Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UK To Privatise Search And Rescue Operations  
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7701 posts, RR: 21
Posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1916 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

In furtherance of the government's clear intent to sell off everything that actually matters to the country, it appears that helicopter search and rescue operations currently operated by the coastguard, navy and RAF are now to be outsourced to private hands.

Is there nothing sacred to our politicians anymore? I am disgusted. I guess the Police will be next. Oh wait, front desk Police operations are already being privatised.   

Public services should not be subject to private greed and the sole motivation of profit.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/b...scue-poised-for-privatisation.html


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2718 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1906 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):

Public services should not be subject to private greed and the sole motivation of profit.

100% agree. Looks like the UK is intrenched in neo-Thatcherism...



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2849 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1897 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):
Is there nothing sacred to our politicians anymore?

This is a phenomenon occurring not only in the UK, but many other countries too.....

We are constantly feed the BS from Government, that once privatized, these services will be more efficient and cost effective.

There are just some things that Governments need to be responsible for, and this is one of them IMHO.

I don't buy it for a moment.. Sad !



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7701 posts, RR: 21
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1897 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 1):
100% agree. Looks like the UK is intrenched in neo-Thatcherism...

The thing is, while I may disagree with many examples of privatisation that have taken place in our country, I can often see at least some logic in the reasons for the plan, understanding to at least some extent why people might think it's a good plan. This, however, I can see absolutely no point in whatsoever. This is clearly the sort of thing that should remain solidly in the hands of the country.

[Edited 2013-03-17 16:27:49]


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1876 times:

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 1):
Looks like the UK is intrenched in neo-Thatcherism...

How'd the more liberal nationalization of various things work out?

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):
Is there nothing sacred to our politicians anymore?

When you mismanage a budget you lose the privilege of having things be sacred. But this probably doesn't need to be sacred anyway.

In the US, many ambulance services (including air ambulances) are private entities, either for profit or non-profits. The aviation companies that do aerial firefighting for to stop forest fires are also private companies and nothing is wrong with that. In fact, I think Europe also has at least some privatized emergency services as well.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7701 posts, RR: 21
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1872 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 4):
When you mismanage a budget you lose the privilege of having things be sacred

I don't know where you got that from. There is absolutely no suggestion that the search and rescue operation was mismanaged in a budgetary sense or indeed any other.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1867 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 5):
I don't know where you got that from. There is absolutely no suggestion that the search and rescue operation was mismanaged in a budgetary sense or indeed any other.

The government as a whole mismanaged their budget.

Even if the rescue operations are run with maximum efficiency, it's still a line item on the budget and therefore a legitimate place to look for savings.

I'd be curious to know if you express the same outrage when the RAF charters civilian planes to move their stuff rather than buying their own metal to do it.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineRomeoBravo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1864 times:

That's not really privatisation in the true sense of the word, more like outsourcing. It's still being tax funded as far as i can see. Privatising it wouldn't be a bad idea. Why should people who don't get lost at sea etc have to pay for people that do?

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):
Public services should not be subject to private greed and the sole motivation of profit.

What i find truly depressing in this country is how much the electorate love a good old mindless cliche. If you had said that on Question Time i'm sure you would have got a huge cheer.

What difference is it actually going to make? It's just outsourcing. Just like many defence contracts are outsoured to BAe ...should we be foaming at the mouth about their private greed? (I realise the gov still has some influence here).

I welcome any move that reduces public expenditure frankly. I don't actually care if the standards decline. We are completely and utterly broke and it's about time the Tories started to cut spending and not slow down its increase.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7886 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1847 times:

I think we need to read into this more... I think this could be a good thing or a bad thing honestly. Privatization can lead to corruption and cutting corners, while government funded programs tend to get bloated and inefficient. Just reading the headline and jumping to conclusions is not a wise course of action


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7701 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1824 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 6):

I'd be curious to know if you express the same outrage when the RAF charters civilian planes to move their stuff rather than buying their own metal to do it.

That is not the same thingn at all. When the RAF need extra lift they charter it, fine - this is actually more like paying a private company to actually just be the RAF in its entirety.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 7):
good old mindless cliche

It's anything but mindless or a cliche. It's about looking at the way privatisation of huge chunks of infrastructure and services has led to the public being ripped off with monotonous regularity, and vast amounts of public money being spent trying to monitor and rectify the hideously frequent cock-ups. Recent case in point - the Olympic security fiasco, where the army had to step in and sort things out. Train companies who can't deliver what they promise to win tenders, infrastructure projects coming in absurdly over budget despite the initial promises, transport prices rising way above inflation year after year, water systems crumbling, suffering from underinvestment and poor management while the consumer pays more and more, and all the while those at the top of the business tree take their fat bonus regardless. Major airports sold into foreign hands that focus on shopping revenue above public service. The list goes on and on. These are not the sort of things I want to apply to life-saving operations. Not to mention the fiasco with Virgin and the west coast rail tender fiasco, where even the initial selection process cannot be trusted. No, I'd be far happier with our professional armed forces and national emergency services dealing with this sort of thing.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1823 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 4):
In the US, many ambulance services (including air ambulances) are private entities, either for profit or non-profits.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 4):
The aviation companies that do aerial firefighting for to stop forest fires are also private companies and nothing is wrong with that.

Apples and Oranges. Those companies are expected to adhere to the same civil aviation regulations as every other operator. In other words: ops normal only. Search and Rescue is a totally different case. Military/Government SAR Crews are expected to operate in conditions that are below the safe minimums established for civilian operators, and cannot refuse individual missions due to their own personal safety. Yes, if you didn't know already, "50/50" SAR missions do exist if deemed necessary. A SAR crew can expect, and are trained for, the scenario where it could be a "one way trip" for one or more of them.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1817 times:

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 7):
That's not really privatisation in the true sense of the word, more like outsourcing.

True, but it's probably possible that some transfers of equipment or facilities would follow.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 9):
That is not the same thingn at all.

Sure it is. The RAF needs to move personnel or equipment from point A to point B. They can either charter a private company to do it for them or buy expensive aircraft and do it themselves. Likewise, there needs to be a service to perform search and rescue at which point the government can make the same choices: pay a private company or do it themselves. I doubt anyone being pulled from the icy water will care.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 9):
It's about looking at the way privatisation of huge chunks of infrastructure and services has led to the public being ripped off with monotonous regularity

Yeah, how awful not forcing people to pay for some hugely expensive pieces of infrastructure.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7701 posts, RR: 21
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1807 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 11):
Yeah, how awful not forcing people to pay for some hugely expensive pieces of infrastructure.

Erm, no. Obviously which ever system is selected, we pay.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 11):
They can either charter a private company to do it for them or buy expensive aircraft and do it themselves.

Nope. The RAF may use the services of private entities from time to time as they deem necessary. We are talking about the outsourcing of an entire public function. What you are talking about would be more like the RAF having to charter an extra helicopter or two to help with their search and rescue ops if perhaps they had a couple tech machines or a sudden extra demand for whatever reason. It is clearly not the same as privatising the entire thing.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4004 posts, RR: 28
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1800 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):
Public services should not be subject to private greed and the sole motivation of profit.

No, of course not, they should be subject to public greed with the sole motivation of power.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 7):
Privatising it wouldn't be a bad idea. Why should people who don't get lost at sea etc have to pay for people that do?

Actually, as far as I understand it (might be wrong, though), marine insurance is already supposed to reimburse governments / other providers for search and rescue operations. Of course that doesn't help in the case of the idiot who goes out on his jet-ski in bad weather, or the idiot who goes on a walk by the cliffs and forgets about tides.



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlinejohns624 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 916 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1797 times:

How is that any different than the Royal National Lifeboat Institution doing most of the sea rescues?

User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7701 posts, RR: 21
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1796 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 13):

No, of course not, they should be subject to public greed with the sole motivation of power.

With the small matter of elections, which allow those not doing well to be booted out. It's not perfect by a long shot, but it's better than the alternative. I am just sick of the country being sold off.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 13):
How is that any different than the Royal National Lifeboat Institution doing most of the sea rescues?

The RNLI is a charitable organisation, not a private company. More than that, it's part of our national heritage, founded in the early part of the 1800s with the sole aim of saving lives. It's the polar opposite of corporate greed.

Edit: Second quote should read Johns624, not Pyrex.

[Edited 2013-03-17 20:24:31]


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4004 posts, RR: 28
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1788 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 15):

With the small matter of elections, which allow those not doing well to be booted out.

When was the last time you voted a bureaucrat out of power?



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7701 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1778 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 16):
When was the last time you voted a bureaucrat out of power?

We vote governments out of power. Are you suggestion governments have absolutely no power over the running of public services?



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2849 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1767 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 11):
Yeah, how awful not forcing people to pay for some hugely expensive pieces of infrastructure.

When anything is privatized, one is generally charged some sort of fee/toll etc

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 13):
Actually, as far as I understand it (might be wrong, though), marine insurance is already supposed to reimburse governments / other providers for search and rescue operations.

As far as I recollect, this type of nautical Insurance is NOT compulsory, and is very rarely ever taken out, because its very expensive.



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1763 times:

Quoting TheCol (Reply 10):
Search and Rescue is a totally different case. Military/Government SAR Crews are expected to operate in conditions that are below the safe minimums established for civilian operators, and cannot refuse individual missions due to their own personal safety. Yes, if you didn't know already, "50/50" SAR missions do exist if deemed necessary. A SAR crew can expect, and are trained for, the scenario where it could be a "one way trip" for one or more of them.

There is no reason why civilians cannot be trained and insured to the same standards. Just put it in the contracts and make sure the expectations are clearly understood. For what it's worth, I don't think any volunteer firefighters take their jobs less seriously than full time firefighters so I don't see why civilian SAR pilots would be less serious than military.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 12):
Erm, no. Obviously which ever system is selected, we pay.

Someone does, but not necessarily taxpayers. Chicago got something like $1.8 billion for selling a lease on the Skyway.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 15):
The RNLI is a charitable organisation, not a private company.

Many emergency services in the US are set up similarly. Charitable organizations are private companies, by the way, just not for-profit ones.

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 18):
When anything is privatized, one is generally charged some sort of fee/toll etc

   So the cost is borne by the users rather than everyone. It's a very nice arrangement when you can make it work.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2450 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1754 times:

Havent CHC Scotia and Bond Helicopters before them operated SAR missions for decades? In fact I believe two of the S92's are registered G-SARB/C accordingly.


Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlineRomeoBravo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks ago) and read 1714 times:

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 13):
Actually, as far as I understand it (might be wrong, though), marine insurance is already supposed to reimburse governments / other providers for search and rescue operations. Of course that doesn't help in the case of the idiot who goes out on his jet-ski in bad weather, or the idiot who goes on a walk by the cliffs and forgets about tides.

That's the way it should and in which case it doesn't necessarily need to be in public hands at all. Ideally we'd have medical insurance over here and jetskiers or cliff-climbers could have rescue for that as an option in their coverage.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 9):
It's about looking at the way privatisation of huge chunks of infrastructure and services has led to the public being ripped off with monotonous regularity, and vast amounts of public money being spent trying to monitor and rectify the hideously frequent cock-ups. Recent case in point - the Olympic security fiasco, where the army had to step in and sort things out. Train companies who can't deliver what they promise to win tenders, infrastructure projects coming in absurdly over budget despite the initial promises, transport prices rising way above inflation year after year, water systems crumbling, suffering from underinvestment and poor management while the consumer pays more and more, and all the while those at the top of the business tree take their fat bonus regardless. Major airports sold into foreign hands that focus on shopping revenue above public service. The list goes on and on. These are not the sort of things I want to apply to life-saving operations. Not to mention the fiasco with Virgin and the west coast rail tender fiasco, where even the initial selection process cannot be trusted. No, I'd be far happier with our professional armed forces and national emergency services dealing with this sort of thing.

Basically the gov needs to grow a pair, put in some stiff performance penalties, and enforce them if necessary.


Quoting RussianJet (Reply 17):
We vote governments out of power. Are you suggestion governments have absolutely no power over the running of public services?

Problem with voting is it's free and it's nowhere near granular enough to address the huge complexities of an economy. People make better decision when their money is on the line.

In fact voting is a horrendus way of addressing these issue. That's why many of us propose small (tiny) government - when Britain was most powerful public spending was only 10% of GDP (excluding serious war periods). Now it's around 40%. It's no wonder we are a totally uncompetitive country now.

[Edited 2013-03-18 02:44:39]

User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1633 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):
There is no reason why civilians cannot be trained and insured to the same standards.

Civil Aviation and Military Aviation are kept completely separate for a reason. The whole point of SMS is to:

A. Mitigate safety hazards to the point where they become non-hazards.
B. Training and Encouraging personnel to identify safety risks and to refuse to work in those situations that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level (the preservation of life and limb of everybody is paramount).

When a reportable incident occurs, the TSB will investigate it with the goal of identifying the causes and establishing a course of action to prevent it from happening again. In other words, intentionally risking life and limb is not an acceptable practice in civil aviation. Enacting regulations to enable individual operators to supersede general regulations for some situations and not others will take them out of the scope of civil aviation. It's been tried, and it doesn't work safely for anybody.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 20):

They are still required to operate under the scope of civil aviation. No operating in situations that are deemed too hazardous.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2985 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1598 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):
that helicopter search and rescue operations currently operated by the coastguard

The Coastguard are and always have be a co-ordinating body.

The UK Coastguard has no helicopters or ships of any significance.

Almost all helicopters are already on contract from commercial companies.
CHC Scotia in the main

Fixed wing aircraft are provided by RVL.

Inshore rescue boats are provided by a very long standing charity the RNLI

Today there is very limited use of military resources - RAF Valley helicopters remain on duty covering the Northern Irish Sea Snowdonia and the Lake District however a CHC Sikorsky S92 is expected to take over the civil rescue missions soon. RN helicopters at Culdrose can be called upon however they are not the first line of call.

Other resources have already been removed notably Nimrod and deep water missions now requires help from France, Ireland and Netherlands.

Out sourcing the few control rooms to Thales NATS or similar would be no great shakes.

Unlike the US the UK Coastal Rescue operation has been in the hands of Commercial and Not for Profit organisations for just about ever.


User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3571 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1581 times:

Anyone would think that this is news, the outsourcing of UK search and rescue has been on the cards since 2006. A preferred bidder was announced in 2010 but had their proposal rejected a year later due to some sort of naughtiness. Since then the existing civilian contractors have been on temporary contracts and the RAF and Navy soldiering on with elderly Sea Kings.

Search and rescue was originally a military function as they were the primary users, now however military use is minimal which reduces hugely any reason for the capability remaining in their hands.

Bearing in mind that part of UK SAR has been under civilian contractors for decades whats the problem ?


25 BMI727 : There is no reason why that cannot be changed for civil services to fly into dangerous situations when it's called for. It's ridiculous to think that
26 Post contains images fridgmus : Now, once this privatisation takes place, will Prince William be out of a job?
27 Post contains images Bongodog1964 : Taking in to account the number of recent short holidays, Royal tours, trips to the races etc he has been photographed at, his position appears to ha
28 Aesma : Can you sue the government if a SAR operation goes wrong ?
29 idealstandard : Agreed, the current coalition is really pushing neo-thatcherism through. Public services should never be privatised - it doesn't make sense, that's b
30 Aesma : Where does the economic gain come from anyway ? Are crew/mechanics paid less in the private sector ?
31 BMI727 : The government can get immediate savings from closing bases and cutting costs while paying out less to a private company with more incentive to be ef
32 DeltaMD90 : I think, depending on the inefficiency of the government, it can save a lot of money. Unfortunately, our government can be so inefficient they end up
33 Ken777 : Actually you are looking at shedding responsibilities. Mismanaging the budget may well mean under taxing, or setting fees too low. That's what you ge
34 PPVRA : The amount of ignorance in this statement is astounding. And two other people jump right in after this in agreement. That said, as someone else said,
35 PPVRA : Completely false and highly misleading. Governments create budgets based on forecasted actual tax receipts, not some theoretical number based on how
36 TheCol : It may seem to you that it's as simple as changing the wording in a contract, but it's not. The whole point of regulating civil aviation is to preven
37 BMI727 : It's not shedding responsibility, it's fulfilling responsibility differently. If you need to get something somewhere, you aren't shedding responsibil
38 Bongodog1964 : As approx 1/3 of UK SAR has been contracted out to private operators for at least 25 years, it is reasonable to think that the comparitive costs, ski
39 TheCol : Like I said, the TSB cannot just show up and determine that the loss of life is acceptable in once case and not others. For SMS to work, it must be b
40 offloaded : I was a big fan of Thatcher and I still think she had more balls than any PM since. 70s Britain was a bit of a disaster: IMF loan, endless strikes, r
41 GDB : What will be happening is that the rather aging RAF and RN Sea Kings currently in the SAR role, will be replaced by a contractor flying an undisclosed
42 BMI727 : Sure they can. "In the course of search and rescue operations it became necessary to operate in dangerous conditions acceptable only when life is at
43 Ken777 : The economic gain goes to the wealthy who get ownership of the operation, raise prices and cut overall compensation packages for the serf level worke
44 RussianJet : And have you been living in the UK for long? I say what I said in reference to the UK's appalling track record of privatisation, which I am not ignor
45 GDB : Not when we will still be paying, probably relatively as much, for an inferior service with the company concerned likely being foreign owned. The con
46 Post contains images BMI727 : Where is this huge amount of money from an organization that habitually loses money? It's important that mail and parcels can reach every address in
47 Bongodog1964 : The existing civilian contractors fly newer more capable aircraft than the RAF and RN, your scenario is totally incorrect. Bristows are offering the
48 PPVRA : I inserted exactly ZERO politics into my reply to your post. I merely stated a simple fact, that balanced budgets do not depend in any way on the lev
49 RussianJet : It does no such thing. I made the comment advisedly. We have been perfectly capable of running emergency and other services on a national basis for a
50 TheCol : "and therefore no further investigative action is required". Seen that one before. No accountability, and no recourse. BTW, it only take one judge to
51 BMI727 : What evidence is there that the service will be inferior, other than just the assumption that government is superior? And what difference does being
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
France, UK To Give Missiles To Syrian Rebels posted Thu Mar 14 2013 17:34:38 by Aesma
UK To Send Armoured Vehicles To Syria posted Wed Mar 6 2013 11:45:00 by RussianJet
UK To Leave Echr posted Sun Mar 3 2013 10:47:00 by RussianJet
Your Chance To Meet Obama And The Working Class posted Fri Jun 15 2012 13:59:53 by Superfly
Listening To Katherine Jenkins And Hayley Westenra posted Fri Dec 24 2010 21:12:24 by n229nw
The Rally To Restore Sanity/And Or Fear posted Fri Oct 29 2010 21:18:37 by caliatenza
UAE Supreme Court: OK To Beat Wife And Kids posted Mon Oct 18 2010 15:33:46 by LOT767-300ER
This Is Addicting To Look At And I Don’t Know Why? posted Thu Aug 12 2010 19:11:06 by CVGpilot
UK To Expel Israeli Diplomat Over Passports posted Tue Mar 23 2010 05:27:23 by RussianJet
Opportunity For UK To Get Rid Of Extremists posted Thu Oct 15 2009 14:33:22 by Dreadnought