Reply to: Should UK taxpayers pay for Papa visit?

[minestrone]

Looking through my record collection I found this:

Living Legends

You're hard.

[darmstadt]

AFAIK, anyone attending has to pay anyway and you can't go to see him if you're not a Catholic really:

Can I travel to an event on my own?

No, unfortunately not. You must be attached to a group from a Catholic parish to attend one of the public celebrations. Each group will be assigned a PILGRIM LEADER. The Pilgrim Leader will be present at the security points and will be able to vouch for the members of their group.

Won't get many converts that way will you?

You can donate to the 7 million its apparently costing...

Looking through my record collection I found this:

Living Legends

[Zippy]

The Pope is a head of state so we should pay - whether you subscribe to a particular religion is irrelevant. I don't think Obama would get asked for his credit card when he visits.

[minestrone]

No taxpayers should not pay.

Football clubs are charged for the cost of policing of crowds. Whats the difference?

Was it a done deal under the previous Governemnt? Certainly has the stench of a Tony Blair legacy about it.

Football clubs only pay a percentage of the costs (maybe 10%) and that is for police directly in the ground.

You argument does not stack up if you use that point.

[minestrone]

Speaking as an atheist, I really don't see what the fuss is about. Whether you agree with his teachings or not (I definately don't), he holds significant faith-based representation of a large percentage of the world's population, so should be afforded due diplomatic respect.

The last time the Dalai Lama was in London, no doubt we picked up the tab for his security arrangements - and no-one batted an eyelid.

Okay, the scale is bigger, but the principle is the same. Either we have to become like North Korea and completely close our borders, or there are certain costs that have to be paid for - and hosting foreign dignatories is one of them.

As I understand it, the Catholic church are contributing to the cost of the papal aspects of the visit, so I'm quite happy with it.

Well said.

[Flashman]

No taxpayers should not pay.

Football clubs are charged for the cost of policing of crowds. Whats the difference?

Was it a done deal under the previous Governemnt? Certainly has the stench of a Tony Blair legacy about it.

[centurian]

Speaking as an atheist, I really don't see what the fuss is about. Whether you agree with his teachings or not (I definately don't), he holds significant faith-based representation of a large percentage of the world's population, so should be afforded due diplomatic respect.

The last time the Dalai Lama was in London, no doubt we picked up the tab for his security arrangements - and no-one batted an eyelid.

Okay, the scale is bigger, but the principle is the same. Either we have to become like North Korea and completely close our borders, or there are certain costs that have to be paid for - and hosting foreign dignatories is one of them.

As I understand it, the Catholic church are contributing to the cost of the papal aspects of the visit, so I'm quite happy with it.

[minestrone]

A Government spokesman said: "The Holy See is an internationally-recognised nation with significant influence across the world, while the Catholic Church has a billion adherents.

"The Pope is visiting at the invitation of the Queen. It is right and proper that the British Government should pay a share of the costs of the visit."

Right, let us cut to the chase, Prince Andrew wants a game of golf and gets a helicopter to take him up to St Andrews for a round which costs 'the taxpayer' 10 grand. Lizzie has managed to 'find' a fortune of 800 million which we top up every year.

[AtW]

If it costs the taxpayer then it is reasonable to ask for some advertising space to sell to firms like Durex ...

[Pogle]

I was under the impression that the Catholic Church IS paying for some of the cost - our Diocese has been given a hefty target to meet, which will all come from donations from the Congregation.

Personally i think the money could be better spent to alleviate a lot of hardship and suffering, but what the heck do I know.

[minestrone]

Drove past the park last night and the work is already getting done to get the mass ready.

[Green Mango]

Yes.

6 million Catholics in this country have a right to have 12 million spent on them once every 30 years to have the pope over here.

I don't remember any Catholic getting in a strop about how much gay pride marches cost.

I agree, 12 million is a drop in the ocean and it allows the pope to meet some of the millions of
Catholics in the UK.

[minestrone]

Yes.

6 million Catholics in this country have a right to have 12 million spent on them once every 30 years to have the pope over here.

I don't remember any Catholic getting in a strop about how much gay pride marches cost.

[xoggoth]

Certainly not. Head of state? Some state, the only reason it takes 25 minutes to get from the Vatican entrance to the Cistine chapel is because they walk you round and round in circles. Would we splash out that much if the president or whatever of San Marinio or Lichtenstein was visiting?

[HairyArsedBloke]

Should UK taxpayers pay for Papa visit?

No.

Next question please?