On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 01:08:20 -0000, "bm" wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 26/03/2013 23:42, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:47, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
HM Coastguard runs the ones around here and AIUI, they will oversee
the
new service in much the same way. Personally, in times when the
Services' budget is being cut, I would rather see what money there
is
going to equip the troops on the front lines.

As I understood it, they were paid to provide the service.

The problem is that, if they were to continue to do it, they would
need
to replace their ageing fleet of helicopters and SAR helicopters are
fairly specialised bits of kit.

And a private contractor gets these for free?


They don't come out of the defence budget at the expense of other things
the Armed Forces need.

Ah - the nonsense of one government body saving money by spending more tax
payer's hard earned in a different way.

Rather like the way they reduced the number of civil servants by sacking
the cleaners and giving the work to a contractor in the H of P. Which cost
more in actual cash terms - but looked wonderful on paper.

Our local council has come up with a winner - council tax - if you own an
empty house you used to get a rebate of 50%. Not any more, if your house is
now empty for 2 years you now pay 150% council tax. So, you own the house,
it has f-all to do with the council (IMO), you are using far less services,
bin collections etc but it costs you 150% ? C'mon. I'm wondering which way
to go on this, it can't be legal, shirley?

Our local authority actually PAYS a couple of FULL TIME trade union
officials at the Civic Centre _and_ provides them with office
facilities...

--
Frank Erskine
Sunderland