I'm not a fan, but to be fair to him, Blair was Prime Minister for ten years, and won three elections. Seems fair enough to me.
I imagine there would be a similar vote if/when Teresa May gets put up for a peerage.
+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b1986283.html..
I see 600, 000 disagree .
Can imagine a few angry faces in the bowels of Labour ,looks like Kier is on the war path, perhaps Tony is coming back into the Labour fold .
I'm not a fan, but to be fair to him, Blair was Prime Minister for ten years, and won three elections. Seems fair enough to me.
I imagine there would be a similar vote if/when Teresa May gets put up for a peerage.
This is plain and simple..The rich and powerful look after the rich and powerful. There is one exception because it's something so awful that the general public can't accept it without punishment. Pedophilia.
Totally disagree, just because someone was PM shouldn't automatically qualify for a gong in my opinion. Also Tony leaves a very tortuous legacy for many. Yes this sounds like the elite looking after their own yet again.
It will be Sir Boris Johnson a decade from now.
The Honours System is an archaic waste of time.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics.../01/04/08748/1
Only 14% of people approve of Blair's knighthood
Sir Tony is a personal appointment by the Queen, not one that's gone to committee for approval.
Agree with it or not, a petition won't change her mind.
Honestly don’t know how the guy sleeps at night…..what a wrong un he turned out to be
Knight agrees with other bloke becoming a Knight whilst the Lord of Darkness Mandleson nods approvingly.
A good example of why we need to scrap the entire honours system apart from for "ordinary" members of the public who've done great things for charity etc.
No former PMs or other MPs, civil servants, party donors, businessmen and women, sportspeople, actors or musicians.
It's nice to give awards for good service, to recognise work and achievement and it could give some attention to a good cause. They're not necessarily bad things but the strange way we do them tends to show what we're like as a country. The important, fancy people must be clearly labelled and take their place in the fairytale hierarchy. The names change to distant everyone from the hoi polloi although some wear the "honour" lightly.
No probs, but I don't mean it's good to receive the accolade but that it's good to give them as a sign of recognition. And this only for the general public. You make a fair point about knighthoods being used as favours etc but they'd lose that kind of value if you knock the daft titles out of the equation.
Don't think the Queen was or is a fan of old Tony , hence the 14 year wait , sounds like it was an award that had to be given in end with a sigh 😕.
Sir Keir had nowhere to turn when asked, and has shown a liking for some of Blair's Tory lite type politics ,which won't appeal to the grassroots of his party ?
Wonder what Corbyn and his supportors think , and do next 🤔
I know folk hate the mail but this is worth a read :
Tony Blair's Defence Secretary says he was told to BURN memo https://mol.im/a/10369343 via https://dailym.ai/android
I know someone who works for the BBC World Service and, putting aside the incredble funds raised as a result, was rather begrudging of the media attention that the pensioner, 'Sir Tom', was given courtesy of his very media-savvy and wealthy daughter. And the McCann's, a media-savvy couple seemed to have more attention focussed on the loss of their daughter than perhaps a run-of-the-mill working class couple. Such situations muddy the waters as to who exactly are 'ordinary people'.
Am I right in thinking, olde Tony’s Mrs, was involved in taking our troops to court for alleged “War crimes” !
of course kier starmer would think that.
I've mixed feelings on Tony Blair. The Iraq war of course completely muddies the water on what was otherwise a pretty successful period for him as Prime Minister.
To be elected three times is no mean feat, and governing for ten years means he has had a hugely significant role in the life of the country and it's people.
I don't think being a controversial figure should bar someone from being knighted tbh. We don't really want to live in such an anodyne world do we? By definition, nearly all figures will be controversial or have some enemies.
I'm okay with it. But more than anything, does it matter that much? I'm not opposed to the honours system, but I don't pay great attention to it either.