Liz Truss' £500,000 (plus) flight to Aus on private jet. Paid for by UK tax payers.

NotSpaghetti Fri 28-Jan-22 08:53:19
Petera it was 2007, apparently,

I apologise for misleading Gransnet; I understand the anger of the nation and as soon as I get out of this fridge I shall insist on the resignation of one of my junior advisors.

Callistemon21

Every cloud has a silver lining! Even if it is finding a nugget of information.

It took off two hours after the regular Qantas departure from Heathrow, which went nonstop to Darwin in Australia’s Northern Territory and continued to Sydney
I didn't know there was a non-stop flight to Darwin!
?

I heard this the other day. Have the flights started to land in Darwin because Western Australia is still pretty much closed?

parsley3 , I have never flown first class but I believe sleeping is much easier than in the back. Even business class have flat ‘beds’. She could probably managed a short kip.

This is not a private jet it is one of two fully U.K. liveried planes for use by Government officials and the royal family.

It was just not Ms. Truss onboard, she was accompanied by up to 30 Trade Envoys, along with security.

If the U.K. wants to play with the big boys than we have to be seen to be a big boy

GrannyGravy13

This is not a private jet it is one of two fully U.K. liveried planes for use by Government officials and the royal family.

It was just not Ms. Truss onboard, she was accompanied by up to 30 Trade Envoys, along with security.

If the U.K. wants to play with the big boys than we have to be seen to be ^a big boy^

Even at £8000 each, it would have halved the cost to fly commercial. (Why would trade envoys and security need to fly 1st class, btw, even if Lady Truss deserves too?)

PamelaJ1In my experience long haul business seats are nearly flat and are usually in twos.

First Class are fully flat and are in self contained modules .

GrannyGravy13

This is not a private jet it is one of two fully U.K. liveried planes for use by Government officials and the royal family.

It was just not Ms. Truss onboard, she was accompanied by up to 30 Trade Envoys, along with security.

If the U.K. wants to play with the big boys than we have to be seen to be ^a big boy^

Then it should put on its big boy pants and set an example, rather than just copying bad behaviour

Petera

GrannyGravy13

This is not a private jet it is one of two fully U.K. liveried planes for use by Government officials and the royal family.

It was just not Ms. Truss onboard, she was accompanied by up to 30 Trade Envoys, along with security.

If the U.K. wants to play with the big boys than we have to be seen to be ^a big boy^

Then it should put on its big boy pants and set an example, rather than just copying bad behaviour

They weren't playing. They were conducting government business. The chartered plane (or whatever its title is) means they can discuss things easily and rest more easily and it saves time by not having the usual airport faffing around.

I think people know this really and if it had been politicians of the right colour they would use the same arguments and justifications. And quite right too.

I think people know this really and if it had been politicians of the right colour they would use the same arguments and justifications. And quite right too.

What a load of rubbish! No politician should be doing this. Of any party, country or colour. She isn't the PM FFS.

Baggs I agree with by using playing instead of negotiating I now see how my post could be misinterpreted.

Baggs

Petera

GrannyGravy13

This is not a private jet it is one of two fully U.K. liveried planes for use by Government officials and the royal family.

It was just not Ms. Truss onboard, she was accompanied by up to 30 Trade Envoys, along with security.

If the U.K. wants to play with the big boys than we have to be seen to be ^a big boy^

Then it should put on its big boy pants and set an example, rather than just copying bad behaviour

They weren't playing. They were conducting government business. The chartered plane (or whatever its title is) means they can discuss things easily and rest more easily and it saves time by not having the usual airport faffing around.

I think people know this really and if it had been politicians of the right colour they would use the same arguments and justifications. And quite right too.

So do you disagree with Liz Truss (2007) or disagree with Liz Truss (2022)?

And your last sentence may give you some succour, but noone else is taken in. It is equivalent to me writing that everyone who is defending this would also have defended it for politicians of any colour.

Excuses , Excuses again. Surely at this time , with so many people in poverty Truss could have swallowed her pride and travelled on a normal flight , in the same way that she could have chosen an equally good restaurant (but with an excellent reputation~)~ instead of an hugely expensive dining club for her entertaining.

Same with the RF they cost £13 million on private jets helicopters which are also very bad for the environment when they have taken scheduled flights they should continue
Climate change hypocrites

Petera

NotSpaghetti Fri 28-Jan-22 08:53:19
Petera it was 2007, apparently,

I apologise for misleading Gransnet; I understand the anger of the nation and as soon as I get out of this fridge I shall insist on the resignation of one of my junior advisors.

Ha ha!
Wasn't trying to be clever. Sorry.
Was particularly annoyed it was a considered piece in a dissertation, not just an "off the cuff" idea though.

Going off at a slight tangent because the plane is GB branded it can only be used by the Government so cannot be leased out commercially. If Liz hadn’t used it then when would it be used? It’s leased for 2 years. It would be interesting to see what it looks like inside - does it have conference tables etc? If so I can see it would be more conducive for business than business class on an ordinary plane which does not facilitate this. I went business class to NZ and it would have been difficult if not impossible to conduct a meeting. It was good for sleeping though unlike those poor souls behind the curtain.

NotSpaghetti

Petera

NotSpaghetti Fri 28-Jan-22 08:53:19
Petera it was 2007, apparently,

I apologise for misleading Gransnet; I understand the anger of the nation and as soon as I get out of this fridge I shall insist on the resignation of one of my junior advisors.

Ha ha!
Wasn't trying to be clever. Sorry.
Was particularly annoyed it was a considered piece in a dissertation, not just an "off the cuff" idea though.

No problem NS

Very disappointing. Having seen her on TV a lot recently I’m at a loss as to why she’s even a contender for PM - although I realise the bar is set low!

I’m surprised Australia let her in as they have shut doors to everyone else lol. But seriously why do these rich people get off thinking it’s fine to waste so much money. Then tell us little folks to do our bit to save the planet and that’s not a dig at any party because labour would have done same thing.

Its disgusting, all the cabinet have their fingers in the till, its lucrative contracts for all their mates £8k lunches (Truss again) and goodness knows whatever else they can rustle up. I reckon they have lessons in how to rob the treasury and get away with it at Eton

I would like to say a huge thank you to those of you who voted conservative in the last GE and landed me with this group of self inflated, lying, cheating , back slapping , selfish people !

A total waste of money on a totally obnoxious woman.

She seems a right pain in the neck but in this case I think it was probably the right thing to do. Having said that, heaven help us if she gets to be PM,

Some of us are being so naive - do we really imagine she had anything to do with choosing how she got to Australia. When my job involved booking travel arrangements for my boss (not in politics) all he wanted to know was what time his taxi would pick him up for the airport, expecting everything to be taken care of.

GagaJo

*I think people know this really and if it had been politicians of the right colour they would use the same arguments and justifications. And quite right too.*

What a load of rubbish! No politician should be doing this. Of any party, country or colour. She isn't the PM FFS.

But wouldn't the same people be complaining if it had been the current PM using the plane?

123kitty

Some of us are being so naive - do we really imagine she had anything to do with choosing how she got to Australia. When my job involved booking travel arrangements for my boss (not in politics) all he wanted to know was what time his taxi would pick him up for the airport, expecting everything to be taken care of.

Good point.

Warning: somewhat shallow comment to follow.
Anyone who thinks it ok to wear thick black tights with bright orange shoes......?!? She tries to act all rock chick tough and it's frankly embarrassing as she's Ill informed if she thinks Britania rules any waves nowadays she is deluded! She needs to reserve comments until she knows what she's talking about, she'll get us into really hot water if she's allowed to keep shooting her mouth off without serious knowledge of the consequences