at a later date with a memorial service at either, Westminster Abbey, St Paul's Cathedral, or the Chapel of St Mary Undercroft in the Palace of Westminster.

Unfortunately everything following the announcement of Baroness Thatcher's death has been hijacked by the protesters and the government. I am trying to avoid bringing politics into the equation, and that is not east, but I am trying to get my head round, why an event on this scale was agreed to.

What I cannot get my head round is:-

1) Baroness Thatcher died on Monday 08 April 2013, Parliament was in recess yet David Cameron recalled Parliament, why, could the tributes not wait until Parliament returned from the Easter recess?

2) Following the announcement of her death. it was widely reported that there were going to be a lot of protests in the days running up to and including the day of the funeral, some reports said some could lead to riots, yet a public, expensive, and extravagant funeral on the scale of a State Funeral, was announced, why when everybody knew, not only was this asking for trouble, it was inviting trouble?

During Baroness Thatcher's time in office it is alleged she courted controversy, sadly it appears that in death she is doing the same.

These various events will cost the tax-payer considerable sums of money and this whole sorry saga of events needs to be looked into, as something is going on here behind the scenes.

It was tongue in cheek following revelations about Thatcher's tax avoidance, Merlin.

Still not understanding why you tried to switch the attention to Blair on a thread about Thatcher's funeral.