Matoman
2nd May 2003, 14:30
I'm sorry to see the premature retirement of Admiral Sir Michael Boyce as CDS. In my opinion during his time in office he has shown considerable strength of character, speaking honestly and openly about the problems facing the overstretched, undermanned and underfunded armed services - an unusual trait in the incumbent of this office. Equally, he was quite prepared to openly tread on politicians toes when necessary and I only hope his sucesssor follows his example and doesn't become one of 'Tony's Cronies'.:(
Arkroyal
2nd May 2003, 21:28
Agreed,
Unlike that idiot Guffry before him, he questioned the polititions rather than sucking up for his place in the Lords.
I'll not forgive that pongo for speaking out in defence of the chinook verdict.
Can't imagine Admiral Boyce doing it.
Why's he off early?
WE Branch Fanatic
2nd May 2003, 21:43
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/07/06/nboyce06.xml
Admiral Sir Michael Boyce is understood to be preparing to retire as the most senior military officer next year amid rumours that he has a poor relationship with ministers.
The Chief of the Defence Staff will have served just two years in the job if, as expected, he leaves his post early next year at the age of 60.
Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence said yesterday it was usual for a CDS to be appointed for a two-year term, but Sir Michael's two immediate predecessors both served for more than three years. Extending the contract is little more than a formality.
Yesterday, Mr Hoon denied reports that Sir Michael was to step down early because of disagreements. "There is no truth in that story whatsoever," he said.
A Ministry of Defence spokesman was more circumspect, saying that no decision had been taken about his tenure. Reports of a rift between Sir Michael and Mr Hoon were "pretty speculative", the two men enjoying "an effective working relationship".
There have been reports in military circles that Sir Michael's relations with Mr Hoon are strained. The two are understood to have disagreed over funding and aspects of the war against terrorism.
Sir Michael, a distinguished submariner, is said to have been deeply unhappy about Mr Hoon's decision to scrap the Navy's Sea Harriers.
He was subject to criticism at the end of last year for warning against a "Wild West" approach to terrorism, which was interpreted as an attack on the Americans.
Some officers have also criticised Sir Michael for being over-cautious in the war against terrorism.
"The troops in Afghanistan have been complaining that they've had Boyce on the phone every five minutes warning against mission creep," said one source.
The indication that Sir Michael will stand down coincided with the disclosure that the Ministry of Defence will receive an above-inflation budget increase when Gordon Brown announces the comprehensive spending review settlement this month.
Mr Hoon's £24 billion budget is expected to rise by around £1 billion.
A turning point in the ministry's fortunes came several weeks ago when Mr Brown met Sir Michael to discuss the department's financial settlement. Their talks were described as "very productive" and the CDS is understood to have impressed the Chancellor with his arguments.
Sir Michael is expected to be replaced by General Sir Michael Walker, the Chief of the General Staff and head of the Army. One defence commentator said reports of Sir Michael's departure may have been encouraged by rivals within the Army, who are keen to have their man at the top.
There may also have been pressure from the US for a more accommodating CDS.
Only three out of eight previous chief of defence staffs have served for less than three years since 1979. One, Field Marshal Lord Vincent, left after 20 months in 1992 to take up Nato's most senior military position. Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir Peter Harding, resigned in 1994 after revelations about his private life.