³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ BLOGS - Peston's Picks
« Previous | Main | Next »

Blair's $5m

Robert Peston | 10:27 UK time, Monday, 14 January 2008

There are times when you see a price and you know that it’s wrong.

One of those was the $1m quoted by many last week and over the weekend for what the huge US bank, is paying Tony Blair for his advisory services.

It felt far too low.

I am not making a judgement about the value of what our former prime minister will actually do for Morgan.

The proof of that will be in the pudding.

But I spend my life speaking to people with money to spend on Blairs and other forms of what is pretentiously known as human capital – and in that world $1m buys a few days of legal or public relations advice, but not continuous access to a politician with a global brand (oh yes) who can pick up the phone to anyone.

Whatever your political bent or view of the Blair years, it would be a national humiliation if the sticker on his forehead said $1000k.

His franchise is worth more.

For a million dollars to be the number on his ticket, Wall Street and the City would be in total meltdown and we would be in the grip of a worldwide recession (we may get there yet).

It couldn’t be the right price – especially since Blair takes advice from a bunch of astute business people and he isn’t famous for knowingly underselling himself.

So when the Daily Telegraph that he is being paid £2m a year, I thought that was more like it.

But it still didn’t feel right.

My intuitive view was that you couldn’t have a Blair for less than $5m a year.

And having now spoken to bankers close to this deal, I am told $5m is what JP Morgan is paying (though Morgan’s and Blair’s office are refusing to publish the pecuniary details).

Which for most of us would be a big pile of wonga – although if Blair had been on the market a year ago, before the pricking of the global financial bubble, he could perhaps have had double.

°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment

  • 1.
  • At 11:05 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Oliver wrote:

As far as I know, it's only a Part-Time position and as far as I know, Tony Blair isn't a banker by trade so $1m is more than enough!!!!!

Moreover, shouldn't he be concentrating on the middle-east seen as that's what he's supposed to be doing?

Nice article though - generally, if it was for a full time position in media-relations or politics for the bank, I would agree.

  • 2.
  • At 11:06 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Ian Harris wrote:

This should help pay his mortgage!

Perhaps they are looking for lots of fees to sort out Northern Rock and Tony "I've been a toon army fan all me life" Blair would seem ideal to be their point man on this.

  • 3.
  • At 11:07 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Err? wrote:

Shurely JPM are paying 5% of HMG's exposure to Northern Rock as well....?

  • 4.
  • At 11:09 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Dave TM wrote:

"The proof of that will be in the pudding."

For God's sake. Why must ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ staff keep saying this. For once and for all, the saying does NOT go "the proof is in the pudding". It goes "The proof of the pudding is in the eating". Proof, in this sense, meaning 'test'.

  • 5.
  • At 11:11 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • colin wrote:

I run a business and have done for a number of years. Reputation is hard earned and takes time and effort. Once proven you could have contact with the people who matter. Mr Blair has a huge worldwide reputation and as you correctly point out access to almost anyone.
'Its not what you know but who you know', makes him a huge huge asset.

  • 6.
  • At 11:14 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Straightalk wrote:

Given Tony Blair has no real business experience and has overseen some disastrous investments of tax payers money (Iraq, NHS, etc.), I agree that his main "capital value" to Morgan Stanley must be his contacts and ability to pick up a phone. So does this make Blair the most expensive switchboard operator ever employed on planet earth?

  • 7.
  • At 11:21 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Sean Keaveney wrote:

£5m? Way off - way too high, where do jounralists come up with these figures?

  • 8.
  • At 11:21 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Karen wrote:

Will he donate some of this bonanza to the families of the people, whom he helped to slaughter and the lives that he has wrecked. This is obscene and casts the Blairs in an ever sleazier, more calculating and mercenary light.

  • 9.
  • At 11:24 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Scamp wrote:

Given the condition of the UK economy I would value his advice as considerably less than zero.

My advice however is worth far more. So Robert if you'd like to earn 10% of £1m you know what to do!

  • 10.
  • At 11:25 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Antonio wrote:

A Fistful of Dollars !!

A Few Dollars More !!

The Good, The Bad & The Ugly (?) !!

  • 11.
  • At 11:25 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • david wrote:

Either figure sends out a clear message to politicians: look after the bankers when you're in office and the bankers will look after you when you retire.

No wonder ordinary people feel their vote counts for nothing.

  • 12.
  • At 11:26 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mike Robbins wrote:

If your average African dictator stashed a $5m retirement fund in a Swiss bank while in office, we'd all be screaming about corruption. Talk about double standards... especially given the pensions crisis that affected so many other British people during his premiership.

  • 13.
  • At 11:32 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Griffiths wrote:

This deal seems to finally confirm Mr Blair's true colours.

Having presided over the expansion of the UK's gap between 'Haves' and 'Have nots' he chooses to chase the international cash (which surely he doesn't need) rather than contribute to healing some of the haemorrhaging social wounds that this government has chosen instead to rub salt into.

Let's instead see Mr Blair leading the creation of youth programmes, community group projects, social work; the opportunities for such a talent are endless...

  • 14.
  • At 11:37 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • alexcn wrote:

Well I wholeheartedly agree on the 5m price tag for Mr. Blair's activities for JPM - however what i strongly disagree with is the fact that his (in my opinion) materialistic, loud-mouthed wife is most probably behind it all.

She constantly milked the trappings of her position while her husband was in office, and that poor acted TV interview only served to make me dislike her more.

Maybe Mr. Blair should offer to compensate a charity for all of the handouts his wife was taking while in office, that would serve to make the country support his efforts.

  • 15.
  • At 11:39 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Simon Orr wrote:

"If your average African dictator stashed a $5m retirement fund in a Swiss bank while in office, we'd all be screaming about corruption. Talk about double standards..."

Yes, stealing tax payer's money and being paid by a company to do a job are the same thing after all.

  • 16.
  • At 11:44 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • vsn wrote:

Remember the WMD claims? Remember the 45-minute claim?

I wouldn't employ a proven liar.

Maybe the "low" price tag reflects that.

  • 17.
  • At 11:54 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Sean Birdsall wrote:

Lets be honest here has he always worked for JP morgan ???? Isnt this his payoff for services rendered?

  • 18.
  • At 11:55 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • bargain wrote:

You mean he gets $5 million as a Call Centre Operative for JP Morgan ?

'Hello, Tony Blair here ringing on behalf of JPM
-do you want to spend any cash or buy any financial products today?'

'No thanks, by the way are you FSA registered ringing me up out of the blue ?'

'FSA? - Oh I never bother with regulations and those sort of things. How about a nice bit of Middle East Real Estate then - you can have it going cheap'

'No thanks Dellboy, clear off'

  • 19.
  • At 11:56 AM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Jonathan wrote:

What a terrible amount of money. Remember when Tony Blair did Comic Relief? Seemed like a good bloke didn't he? But if he donated his gravy from 2007 to charity, he could probably match the amount raised by that entire campaign. Am I bovvered? Yes.

He is just one of countless public figures who claim the moral high ground while trousering all the cash they can get their hands on.

  • 20.
  • At 12:01 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • James Harvey wrote:

$5m seems about reasonable to have someone on board who can pick up the phone to George W Bush or the Clintons (think who might be the next President). Investment Banking relationship management is largely about opening doors and your personal network, not being a derivatives or capital markets expert: there are specialists for that. You buy people for their Rolodex.

A quick note to Straightalk: Blair is being hired by JPMorgan, not Morgan Stanley. They are two different banks.

I don't see the comparison between Blair's earnings and an African dictator: the corruptions of dictators lies in pinching from the public purse, which isn't what Blair is doing here at all.

  • 21.
  • At 12:09 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Geoff wrote:

Robert,

A very interesting subject, the value of a redundant G8 politician with the speciality of illegal wars and the leader of a government 'purer than the driven snow' for 10 years.

1. Morgan are paying for access to information that is not presently within the area of public knowledge of benefit to Morgan.

2. Morgan are paying for the influence Bliar may have on some of his political friends, getting fewer by the day, to make things happen the way Morgan would like them to happen.

3.Morgan are paying to ensure Bliar is at best 'memory neutral' to Morgan and those with a close relationship with Morgan.

4.If Morgan need to hire Bliar, and there is a real job, the Morgan organisation should be worried about
the quality of people already on the payroll and failing to deliver on that for which Bliar has been hired.

5. At present Bliar is hired by someone to save the Middle East from the West, or is to save the West from the Middle East, is this not a conflict of interest for Morgan ?

Remember the junior Civil Servants, during Bliars office, that went to prison for breaches of the Official Secrets Acts.

In the case of Bliar, anything is possible, after all he was the architect of the sleaze free, mighty pure NuLabour as the media have unearthed.

  • 22.
  • At 12:11 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Andy wrote:

Robert,

What impact might this level of earning (combined with other jobs that may arise) have on the keeness or otherwise of Blair to become President of Europe?

And what does this level of control over someone still very much active in world politics say about the integrity of global democracy and justice. This sort of thing might seem fine in Lagos or Rome, but do we not expect higher of our politicians? This self-serving prostitution damages brand UK.

  • 23.
  • At 12:13 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Amery wrote:

Payback to Blair for

1. The Iraq war
2. Unceasing support for the US in every area conceivable
3. Allowing US financial interests to monetise and mortgage everything, and giving the debt/credit bubble free rein in the UK
4. Allowing the mercenary bankers who staff these organisations to live in London tax-free.

Meanwhile we lecture the world on "democracy" and are prepared to invade countries and kill their citizens to allow them to taste it.

No wonder Blair needs to live behind armed guard in Bayswater.

  • 24.
  • At 12:14 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Tim Jones wrote:

Could the timing of this by the Bank, being as it is during a banking crisis, be a reminder to G Brown and other top officials that there could be a pot of gold waiting when they 'retire'? Especially if they are kind to the banks now and don't bring in much needed regulation?

Or is the timing just a coincidence and the Bank looking just to buy a contacts book?

Now G Brown and associates may think that they are not influenced by such things in the running of the economy. But will we believe it? Its dangerously close to sleaze.

  • 25.
  • At 12:19 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mad Max wrote:

If one was to look at Blair's balance sheet, one item on the the revenue side would be his combined Prime Minister and Parliamentary pensions which are believed to be worth some 6 million pounds or more.

Combine this with JP Morgans 2.5 Million pounds and we arrive at a moral hazard that is not restricted to banking.

  • 26.
  • At 12:20 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Simon R wrote:

Tony Blair is personally responsible for the Iraq war. He made up the "inteligence" that the USA used to justify the invasion. He has caused misery for millions. He ought to be imprisioned for crimes against humanity. Paying him vaste amounts of money is obscene, 10 dollars for every death he caused.

  • 27.
  • At 12:22 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Dave wrote:

Does this mean that Tony will be earning too much to continue to enjoy those services currently paid for by the UK taxpayer? I believe his annual security bill comes to several million pounds alone...

  • 28.
  • At 12:22 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Meyrick wrote:

As usual Peston shows his complete lack of knowledge about business & politics.Especially big business.His pathetic proof is in the pudding...Lets see how right he is about Northern Rock. Thats it Peston I will read your drivel no more!Vote with your feet readers.At least Blair tried to build Britain Whilst blokes like Peston dont care about Britain just their egos and attracting readers.Do all they can to knock it down.Good luck to Blair. Peston how can you sleep at night with your devisive comments?? Especially when you dont even work in the real economy.....Roll on Apple TV..... Dont bother applying for a job Peston you burnt your bridges for short term gain.

  • 29.
  • At 12:23 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Eddie Clark wrote:

I saw a figure of half a million a year quoted last week, for a part time job, although what part time meant was not said.

Given the state of the fat cats/noses in the trough syndrome, half a million doesn't seem a lot, except to the normal "person in the street".

What I thought was interesting, was the day after the initial report, the self same bank bought £2.2b of Northern Rock's mortgage book!! A coincidence or insider trading? Time will tell.

Can't believe there is any risk to involved, and possibly nationalisation will improve their investment.

  • 30.
  • At 12:27 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Stuart Sweetman wrote:

Assuming he paays UK income tax on this it means $2m tax for the UK. What will Gordon spend it on. How about contributing to political parties expenses. Seems to square the circle!!!!

  • 31.
  • At 12:29 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Craig M wrote:

Somehow I don't see him being able to readily pick up the phone to Gordon Brown and 'influence' him.

If JP Morgan have more money than sense to pay TB $5M then that's their business, I think Tony will be seen by them as a 'figure head' than as someone whose skills will revolutionise the banking world.

  • 32.
  • At 12:29 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Bobby Chariot wrote:

Will he donate some of this bonanza to the families of the people...

Yes. It's called income tax.

  • 33.
  • At 12:30 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • chris marshall wrote:

Surely there should be a period after a politician retires in which he cannot take up these sorts of sinecures for the very reason that the thought of future largesse could colour his judgement when in office?

Otherwise people like Mr Blair will be seen to be very sleazy and spivvy by the public. People might even imagine there is a connection between Morgan Stanley retaining Mr Blair and the government retaining the services of Morgan Stanley for Northern Rock and other lucrative commissions.

We wouldn't want that now would we?

  • 34.
  • At 12:31 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Colin Penny wrote:

Are not JPM the ones acquiring £2.5B of Northern Rock's mortgage assets?

Wish I'd thought of that; wonder who suggested it?

  • 35.
  • At 12:31 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • mike hogan wrote:

What can Tony tell JPMC that it does not know already? Probably not much. So why the $? banks, except for Goldman are pretty much the same. JPMC has lost lots of $ on sub prime and LBO debt that it can't sell at a 10% discount. So banks try to distinguish themselves by the company/advisory boards they create ie Henry Kissinger, John Major et al. So basically this is an image/snobbery game, which tells the world about the alleged quality of the bank brand. They are just saying - look at the company we keep.

  • 36.
  • At 12:39 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Rex wrote:

Whatever Tony Blair is being paid, he is paying 40% tax on a great portion of it.

whatever - he is past and will leave history to judge his conduct - for time being he doesn’t seems to be worth while!

  • 38.
  • At 12:42 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • J Mac wrote:

I don't understand what they gain from Blair.

Does this mean he can phone someone up and say "oh relax those banking regulations" or "can we have a fat government contract?"

I mean what really do they get?

John Major didn't turn out too well for Mayflower's shareholders.

  • 39.
  • At 12:50 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Bob wrote:

Wasn't George W Bush's grand father a board member of JP Morgan??

Tony will be strumming his tennis racket admiring himself in the mirror singing 'I get by with little help from my friends....'

Tony Blair...Rock Star! Ooh yeah

  • 40.
  • At 12:54 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mike OB wrote:

Be it £1m or £5m this is sick...

He should be being tried for treason against the British public and for crimes against humanity...

Why can't people see what's going on?

Open your eyes people!

  • 41.
  • At 12:56 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mike wrote:

Surely 13 pieces of silver would suffice.

  • 42.
  • At 01:02 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • shawshank wrote:

What exactly do JP Morgan get out of this? Thats not a rhetorical question - I'd actually like to know what their motivations are?

Do they see this as an advertising campaign? Is Blair to banks what Beckham is to sunglasses manufacturers?

If not, are they instead paying for the "access" he gives them? If that is the case then this is as corrupt as the dodgy political funding we've been hearing about over the past year.

I think that our retired politicians should be forced to be bound by the codes that govern members' interests while in office.

  • 43.
  • At 01:05 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • bushwhacker wrote:

Tony Blair was a merchant banker all along. Only now he's a literal rather than a figurative one.

For his next trick, on February 5th, Shrove Tuesday, I predict he'll also be a tosser(of pancakes), rather than the figurative one he's been all along too.

  • 44.
  • At 01:12 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Paul O'Brien wrote:

Things can only get better eh Tony?
At last the song rings true for someone.

  • 45.
  • At 01:12 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Chris Scott wrote:

Sean - the amount is USD 5m, not GBP 5m. There is a bit of a difference.

  • 46.
  • At 01:17 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Michael wrote:

I'm no fan of Tony Blair, but outside America he has limited appeal (unless he sorts out the middle east) so has only a short window to make big money.

He's spent ten years living in a gilded world and if he wants that to continue that he needs to earn about £30m before tax in the coming few years to (a) pay off his mortgages, (b) buy a country pile and (c) accumulate sufficient capital to pay an enormous entourage that will look after his every need for the next 30 years. That doesn't come cheap.

  • 47.
  • At 01:19 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Naresh Sharma wrote:

Just a side thought,

Where will he pay tax on this? Will it be UK based or will it be paid to say, " T Blair & Co" based in Bermuda?

  • 48.
  • At 01:20 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Bob Ferris wrote:

What do they pay football managers? Is Blair worth less?

  • 49.
  • At 01:22 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mike Murray wrote:

Fools!

Have you all forgotten the revelation the Blair is a Marxist! Blair, when attempting to rise up the greasy pole, thought it a good idea to claim Marxism in a letter to Michael Foot, then Labour party leader.

You can only discount this proof if you think Blair might have lied for his own personal advantage! Unthinkable, given what we now know of Blair's personal morality and deep piety!

Comrade Blair is undermining the system from the inside!

  • 50.
  • At 01:25 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Seamus McKeown ex-pat in Warsaw wrote:

As you allude to, Robert, JPM must be paying Mr Blair for who he knows, not for what he knows.

As he has previouly admitted, Mr Blair is not at his best when making decisions based only upon only "the intelligence available to him."

  • 51.
  • At 01:27 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • rav wrote:

$5 Million is too high for a handful of meetings a year even for Blair!

  • 52.
  • At 01:27 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Kilburn wrote:

So paying Tony Bliar $1m would be a national humiliation.

Please humiliate me some more- why should he profit from resigning as PM in this way.
No coincidence that he took us to war with Iraq and that JP Morgan are reputedly one of the biggest profiteers from that conflict

  • 53.
  • At 01:30 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Peter wrote:

Another good reason for all ex-MPs to be required to declare interests for 5 years or more after leaving office.

Here is a man who has used (and abused) his position over the years now using the contacts he has developed while in public office to line his own pockets.

Well done.

  • 54.
  • At 01:31 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Guy Thornon wrote:

I'm just a peanut businessman but 5m seems like a bargain. Even at my level I can imagine I'd show a profit on employing him. Imagine, getting easy entry to pitch your product to the head of practically every business/government in the world. Some would even buy your product just so they could stay in touch with your salesman. No more spending days just trying to get the name of the purchasing manager, let alone getting to meet him.

  • 55.
  • At 01:33 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Bobby Smith wrote:

What does JP Morgan get by hiring Blair? Access to the sensitive and highly secret information Blair has aquired whilst PM of this country. This infomation, if leaked by a 'civilian', would result in a criminal trial, conviction for crimes against 'national security' and a long prison sentence. What does Blair get? 5 million dollars a year (plus bonus).
This is a man who stopped the SFO investigation into BILLION dollar bribes by BAE Systems, quoting 'national security' as his reason. It is time for the UK to stop this individual selling us all short. His earnings from roles that rely on him being an ex PM should be taxed at 100% and he should be banned FOR LIFE from exploiting knowledge gained whilst PM. He is a truly disgusting human being, but the establishment allows his disturbing money grab. Some are more equal than the rest of us, and I for one am left sick to the core!

  • 56.
  • At 01:34 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • RB wrote:

£5million is peanuts in banking - poorly negotiated in my opinion.

  • 57.
  • At 01:34 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Daniel Cumpsty wrote:

We can all agree that Tony Blair is valuable because of his "access" to people. This means that his role at JP Morgan could be deemed unlawful. Why? Well, he may well be in breach of the implied duty of employees to keep their previous employers' information confidential and not to "spring board" using the information that they developed during and by virtue of their employment, information which implicitly belongs to the employer, i.e. HM government (without prejudice to the Official Secrets Act or any other undertaking Blair made).

  • 58.
  • At 01:38 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Pete wrote:

$5 would just about cover the value of his advice! A pensions crisis, a 3rd world transport system, an NHS ever more expensive but ever less efficient and an unstable Middle East contributing to sky high oil prices (to name a few) are hardly the work of an economic genius.

Still when you've sold off the country to big business and foreign ownership, it's only fair they should reward him for his services. I'm sure they'll be very happy together.

  • 59.
  • At 01:38 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mark Thornton wrote:

Responding to Mike Robbins:

If an African dictator stashes $5m, he'll have done so at the expense of a grindingly poor country, illegally, syphoning off cash and taking bribes.

Blair on the other hand is being paid a market-rate to work with a major multinat.

Not the same thing at all.

I'm not saying the $5m is to be applauded - but please don't trot out cliches like this which compare apples with oranges. It's completely different.

This is almost as annoying as when people start moaning with the expression "If we can put a man on the moon...". We can't (we used to be able for a very short time in the late 60s/early 70s - but not any more!)

(Although perhaps not as annoying as "the proof of that will be in the pudding" now you mention it...)

  • 60.
  • At 01:40 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Simon Stephenson wrote:

All this is from Morgan's point of view is the purchase of the possibility of unwarranted favouritism. And a pretty good example it is of plutocracy at work - mutual back-scratching of a self-protecting elite.

It may be the way of the world, but that doesn't stop it from stinking to high heaven.

  • 61.
  • At 01:41 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Tom wrote:

I cannot believe I am sticking up for Tony Blair, but here goes!

JP Morgan are hiring a very bright, well connected individual who can open up avenues of business that will enable the bank to make higher profits. Banks aim to do this every time they hire someone. On this occasion the person happens to be Tony Blair. Increased bank profits mean more wealth in the system and actually we all benefit.

All of the drivel written about whether he should be rejuvenating youth services, spending more time on charitable work etc etc is a mute point.

This job can not in any way be compared with a corrupt "stash" of money made by an African dictator; it is a legitimate salary for which he will have to work and provide results. And that is perhaps the beauty of Mr Blair now being in the Private Sector. If he does not produce the goods, he will be out on his ear.

As for his effectiveness? - the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Lets see what he has done for JP Morgan in 12 months time.

  • 62.
  • At 01:43 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Hutchings wrote:

He may well be worth more than $1m to the bankers but we should all be disgusted. I agree with david and Peter -

Politicians are supposed to get into politics to represent the interests of the people in their communities not use it as an opportunity to gold plate their retirements.

Whatever your opinion of Blair there is an enormous amount of good he could, and damn well should, be doing. Instead of that, he has chosen to make himself rich and the rest of us even more cynical.

  • 63.
  • At 01:43 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Adam Norwood wrote:

Words almost fail me. However, unlike the majority of those who have so far sent comments, I am willing to believe that Robert Peston's figure is about right. They are simply out of touch, and do not realise how rotten is the state that we've got ourselves into since Mrs Thatcher and her cronies lit the blue touchpaper by "selling the family silver".

Make no mistake about it, Blair is extremely intelligent. And, at school, he was the best actor of his generation.

Lest anyone doubt it, let us remember that Blair modelled his approach to government on Mrs Thatcher's. He was always just as determined as she was, but significantly less scrupulous.

Some believe that his likeness to a snake-oil salesman became even more marked after he started sharing an office with Gordon Brown in opposition.

Aided and abetted by Mandelson, Campbell and the younger brother of Charles Powell, he regularly supped with the devil. He and his wife now show every intention of continuing this orgy of deceit.

As a footnote, it's interesting, isn't it, that the less personable Mr Brown is now finding out just how difficult it is to keep challenging the limits as Tony did without having quite the same ability as Tony to get away with telling porkies.

  • 64.
  • At 01:49 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • mm wrote:

Oh my god Robert - you intuitively knew that £1m was too low and by jove you were right! You surely must be the greatest business reporter of all time.

  • 65.
  • At 01:52 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Mackey wrote:

Tony Blair is the biggest fraud and incompetant ever to gain the office of Prime minister. He is worth nothing, and should be paying the country back for what he has cost us.
I think this seriously brings the judgement of JP Morgan into question.

In many born-again Christian communities, a convert would be expected to tithe 10% of their income to the cause.

How much will the Catholic Church receive of this $5million pound, if that is what TB receives?

dave

  • 67.
  • At 02:01 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Azfar wrote:

This is the world of give & take. Everybody has a price tag.

  • 68.
  • At 02:08 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Alan Houston wrote:

If Tony Blair was an ex-Conservative PM, one might understand this. However he is supposed to be an ex-Socialist PM; hence this is obscene.
I agree with the Liverpool Labour MP (whose name escapes me!) who has already stated this. Truly Tony Blair has morphed into Roy Jenkins: "More socialite than socialist!".

  • 69.
  • At 02:08 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Owen wrote:

It would be illegal in some countries, its about time we stopped the revolving door, work as a lobbyist [david cameron was a lobbyist], then work in government, as a politician or a civil servant, then go thru the door back to a job as a lobbyist.

No wonder government listens to big business so much.

Its about time we stopped even the appearance of this by saying its public service, then at least a long gap of a few years before you can work to influence where you previously worked.

Democracy's worth more than a price tag for influence peddlers.

  • 70.
  • At 02:09 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • David wrote:

Really, Robert, what business of ours it is what a public company pays one of their employees. To use the phrase 'national humiliation' is typical of the hyperbole which you far too often resort to.


And JPM are famously terrible 'human managers', he'll be fired within the year, I'm sure.

  • 71.
  • At 02:11 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Colin, Spain wrote:

Well that's JPM off my list of banks to deal with - another customer lost JPM - my account is moving !!.

As a matter of principle I won't deal with any bank who throws their customers' money away on an ex-politician who really has no "value for money" and has a very dubious reputation (certainly in the UK).

How on earth can Blair be any benefit to JPM or anyone else for that matter?

Michael says "Blair has limited appeal" - Yes it is so limited that it's virtually nothing, zilch, nada, zero etc.

  • 72.
  • At 02:13 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Chris Bowie wrote:

Robert - any way of finding out what TB's tax status for this payment will be?

I can't believe he'll happily pony up 40% of $5m straight to Gordon's back pocket.

My cynical suspicion is that it'll be paid into some form of offshore account to avoid 'investment' in the NHS etc.

  • 73.
  • At 02:25 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Alexander wrote:

The Carlisle Group will also be worth a bob or two, if TB doesn't mind breaking bread with his predecessor Mr Major, and various other Tory luminaries of days gone by. Good luck to him. Blair is a global brand in a globalised military, industrial affirmament and should be paid the market rate as you suggest Robert. It's the financial instruments in JP Morgan that we have to worry about. Not the small change paid by the J P Morgan Board to our recently departed PM. (And I guess that was what you were alluding to in the comment you made about the possibility of a global recession...).

  • 74.
  • At 02:29 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • JT wrote:

Interesting post. However, I am suprised that only 'factual' basis for the accompanying article on ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ News Online (https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7186975.stm), dramatically headlined "Blair's bank job worth $5m a year", is your 'intuitive view'. If bankers close to the deal are really claiming Blair is being paid $5m, then why not base the article on that?

  • 75.
  • At 02:31 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Hassan Suffyan wrote:

I wonder if Ol' Tone will have to go the strict reference checks and credit checks that banks force all their other employees to go through? Who will he have put down as a reference contact on his CV? Gordon Brown maybe? Peter Mandelson? Two Jags Prescott?

Previous Occupation: Mass murderer, Misleader of a great nation, advocate to the americans

Skills: Waffling out of tricky situations, pulling the wool over the eyes of millions, bringing a nation down to its knees through war

Interests: Mass murder, using power for personal gain

I think thats $5m well spent, don't you think!?

John Major joined the Carlyle Group, Blair joins Morgan.

Birds of a feather an' all that.

~~~~~~~

So who else is blair (lower case is not a typo) in bed with?

Apart from the Bushboi ( the U.S.A.'s #1 enemy, and the World's #1 cockroach even though he is but a puppet which shows how much worse are the puppetmasters) and those of similar ilk -

The pope (no I won't honour that office with a capital 'p')which heads a sovereign state with a seat on the u.n. (no need for caps there either)and who rules through supertitious fear.

The e.u. (no honour there, either)head monkeys which are unelected, unnacountable and are almost certain to give blair the presidency.

This adds up to what, do you suppose?

Think about it.

Remember the EEC becamethe EU,
APEC - The Asian Pacific Economic Community will become the Asian Pacific Union (APU) and then ...

... the North American Union (NAU) is well under way.

The head monkeys of each of these so-called 'unions' being of the same club one might be forgiven for thinking a single world government is being put in place.

Key movers? Well ... Australia, of the APU and Canada of the NAU have the same head of state as the U.K.

It may be noted that our monarch has gone against her coronation oath in regard to the e.u. so, like the blair, is a traitor to U.K. folks.

The charge, ladies and gentlemen, is treason.

However, there can be no such charge - the relevant treason laws are noticeable by their absence, having been deleted from our statutes.

Think about it ...


  • 77.
  • At 02:37 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Clothilde Simon wrote:

After about 2003 the British people could have had a whip-round and easily raised $5m, if that is what was needed to persuade Blair to hop it.

  • 78.
  • At 02:43 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Bob wrote:

Those who thought Mr Blair a sinister friend of globalisation and Capital have been proved right with this appointment;No wonder his conscience troubles him to the extent of seeking solace through a religious conversion.He should remember the bible and seek humbler rewards.

  • 79.
  • At 02:45 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Jon Worden wrote:

Of course Tony is well rewarded by his banking masters! It is their way of thanking him for making war. Don't you know that war makes money? JP Morgan love a warmongering "leader".

  • 80.
  • At 02:54 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Shakir wrote:

I think there is something more going on here than wages... I'm not certain but this must be some corruption money or going to war money.... Best be investigated properly

  • 81.
  • At 02:54 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Scamp wrote:

Didn't one of Blair's former advisors who also had no experience of working in the City recently get a job with an investment bank as well?

  • 82.
  • At 02:56 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Rohan wrote:

What a bunch on whingers! Usual UK problem. Someone makes a success of their opportunities and out come the 'its so unfair' crowd. Like his policies or not Tony Blair is the most successful international politician of his generation - you want $10m? stop whinging and do something people will pay you that sort of money for.....no I thought not whinging is so much easier than playing the world stage even if badly!

  • 83.
  • At 03:04 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Barney wrote:

The comments above show the cynicism of the UK public. Yes $5m is a lot of money, yes it is only a part time role, but in the real world he could easily charge 5 times that, and JP Morgan would still make a lot more than that out of him.
As for the "he's worth nothing" school, i'm afraid that most of the business and political community (be it global or local) would have to disagree with you!

  • 84.
  • At 03:05 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Athena Constantinopoulos wrote:

Blair knows nothing about economics that's worth so much per annum. This is his payoff for helping the Federal Reserve-owning oligarchs with the arms trade fair that was the Iraq War. Plenty for this Catholic convert to take to confession!

  • 85.
  • At 03:07 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Propertyboy wrote:

TB should be careful about his BRAND. A Brand which did not stand for much but for the changing times without much affection for his own people...I think this is pure blood money ! he doesnt suffer the consequences like the rest of the people who he has put into war! he should be ashamed of himself for such an audacious point of view! TB should have some humility and not talk about his fees when he felt that the people who have served GB will only get a pitance of £153k for the whole of their lifetime! Shame on you Tony - i thought you stood for conviction - and what a farce of joining such a good religion - just to save face!

  • 86.
  • At 03:09 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Ian Watson wrote:

I am sure that those rotting in their graves due to Blair, those that have lost everything due to Blair, those here in the UK who live in poverty or under an emerging police state will due to Blair all be jolly happy for him when he gets his millions a year...

National brand, the man is a national disgrace, an international menace and it seems feted that not content in running Britain into the ground he is being feted (without a vote or democratic process) of landing the Presidency of the EU.

So tell me Mr ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ man where the line is drawn that making money is acceptable on the backs of massacres, illegal wars, cronyism, corruption and damned criminal practice?

This article shows that Blair still has agent provocateurs working for his cause at the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ.

Maybe Mr Peston you should see the aftermath of Blairs legacy down in your news archives, the pictures of burned and mummified children, the pictures of mass burials, the typhoid and cholera pandemic in Iraq and then ask yourself if THAT is acceptable and if THAT should be rewarded with millions of dollars in blood money...

I think the only fitting reward for Messrs Blair and Bush is of the hempen kind, the long walk, the short drop and the world is a safer and cleaner place afterwards.

  • 87.
  • At 03:10 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Jonathan Modov wrote:

It just goes to show that when it comes down to it, the left are just as self-interested as the right wingers that they spend their careers calling selfish.

  • 88.
  • At 03:12 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Marie-F Cameron wrote:

Tones and his old lady are just the latest in a very long line of so-called 'socialists'with their, 'snouts in the trough'. Dennis Healey now resides in some magnificence on his Sussex estate, Helene Hayman earns over one hundred thousand a year as speaker in the House of Lords, Michael Meacher owns a healthy property portfolio and so we go on. As these people are not devoid of intelligence, they surely know socialism means equality for all, yet they choose not to practise what they preach. Their putrid hypocrisy overwhelms me and that is why I will never vote Labour until the so-called socialists live as socialists like Mother Theresa or Ghandi.

  • 89.
  • At 03:21 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mr H wrote:

Why doesn't one journalist (remember investigative journalism??) comment on the fact that JP Morgan won the consortium to run the Iraqi Trade Bank in 2003 (link - New York Times

This is payback pure and simple. And we have castrated journalists who can't see the wood from the trees. If this was akin to the declaration of 'members interests' Blair would not be able to take this job. OIC - kill and maim hundreds of thousands, institute a new "western" banking system, and then take the job on offer.

This makes me sick

  • 90.
  • At 03:24 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • TRUST_NO_1 wrote:

It should not be allowed.
He has too much insider information and is privy to information that won't be released to the public for 50 years.
Why don't we have an inquiry so that we can give some money to his barrister wife as well ?

  • 91.
  • At 03:31 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • mike wrote:

so thats the price for a war-monger. like so many of the earlier comments I agree that Blair was a disaster. Tony and his mate george bush should both be in the Hague on trial for war crimes. I am outraged and disgusted, but what can we mere mortals do about this......so much for democracy!

  • 92.
  • At 03:35 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Paul glover wrote:

This kind of thing only highlights to me that we should be paying our Prime Minister and MP's a lot more. How can we expect impartial governance from someone who earns 160k a year in the job and can earn 5 million a year out of it? The job should carry a salery worthy of its influence and a Prime Minister should leave the job never having to work again. Only in this way can we attract the brightest minds who can operate in an impartial way.

* Mike wrote: Surely 13 pieces of silver would suffice.

It is 30 pieces of silver that Judas received, but you've demonstrated Blair's effect on the education system of this country.

  • 94.
  • At 03:53 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Huw Evans wrote:

What is his whole package worth? His $1m/$5m salary is one thing, but he is also likely to be receiving some stock and pension benefits. Has anybody considered the value of the whole remuneration package?

  • 95.
  • At 04:05 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Chris Bowie wrote:

To Rohan,

I have no problem with anyone earning any amount, as long as they are fairly paying their share.

Good luck to Tony earning $5m - I just want to make sure he's paying 40% tax on that and all his other nice little earners.

We should all be disgusted, someone says here.

Too right! But my disgust stems from the inability of the moaners and groaners here to understand business, politics or human nature.

The business thing was something Blair tried to help Labour lefties with - they never got it then, and seemingly, they never will.

Meanwhile, business can see the value of this man. Good for them. It's possible he won't be around much longer in this market anyway - less than a year - if M Sarkozy succeeds in persuading other Europeans that Blair is the answer, and not the problem.

If he does become EU president I predict some fun and games, not least for the British government, of whichever colour. Two and a half years from Jan 2009 - is summer 2111, AFTER the next British election.

Hey, ho. Will Cameron or Brown go down in history as the one to take us into the euro. ONE of them will, you can be sure of that.

Hedging bets time, eh Gordon/Dave?

Blair becomes more and more intriguing with every passing month.

I think I'll start writing that book ...

  • 97.
  • At 04:16 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • jim evans wrote:

Dear Robert
Blair is a "Hanger On",he has no where to go, and JP Morgan is totally suited for him, because of their History. The problem with Blair is he has to keep looking over his shoulder, in todays world he is not safe from retribution, and he will need every bit of the security and money he can get.
He is the first Prime Minister with a price on his Head.

  • 98.
  • At 04:17 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • D Smith wrote:

Spot on No 34

Blair has already earned his first years "fees"

JPM will make quite a lot of dosh out of Northern Rock fire sale.

Good suggestion eh!

  • 99.
  • At 04:18 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • FR wrote:

Does Tony Blair know no bounds of decency? Self-serving scum.

  • 100.
  • At 04:19 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Sean Keaveney wrote:

Thanks Chris, I realised my mistake after I posted in haste - $5m is still way too high - the $1m quoted at the outset was far closer. I am not sure why, but journalists so often overstate salaries, contract values and personal wealth... It must be part of a journalist's training to exaggerate their subject matter.

  • 101.
  • At 04:21 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Miriam Pensa wrote:

Well, at least we now understand Blair's motivation for prostituting the UK. The world has been laughing at Blair's unquestioning affiliation with Bush's misguided foreign policies - now it looks as if, as we suspected, there was a dollar based incentive attached to his sychophantic stance, and this was what he was hanging in for. They have criticised Benazir Bhutto for corruption but how is this any different? I hope the country will not make the mistake of endorsing these actions by giving him peerages, knighthoods etc.

  • 102.
  • At 04:25 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mathew wrote:

I think the best part about this is that Blair worked extremely long hours for much less than would be the market value of his contribution outside politics and he still had to put up with you whinging poms complaining about everything he did - even though if tomorrow you were told you by your boss that, for the public good, you had to work an extra 6-8 hours a day - 7 days a week - for little extra pay, and no future prospects of profiting from that extra work - I'm sure you'd tell the boss where to shove it.

Now he's enjoying being paid market rates for a job that is far less stressful and he doesn't have to give a toss about what any of us think - A country where people are happy to see grown men paid $5m to chase a synthetic ball around an open area while others, grouped into separate gangs, stand around yelling at said ball? Sounds like another roman past time - break and circus for the people! !

I guess he's come to learn that theres nothing worse than whingers....who here is going to turn down such a payrise?

  • 103.
  • At 04:25 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • AT wrote:

I dont understand why there are so many people on his back. they are not hiring him for his financial expertise but for his contacts (which makes him a tad bit more than just a switchboard operator). and if he is getting paid $5MM a year, Im sure he's worth it as JPM will be making much more because of the people he'll be able to make them meet

  • 104.
  • At 04:29 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Jackie wrote:

I'm as outraged and disgusted as many other correspondents at the obscene reward being given to this charlatan (and his repulsive wife) after presiding over such a disastrous chapter in history. £5m for access to his flaky contacts and the pleasure of that sickly grin. In my case there is a small but tangible protest I can make - sell my entire stock holding - and tell JP Morgan why.

  • 105.
  • At 04:32 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mellowmick, Dundee wrote:

Blair is useful as a lobbyist in a European context, especially concerning GATS negotiations and putting on pressure for UK and European public services (education, health) to be opened up for privatisation.
His contacts with Mandelson (EU Trade) will come in particularly useful, as will his links to social democrats and (nominal) socialist parties and MEPs. Look out for more Bolkestein-style directives as our welfare provision is hijacked and 'marketised', assisting European employees to join in the world-wide 'race to the bottom' as far as wages and terms and conditions of employment are concerned.

  • 106.
  • At 04:35 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • dave wilson wrote:

So many postings bashin' Blair - truth is Blair didn't do it on his own. Parliament, Tories included, backed the illegal war and the national press, without exception, went right along with it. Gilligan was sacked and Dyke was forced to resign by that unelected ex-media man Campbell and his campaign of vilification. It's not just Blair that is guilty it's the whole despotic system of governance, which includes not only 'Parliament' but that all encompassing 'national interest' a catchall for every form of corruption, illegality and war crimes. It's not just Blair that needs a kicking its the whole sorry mess, of putative western democracy.

  • 107.
  • At 04:36 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Dee wrote:

With him working abroad most of the time he will be in the UK for less than 90 days a year.
If he then becomes president of the EU he then would get further benefits (UK tax free?).

I would love to see his tax return for 2008/9.

  • 108.
  • At 04:37 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • alan wright wrote:

In case anyone is still not quite sure just why Britain went to war against Iraq....
So we bomb the place to bits, slaughter a couple of hundred thousant Iraqui peasants, seize the oil and then make billions of $$$ re-building, advising, overseeing etc.
And your job Tony, when all the dust has settled, is to open a few doors for us investment wise..nudge nudge.

Blair the liar/ con-man is now blair the profiteer!

  • 109.
  • At 04:38 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • bushwhacker wrote:

Did Tony Blair(a.k.a. Miranda) have to kiss the bishop's ring when he was received into the Church?

  • 110.
  • At 04:44 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • wrote:

Remember that Mr Blair's network of contacts and access to influential people is not the only valuable part of the deal as far as JPM are concerned; just look at all the newspaper articles and television news coverage of this story. JPM must've received at least $5mm worth of advertising for this story already, before Mr Blair has even got his feet under the desk.

  • 111.
  • At 04:59 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Jonathan Arr wrote:

Why all the fuss? Blair is worth whatever J P Morgan, or any other bank, chooses to pay. End of story. It is not a moral judgement as to his worth as a human being. It's simply what the market will bear. We don't have to pay- so who cares? Good on him. There's no conspiracy, just someone with unique skills getting rewarded for them. And as for the laughable argument that Blair has betrayed socialism (see comment 88)- when was he ever a socialist?! We'd never have voted for him if he was...

  • 112.
  • At 05:03 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Derek wrote:

Will he be inside or outside or the infamous IR35 ?

  • 113.
  • At 05:11 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Arthur Priest wrote:

Nice blog - a fascinating example of how words can be used to make a useless commodity seem worth a packet.

"Whatever your political bent or view of the Blair years, it would be a national humiliation if the sticker on his forehead said $1000k."

Well Mr. Peston, a little lower down here in the class system, I think we could learn to cope with a touch of national humiliation (patriotic sensibilities not being all that great in those who didn't do so well as Blair did under Blair), in exchange for seeing the humiliation to the man himself. Now that would really be priceless.

  • 114.
  • At 05:19 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • CC wrote:

Just one point here - why should Tony be helping his local community any more than the rest of us? Not to say that we shouldn't all be helping local youth groups, community projects etc, but lets be honest here.

How many of the outraged people here would turn down the offer of $5m when they were effectively unemployed? I know I wouldn't. How many of these people aren't working for large corporations and are actively involved in those sorts of projects? Blair is just a person, and he's not even now in charge of us (thank heavens) so what can anyone expect?

  • 115.
  • At 05:24 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Mary Campbell-Brown wrote:

Are T and C Blair and paying tax on their income are are their assets stashed away in some tax haven? M. C-B.

  • 116.
  • At 05:53 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Oldlabourer wrote:

It is not surprising that this stirs unease in a lot of people.
Ten years as the head of a labour government, no real action on poverty, inequality or anything important really. Then a cushy big paying job with a merchant bank.
Is it really a job or a payment for his address book?
Or as people have hinted at, is it in fact for services already rendered.
I hope he is just a naive, greedy, self important twit and this is just another tactical blunder that paints an unfair picture of him.
Tony, think of what you could have done.
Oh well

  • 117.
  • At 05:54 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Jamie wrote:

Payback time for being George's poodle. Former Prime Ministers should be paid a handsome pension & be barred from working in the private sector, especially for a foreign country.If Tony has that much influence he should be using it for British charities or interests not a private American bank.

  • 118.
  • At 06:00 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Chris wrote:

Why would any bank want the services
of an ex murderer?

  • 119.
  • At 06:23 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • John Constable wrote:

This must be the ultimate in 'cash for access'.

However, the big difference is that this time it is legal.

I still wonder how Tony Blair sleeps at night though ... all those dead bodies laid at his door.

Not worth any amount of money in my humble opinion.

Peace of mind is priceless.

  • 120.
  • At 06:34 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Lawther wrote:

It is disgraceful that a former Prime Minister of this country is permitted to take this sort of money after what he has done to the UK!
But then again we should be grateful that he is no longer PM!

  • 121.
  • At 07:02 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Colin wrote:

Another use of that curious phrase "the proof will be in the pudding". Get your cliches right. You mean "The proof of the pudding will be in the eating." The original was mildly witty. Your version is pretty well meaningless.

  • 122.
  • At 07:25 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • grania davy wrote:

I have ploughed through the comments in morbid facination and what can I add... there is not a lot that is positive or complementary and that probably says it all.

  • 123.
  • At 07:36 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • peter ryan wrote:

To the people that have plenty of time on their hands. Blair is now the ex Prime Minister. Does anyone except the "bleeding hearts" care less what he now earns. Go get a life and do something useful.

  • 124.
  • At 07:49 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Ian Watson wrote:

One reader points out that Parliament and are equally to blame as are the Tories etc for leading us into an illegal war and slaughter of the Iraqi's and Afghans BUT it was Blair that initiated the lie, that ordered the people around him to follow that lie, Blair was the enabler and thus should pay the highest price.

As for JPM, they might find they are too late in pulling Blair onto their payroll, if the signs are right within a year the financial makeup of the planet could be a whole lot different especially as many analysts from Bloomberg to others out there are all now predicting a massive crash and the end of the dollar, $5 million dollars when this happens might be worth nothing...

All it takes is for China or an oil nation to drop its peg or even junk the dollar in favour of the Euro and thats it for the US, zero liquidity, zero credit, zero economy... Bankrupt and it could happen overnight it is that dire a scenario.

As for Blair the man, I personally think he is a traitor and sold this country out to America after asset stripping it for his own gain.

  • 125.
  • At 08:10 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Charles E Hardwidge wrote:

The Six Million Dollar Politician.

We have seperation.

Coming forward with the contract.

We can't hold the appointment back.

Tony Blair. Politician. A career barely alive. Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the spin. We have the capability to make the worlds first super-politician. Tony Blair will be that man. Better than he was before. Better, stronger, faster.

  • 126.
  • At 08:40 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Day wrote:

As a JP Morgan employee, long used to the annual excuses for tiny pay rises and bonuses, I am amazed that the bank would feel that it is worthwhile to waste $2-5m on Tony Blair's services. What will JP Morgan gain from this (apart from a reputation for profligate idiocy?)

  • 127.
  • At 08:41 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Howard wrote:

The rich get richer, the rest... well, who cares about the rest, eh Blair?

  • 128.
  • At 09:14 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • John Constable wrote:

I want to be fair, and on reflection, Tony Blair would argue that his 'interventions' in Kosovo and Serria Leone has saved many lives.

Seems that the 'Maker' will have to decide which whether he finally goes up to the astral plain or downstairs where it is very hot (if you believe all that stuff).

Whatever, $5M pa now is very useful, especially if the outgoings are severe.

  • 129.
  • At 09:35 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Daniel wrote:

I'd rather pay Blair $5M for whatever access to world leaders he can give, than pay Fabio Capello £6M per year (avg £1M per match over next 2 years), or Jonathan Ross £6M per year.

  • 130.
  • At 09:43 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Hutchinson wrote:

As someone who "escaped" from the UK at the birth of Thatcherism I wouldn't give Blair $5 !!!

  • 131.
  • At 10:14 PM on 14 Jan 2008,
  • Naresh Sharma wrote:

If Tony is being hired for $5m pa for his contacts, then perhaps JPM would like to pay me the same?

I can get the phone number for 10 Doning st, the white house etc......BT phone book!!!

Ya gotta laugh!

  • 132.
  • At 12:14 AM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • DaveH wrote:

My mother might - she is a pre-1973 War Widow and Bliar promised in 97 that he would bring the pre-73 Widow's pension up to the post-73 Widow's level, not least as they are the older ladies. He refused to honour that promise, but my mother owns Unit Trusts managed by JPM - perhaps if she and everyone else moved their holdings, JPM might lose out a bit?

It does matter because it brings politics into disprepute and probably doesn't help military recruiting when the wounded and bereaved of Bliar's wars are rather less well-treated.

The man is a war criminal - and the media aren't allowed to pay such people for their stories after all.

  • 133.
  • At 06:13 AM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • wrote:

Congratulations for asking a sensible but rarely asked question.

The obvious question 'how much is Blair worth?' can't admit a technical answer. The question 'how much is Blair likely to get for his services? can be answered.

RP's question is a good one, and his analysis is reasonably convincing. At least he confessed it included a bit of water divining.

  • 134.
  • At 06:29 AM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • William Fletcher wrote:

$5m - not bad wages for a war criminal & traitor!

  • 135.
  • At 07:17 AM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • liam wrote:

$5m a year for a War Criminal, what next? Perhaps they might consider hiring Ratko Mladić as Mr Blairs personal body guard..

  • 136.
  • At 08:04 AM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • Jeff Gray wrote:

Your taking the piss! He is not worth $5 let along $5million. Look at the mess he has made of the U.K. Its just a kick back for Iraq!

  • 137.
  • At 09:18 AM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • alex wrote:

For anyone interested in the real figure that Mr Blair will earn, Her MAjesty's Revenue & Customs may oblige in a year or two if they manage to lose some more discs in the post or on the side of a street.

Depending on Mr Blair's memoirs, elements of his party may see sense to leak the data anyway.

  • 138.
  • At 11:59 AM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • Arthur Priest wrote:

"I'm sure you'd tell your boss where to shove it" (no.102)
If I could afford to, sure. But you're not really comparing like with like - Blair chose his lucrative path, and his extra work, though laudible in a way, was only to amass more dosh for the future.

And why does the right wing always label objections to their crummy ways as "whinging?" What the hell else can we do? The guy's too well-protected to get at with anything more than words.

  • 139.
  • At 12:10 PM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • Andrew wrote:

Good to see Tony is doing his bit for the poor of the world by subjecting them to more usary by working for one of the worlds biggest banks.

Im sure his Lord and Master 'upstairs' would not agree.

  • 140.
  • At 12:26 PM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • Tom wrote:

Good grief. Some people are getting very hot under the collar!

JP Morgan have got a bargain. I will be interested to learn his bonus payments for a job well done in due course.

Blair has worked hard for years to get to a position where he can earn substantial amounts. That is called a career. You may or may not like him, but he is a successful man. Other successful people earn many times more than him. He is not yet even in the Times Rich List where some pretty vacant individuals who contribute nothing to the world appear (footballers and the like!).

Blair is going to make a lot of money over the next few years and good luck to him. I am happier he is now working in commerce than running the country.

  • 141.
  • At 12:39 PM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • FR wrote:

Hey Robert, apparantly your name was mentioned at the Crocks EGM this morning....

  • 142.
  • At 01:29 PM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • Tony Hallett wrote:

Well done Tony!
He's discovered another way removing money from pension funds.....

P.S did they read his CV ?

  • 143.
  • At 01:33 PM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • Jim Holdall wrote:

Message to Blairs: step away from the swill trough now.

It used to be that you could hire a public schoolboy-fantasist for £10k through the columns of Private Eye. Why the inflation, even if he was prime minister?

  • 144.
  • At 02:28 PM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • Dudley George wrote:

Anything is worth what people will pay for it. I like to think, however. that if someone offered me £500,000 to spend an afternoon with a war crininal like Blair, I would have the moral strength to say no.

  • 145.
  • At 06:45 PM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • satjit wrote:

At $5m a year, JP Morgan have a real bargain. Probably the greatest coup for any business. In an increasingly international world, one cannot overestimate the value of having the advice of someone like Blair. Good on him and lucky JP Morgan.

As a business consultant, all I can say is the JP Morgan have access to the best advice.

  • 146.
  • At 07:18 PM on 15 Jan 2008,
  • satjit wrote:

Reading some of the comments, all I see is political bile and envy. I for one, am delighted for him.

Regarding Northern Rock (of which I am a shareholder), I cannot see how his policies contributed to this. No one praised him when the shares were sky high but as soon as something goes wrong, it is the govts, or in this case Blair's fault.

We need to grow up and take responsibility for our actions. Also, in case you did not know, envy is one of the deadly sins!

  • 147.
  • At 01:00 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Arthur Priest wrote:

"Also, in case you did not know, envy is one of the deadly sins!" (No.146)

Not in my view it isn't. It's very handy for the elite and their supporters to guilt-trip us about feeling envy, but we shouldn't fall for it.

Envy is a natural emotion that motivates us to push back against those who in their greed (also a "deadly sin") are taking more than their fair share of the cake.

This post is closed to new comments.

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ iD

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ navigation

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Â© 2014 The ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.