Both. You haven't offered an alternative take - that's usually how discussion works!
It's hard to see why you find the idea of Truss having full time paid bodyguards is particularly dim.
My view of Truss's bodyguard's: It's standard. They all have them, as do thirteen Royals. Surely the recent assassination of Abe demonstrates that there is a need.
Boldon's ridiculous comment: (They get paid regardless,whether she uses them or not, so no saving of tax-payer money.) Ridiculous because the number of people employed is based on perceived need. Remove the requirement for ex-PMs to have close protection and fewer would be employed.
On a more more informed level, there was a motion in parliament about a decade ago about funding for ex-PMs bodyguards coming from the public purse.
The motion was for these politicians to pay for their protection themselves
if it was required during a private income generating event for the ex-PM in question.