I have a feeling someone in the MoD and/or Honours Committee is thinking “Oops”.
Having been forced into very publicly accepting liability in a statement to the House, Des Browne must be wondering why his team can’t put one and one together, have a quiet word with the Honours Committee and say “Not this time old chap, let’s wait and see the outcome”. And if the Honours Committee couldn’t see this one coming, what with their direct links to MoD and Nimrod (a 30 second Google if you’re wondering) and the first hand advice available to them, then surely the penny dropped when the QQ report was released. (Perhaps they, too, are cursing the timing). To me, this merely indicates again what an absolute howler of an own goal that was. Quite clearly, those in MoD who knew of the report didn’t imagine for one minute it would see the light of day. And they’re so disjointed in everything they do, they just couldn’t react quickly enough. Des must be apoplectic.
I understand the MoD’s typically facetious reply to the issue of timing was “Well, when better to make an award in the New Years Honours list than New Year?” I’ll tell you when – after the dust has settled and you’ve established the facts. It’s often said by recipients “This isn’t for me, it’s for the team”. Well, in my opinion, Tapper’s Dad has every right to feel let down by the “team”, by which I mean the MoD as a whole. That’s not just his or my opinion – it’s a simple fact acknowledged by the Secretary of State when he apologised. If you cannot see how provocative and upsetting this is to him, then I despair, yet hope you never find yourself in the same position. It is the effect on HIM that matters, no-one else.
Whatever the outcome of the QC’s review (and he still hasn’t answered correspondence on the subject), history will show that Tapper’s Dad did more for Military aviation safety than anyone would have thought possible. He had the balls to stand up to people whose attitude to safety and airworthiness has been, frankly, nothing short of criminal negligence. Some of you, or your children, may be glad of that one day.
I know what my first question to a certain retired 2* would be. “So ***, why did you rule airworthiness and safety were optional, and did that ruling apply to all the aircraft you were responsible for, including Nimrod?” I think this and other issues – read the QQ report - are a lot more important, don’t you? Make no mistake, there is more to come on this, that no award will be able to gloss over.