3 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Depends on the country, and the number of British residents and visitors. Thailand has a large number of both.As I have just pointed out, the former Ambassador to Spain (a much more senior position that the Ambassador to Thailand) saw his responsibilities to British subjects as important as any other area.

 

You knew him personally I see... 

On 3/14/2025 at 8:24 AM, jayboy said:

Puff piece to which there is no particular objection, but it would be interesting to know whether the customer base had an equally sympathetic view.

paid puff piece to help foster that sympathetic view I would reckon

On 3/16/2025 at 8:50 AM, Yagoda said:

Every Brit I have met anywhere in the world for my entire life HATES the the local British Embassy. Why LOL

In my 20 years in Thailand I worked in Australia (FIFO) for a few years, so I had to use the Australian Embassy for a work permit. Using the Australian Embassy/services was much nicer/quicker/ more convenient/cheaper than using the British Embassy.

On 3/14/2025 at 1:32 AM, Robert_Smith said:

They are about as useful as a chocolate fireguard.

Never heard that one before, haha.

41 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

You knew him personally I see... 

 

No, his position was made clear in obituaries in most of the British major newspapers.

19 hours ago, jayboy said:

No, his position was made clear in obituaries in most of the British major newspapers.

 

Great bit of PR....       People love it, makes them feel important subjects !!!... 

 

But if you think the weighting of the Consular Section's of each of the British Embassies is considered more important than Diplomatic Representation, Trade and Investment Promotion, Security and Defence Collaboration and Cultural and Educational Cooperation....   Good for you... 

 

...   But you'll find yourself disappointed - As I repeatedly highlight: 'There is a common misconception that Embassies / missions exist primarily to serve as a safety net for their citizens abroad, this is not the case'.....

On 3/18/2025 at 8:47 AM, sandyf said:

You have taken the statement out of context, the term embassy merely indicated representation. There are several countries with only one embassy but many consulates.

In some countries there is no embassy but have a consulate making consular services the only role from representation.

The very first British Consulate was in Bangkok, that also handled trade and diplomatic relations with Siam.

 

The first official British consulate was established in Alicante, Spain, in 1584.

 

The first formal diplomatic mission from Britain to Siam was led by John Crawfurd in 1822, but this was exploratory and diplomatic in nature.

 

The first British Consulate in Siam was officially established in Bangkok in 1856, following the signing of the Bowring Treaty (also known as the Anglo-Siamese Treaty).

 

The British Consulate in Thailand (then Siam) was formally upgraded to an Embassy in 1947, following World War II.

 

 

I agree, with your comments though - A consulate is an essential mission in any nation where there are British Subjects, some of those countries are not considered 'worth while' or too costly to position an Embassy where trade and security matters are considered of less importance. Many such countries exist.

 

However, that does not detract from the fact that where Embassies are present their primary mission is not consular services - though they are of course necessary.

 

 

24 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

But if you think the weighting of the Consular Section's of each of the British Embassies is considered more important than Diplomatic Representation, Trade and Investment Promotion, Security and Defence Collaboration and Cultural and Educational Cooperation....   Good for you... 

 

I didn't argue consular activities were more important than other functions.I argued that in certain countries with very large British populations/visitor numbers, Embassies pay as much attention to consular activity as anything else. Thailand and Spain good examples.This is not even controversial so I don't know why you are reduced to foolish comments like it's just Ambassador's PR. In countries like China,Saudi Arabia etc it's obviously not the case.

 

30 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 But you'll find yourself disappointed - As I repeatedly highlight: 'There is a common misconception that Embassies / missions exist primarily to serve as a safety net for their citizens abroad, this is not the case'.....

 

I have never thought or argued this.