E-petition about Margaret Thatcher's funeral

The funeral should be privatised
I saw this and you know, given various things that went on it's not such a bad idea.

 

I totally agree.
I'm sure Thatcher herself and Cameron would approve.

 

Has it been decreed that she will have a state funeral, or is it just talk?

 

It's just talk. Gordon Brown was pushing for it when he was PM for some reason.

The last ex-PM to have one was Winston Churchill in 1965, but he was rather exceptional, I'm sure everyone will agree.

 

Reasons for a state funeral are here:

Margaret Thatcher will deserve a state funeral – even if it upsets her critics – Telegraph Blogs

 

sell it to Philip Green for a penny, which should represent good value for the taxpayer

 

Saw the petition. If it said that she should not have a state funeral then I would have happily signed it. Bring her to the valleys of South Wales, I'm sure the colliers she threw out of work would dig the hole with their bare hands to make sure she gets to Hades.

 

dont privatise the funeral we have to tackle a deficit right let keen people willing to dig the hole do it for free and it will save tons in hiring costs. People will do it since they will be willing to help bury thatcher anyways

 

I have no specific ill-will towards Thatcher myself, but I'm more inclined to think the nation would be more split than that article indicates. Peter Oborne's article will probably resonate with a lot of people - just look at gibbsy's comment above.

Margaret Thatcher deserves every honour.

 

I dont see anything exceptionaL about Thatcher though apart from odious.If she gets one then i think the likes of Skinner do as well

 

How dare you speak ill of the Iron Lady She was a glorious leader and a shining example for this country. I demand you apologize for that comment.

On a serious note who cares about thatcher i dont?

Gotta love sarcasim eh la gran siete

 

The difference is Thatcher led her party to repeated electoral success for a decade. Skinner just spent a lifetime failing to achieve.

 

As did Blair. Is anyone suggesting he should get state funeral as well?
Skinner achieved consistent electoral success and has been over the years one of the most conscientious back benchers in HOC where he is also one of the most respected because of his undoubted honesty.Couple that with the fact he came from the coalface and rose to prominence in politics speaks volumes for him. I dont actually think he merits such a funeral but then neither does Thatcher ,who had as many enemies as admirers

 

Who ordered the sinking of the Belgrano?

Who caused the collapse of the coal mines and cost millions of people there jobs and lively hood?

Who took away all the milk from school children?

Who caused a heckler barge into the houses of parliament and then shout for her own party to be out of power because people wanted jobs?

Thatcher that's who so what gives you the right to say skinner failed to achieve when the person your defending cocked up non stop?

Face facts the tories haven't a clue

 

Mods, can we set up a 'Cartoons' forum for Gaz - I think he is probably better prepared to post on that topic, rather than politics or economics.

Sidicks

 

Hi sidlicks was wondering where you got to

I dont want a cartoons forum but thankyou for the suggestion

 

Any reason that's on your list?

 

He was Prime Minister for a long time - he has to be a candidate for one.

But he is a political failure. I have no doubt that some on the left hold him up as someone who shares their ideals - but it misses the point that those ideas have been kept in the wilderness for decades because of the failure of people like Skinner.

 

Again Skinner speaks the truth doesn't matter if he fails since he has been honest that has always been the best policy

 

of course he isnt a political failure .If he was he would not have be reelected so many times.The fact he never made the front benches doesnt make him a failure. He was an effective backbencher who always represented his constituency with great fervour and whose honesty and candourh was held in high regard across the house.Even Thatcher respected him

 

You are confusing concepts. Of course we can respect Skinner for his beliefs (however misguided) but this is a world apart from being effective. GAZBEROTTEN inadvertently made the point - whether you agreed with them or not Thatcher made key, life/country changing decisions. The hatred for her by some on the left is acknowledgement of that success. By contrast Skinner has achieved nothing other than being a political minority even in his own party. He failed to achieve even a portion of the change he entered politics to achieve. For that he should die in obscurity.

 

I doubt Skinner ever aspired to be a front bencher nor did he set out to make key life/country changing decisions.He is just a very good parliamentarian, who has served his constituency well. His attendance record is second to none plus he is man of great integrity who stuck to his principles , which is something one cannot say about the majority in the house.
He will be remembered fondly by those he served at Bolsover.
Thatcher may have had her fans but then so did Sadam and Gaddafi

 

Skinner achieved nothing. Can you name a single piece of legislation he has sponsored and pushed through?

His electoral success was purely based on being in a safe constituency. You could have put a red rosette on a pig in his constituency, and it would have won.

He may be a man of principles and integrity, I don't think anyone is disputing that. But he was a minority in his own party, failing to even get his own party on side let alone the rest of the country.

 

How did he fail if he was elected by the people countless times

 

He's represented the same Labour rotten borough since 1970, as has already been stated. The guy's a 79 year old gobsh*te and ex-union waster that hasn't done a stroke of work for decades. He should have retired, or been forcably retired decades ago. If he's Labour's poster boy then they really are in the wilderness ..again.

 

You do realise that the Bolsover seat is a Labour Party stronghold and a former mining area?

A donkey with a red rose could retain that seat!

Sidicks

 

Gordon Brown suggested it of Margaret. Blair led a possibly illegal war.

Originally it was Admiral Sandy Woodward as he was worried the task force would be caught in a pincer movement with the Argentine Carrier coming one way and the Belgrano and her escorts the other. He flashed a message knowing it would be read by Whitehall and then having seen the situation it was agreed by the cabinet it should go ahead. The Belgrano's escort ships were actually probably the greater threat as they carried exocets. Either way taking out the threat from the Belgrano and her escorts just meant the task force could worry about the carrier alone. After the sinking the Argentine Navy legged it anyway. Afterwards we got the Falkland's back and the Argentine Military Junta collapsed to be replaced by a democracy as the fact they got the Islands for a few weeks was the only popular thing it achieved. So Margaret is responsible for the democracy in Argentina coming along in part.

Arthur Scargill and the unions with their intransigence. They still believed that unelected union leaders should hold democratically elected governments to ransom. At the time the coal miners held a lot of public support. If they had agreed a few unprofitable pits should close they would have had public support. They fought the government head on over everything, and the public still remembering the 70's saw that the unions still wanted more of the same. As a result Labour was kept out for years until finally New Labour came along and the public felt that Labour could be trusted again. The reason that there is now ballots over strikes and that strikes are actually for a worthwhile cause is all down to Thatcher.

BBC News - Why is free milk for children such a hot topic?
But on becoming prime minister in 1970, Edward Heath asked all of his ministers to find budget cuts in their departments, as David Cameron did last year.

Mrs Thatcher, the then education minister, was asked to find savings of £9m, some £90m in today's money. In 1971, free milk for primary school children cost £14m a year - twice as much as was being spent on school books.

Her biographer, John Campbell, said she took the view it was more important to spend money on buildings and books. She thought things like free school meals and milk were for social services and nothing to do with education.

As she explained in 1971: "Many, many mothers can provide their children with milk or give them a certain amount to take to school, say 10p a week to buy their milk. What they cannot do is to see that their children are taught in the proper buildings.

"Many children are but many are sent to school in very bad conditions - I think it is our first job to get those right."

In 1968, Labour had cut milk for secondary pupils, so she thought the move was an extension of that, which had been fairly uncontroversial.

Maybe you might want to face a few facts.

 

Pigs, donkeys, pretty much any farmyard animal. ;-)

 

ask his constituents what they think of him and what he has achieved for them. Speaks volumes for the man.His voting record is also excellent.Of course he represented one wing of the party, but what of it? Both major parties are broad churches and he has never compromised his values.Another thing despite, being almost an octogenarian and having gone through a life threatening illness, he still attends the HOC regularly
I have huge respect for the man, just as I do for Tony Benn ,even though i may not agree with him on some issues.The house would be all the poorer without people of that ilk

 

And you think that deserves a state funeral???

You mean he does the job he is paid to do - why is that so remarkable??

Sidicks