Originally Posted by
grahamhouse
Part of why this issue is so important if Defence wishes to be relevant....which I offer you here....
1 - When a CO...an allegation of rape perpetrated by a RAF Instructor on a 13 yr old girl when on summer camp on my base was reported to me. My Chain of Command (22Gp) directed me to not entertain the allegation nor initiate investigation (22Gp owned the Air Cadet organisation). The rationale of the CoC being that such an allegation would in itself adversely impact on the anniversary of the Cadet organisation which was imminent. There was then no military investigation despite the military having lead jurisdiction. Not content with this, I went to the civil police, there was an investigation, there was a due process and there was a conviction - the RAF Instructor went to prison.
2 - When a CO, I also received a Service Complaint from a female officer made against me - she had every right and reason to complain! I then became 'RESPONDENT' to the 'COMPLAINANT'. What astonished me was the Lines to Take presented to me by HQ Air which was an implicit and explicit intent to defeat the Complaint, at all costs, and deny her access to justice. Moreover, I was told that this 'handy tactic to keep in the back pocket' had been used, and is still used, and is successfully used to defeat any Complaint. I objected, strongly....and that led to the point that we are at today, supported of course by ACM WIgston who rightly is trying to shake this all out
Why does it matter? Because Defence is a values-based organisation and today those values, that you all hold dear, are clearly under great pressure due operational and fiscal challenge - suggest listen to The Reith Lectures today to understand why?
I am now aware of thousands of women, and men, who once served well, have since been truly ruined by the organisation they held in high regard. That in our book, true to those values you hold dear, is not acceptable if Defence wishes to stay relevant in a rapidly changing world.
Debate....!
We are really interested in any counter view as to why those in uniform should not enjoy independent representation, as the Civil Servant does, and look forward to receiving a convincing view.......
Unless I missed something, these were not motivated by the sex of the individuals involved!
This is why these initiatives lose credibility as a lot of the time they 'find' evidence... that isn't.
Much like the 'racist' police shootings in the USA... despite no evidence proving racism other than a white cop shot a black man.
I am 100% behind women being given equal rights and treated fairly, this extends to everyone belonging to whatever demographic. But we seem to be falling over ourselves to burn the organisation to the ground by 'finding' faults that may not exist.
A case in point, I was given a formal warning (eventually removed) for being homophobic because I said "I dont care what group people belong to, just be a good person, work hard and treat everyone how you would like to be treated."
This was in reference to the flying of the rainbow flag at RAF stations a few yrs back.
The only thing that saved me was that I had been a gay ally for 6 months when at Air as part of the LGBT forum. I argued that I could be bisexual and was being discriminated against by the system because it was assumed I was straight, as I was married.
An absolute waste of time, effort and resources and the defining act that made sure I will be leaving at my pension point on PVR. I would have had an extra 8 yrs to serve beyond that.
The system is broken... I am not sure more committees will make things better overall.