So, Mike, why didn't you say so when you, just maybe, could've made a difference?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Too far North - hardly a RAF base that isn't these days...
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, Mike, why didn't you say so when, just maybe, you could've made a difference?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6215296.stm
Former Army chief criticises MoD
General Sir Mike Jackson, the former head of the Army, has criticised the way in which the Ministry of Defence (MoD) runs the armed forces.
Speaking at the annual Dimbleby Lecture, he said there was a failure in the MoD to understand the fundamental nature of soldiering.
He added that wages paid to soldiers were "hardly impressive" and "some accommodation" was "frankly, shaming".
But the MoD said it was always working to improve conditions for its forces.
Sir Mike retired as the head of the Army in August.
Questioning the MoD's understanding of the fundamental ethos of the armed forces, he told his audience: "One's loyalty must be from the bottom.
"Sadly, I did not find this fundamental proposition shared by the MoD."
He suggested that not enough was being done to care for servicemen and women, as well as their families.
"Not much over £1,000 a month for the private soldier for what he or she is doing on operations is hardly an impressive figure," said Sir Mike.
He went on to add that "some accommodation is still, frankly, shaming and hemmed around by petty regulation".
The former Army chief told his audience it was "time that real authority was restored to the Chiefs of Staff in order to match the responsibility which indubitably and rightly they carry".
He also hit out at the "diminution" of the authority of chiefs of staff - his former role at the Army.
Sir Mike later turned his attention to the culture of "commercial so-called 'best practice', with its... targets".
During his speech, he hit out at a "Kafka-esque situation whereby the MoD congratulates itself on achieving an accommodation improvement plan defined by itself on what it calls affordability, but which is far from what is defined by the needs of soldiers and their families".
General Sir Mike Jackson stepped down as chief of the general staff in August.
BBC defence correspondent Paul Adams said the comments were "bound to cause offence in some circles" and were likely to be "taken seriously" by those high up within the MoD.
"I'm sure there will be those who raise a glass because they don't like the MoD either."
But our correspondent went on to say Sir Mike was "not universally respected", adding that some people may think "it is a bit late to stand up for the common soldier", given his recent retirement.
A spokesman for the MoD said: "General Jackson is fully entitled... to voice his opinion on these important issues."
He added the MoD was "staffed by civil servants and members of the Armed Forces working closely together... with a clear sense that their priority is to support our forces on the front line".
"While we do not agree with everything Sir Mike has said, we are always the first to recognise - for example in relation to medical services and accommodation - that although we have delivered real improvements, there is more we can do.
"We are always striving to make things better for our forces and we are always open to informed criticism."
Former Army chief criticises MoD
General Sir Mike Jackson, the former head of the Army, has criticised the way in which the Ministry of Defence (MoD) runs the armed forces.
Speaking at the annual Dimbleby Lecture, he said there was a failure in the MoD to understand the fundamental nature of soldiering.
He added that wages paid to soldiers were "hardly impressive" and "some accommodation" was "frankly, shaming".
But the MoD said it was always working to improve conditions for its forces.
Sir Mike retired as the head of the Army in August.
Questioning the MoD's understanding of the fundamental ethos of the armed forces, he told his audience: "One's loyalty must be from the bottom.
"Sadly, I did not find this fundamental proposition shared by the MoD."
He suggested that not enough was being done to care for servicemen and women, as well as their families.
"Not much over £1,000 a month for the private soldier for what he or she is doing on operations is hardly an impressive figure," said Sir Mike.
He went on to add that "some accommodation is still, frankly, shaming and hemmed around by petty regulation".
The former Army chief told his audience it was "time that real authority was restored to the Chiefs of Staff in order to match the responsibility which indubitably and rightly they carry".
He also hit out at the "diminution" of the authority of chiefs of staff - his former role at the Army.
Sir Mike later turned his attention to the culture of "commercial so-called 'best practice', with its... targets".
During his speech, he hit out at a "Kafka-esque situation whereby the MoD congratulates itself on achieving an accommodation improvement plan defined by itself on what it calls affordability, but which is far from what is defined by the needs of soldiers and their families".
General Sir Mike Jackson stepped down as chief of the general staff in August.
BBC defence correspondent Paul Adams said the comments were "bound to cause offence in some circles" and were likely to be "taken seriously" by those high up within the MoD.
"I'm sure there will be those who raise a glass because they don't like the MoD either."
But our correspondent went on to say Sir Mike was "not universally respected", adding that some people may think "it is a bit late to stand up for the common soldier", given his recent retirement.
A spokesman for the MoD said: "General Jackson is fully entitled... to voice his opinion on these important issues."
He added the MoD was "staffed by civil servants and members of the Armed Forces working closely together... with a clear sense that their priority is to support our forces on the front line".
"While we do not agree with everything Sir Mike has said, we are always the first to recognise - for example in relation to medical services and accommodation - that although we have delivered real improvements, there is more we can do.
"We are always striving to make things better for our forces and we are always open to informed criticism."
Last edited by Confucius; 7th Dec 2006 at 09:51.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,574
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
"One's loyalty must be from the bottom."
Soldiers getting a bum deal?
Soldiers getting a bum deal?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gosh..........an Ex senior officer with his snout in the trough......imagine my surprise
Pity that during his tenure he was not so vociferous but I guess there were pension considerations
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Edited to state I am an arse
Just watched with rapt fascination and I thought he was superb, well done sir
Pity that during his tenure he was not so vociferous but I guess there were pension considerations
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Edited to state I am an arse
Just watched with rapt fascination and I thought he was superb, well done sir
Last edited by Always_broken_in_wilts; 6th Dec 2006 at 23:23.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, really?
A spokesman for the MoD said.....
"While we do not agree with everything Sir Mike has said, we are always the first to recognise - for example in relation to medical services and accommodation - that although we have delivered real improvements
"While we do not agree with everything Sir Mike has said, we are always the first to recognise - for example in relation to medical services and accommodation - that although we have delivered real improvements
It just goes to show, even as CoS, you can't polish a turd when it comes to MoD penny-pinching policy
At least he's spoken now.
Uncle G
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although the General may have been paid and should have mentioned this stuff while he was driving the train set, hopefully it will raise the issue of housing. Simply put the Cra*p that DHE go on about housing is utterly utterly wrong. Changing definitions to make stats look good is typical of most defence support agencies.
MoD's response is yet again typical of a Ministry that does not give a shi*t about the welfare of chaps that are being killed, nor of their devoted families.
MoD's response is yet again typical of a Ministry that does not give a shi*t about the welfare of chaps that are being killed, nor of their devoted families.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It really never ceases to amaze me how people like Sir Mike change their attitude as they go through their carreer. I have seen it a million times in the Air Farce.
You get a young baby Fg Off who is going to 'change the world' You hear them in the crew room about how this needs changing, and that needs doing and 'if I were OC XXXX squadron then I'd do it this way Blah' Great stuff to hear from a JO. But it don't last.............................................
They rise to Flt Lt, go off and come back as a Sqn Ldr, where already, their outlook on things has begun to change ever so slightly. Gone is the thrust and thunder attitude, now there is a less harsh, perhaps even a more 'sensible' take on things. But nevertheless, their underlying view still remains the same, albeit somewhat calmer now.
After a tour as Sqn Ldr/Flt Cdr they go off again and come back (quite often to the same sqn or fleet) as a Wg Cdr. Now there is a significant change. The 'punchy' attitude from a couple of ranks ago has almost disapeared, and has been replaced with a far more 'company man' attitude. The Company is 1st, last, and anything in between frankly! (Not all Sqn Cdrs are like this I know, but I'm refering to the majority here)
Off again, and soon to return as the 'Staish where he is still very much the 'company man' but now apears to have mellowed just a little. 'Maybe he is returning to his roots you think??' Lets hope so. But NO........................
The next time we see our man, he is now of Air Rank, where he effectively IS the company, and he 'aint gonner rock the boat and change anything' - he has his positiion and pension to think about now (the position on the board that is!!)
I just wish I knew what happened to our little Fg Off types when they go 'off' in between ranks, because whatever it is, it sure does have a lasting impression on them.
It dosn't suprise me in the least to find Sir Mike now bashing his former boss's for what they didn't do. Sorry Mike, you have had the chance during the last few ranks of your life to make a real change, but either couldn't be bothered to take up the challenge or were thinking too much of that pension sh1t stuff! (or maybe that position on the board of 'Tanks are Us'
Get back to prunning your roses, you now have the rank of 'has been' (and failed)
Kind regards to all, and best wishes for Crimbo', especially to everyone out in the Gulf, Afghanistan and anyone away from their loved ones. Be Safe
TSM
You get a young baby Fg Off who is going to 'change the world' You hear them in the crew room about how this needs changing, and that needs doing and 'if I were OC XXXX squadron then I'd do it this way Blah' Great stuff to hear from a JO. But it don't last.............................................
They rise to Flt Lt, go off and come back as a Sqn Ldr, where already, their outlook on things has begun to change ever so slightly. Gone is the thrust and thunder attitude, now there is a less harsh, perhaps even a more 'sensible' take on things. But nevertheless, their underlying view still remains the same, albeit somewhat calmer now.
After a tour as Sqn Ldr/Flt Cdr they go off again and come back (quite often to the same sqn or fleet) as a Wg Cdr. Now there is a significant change. The 'punchy' attitude from a couple of ranks ago has almost disapeared, and has been replaced with a far more 'company man' attitude. The Company is 1st, last, and anything in between frankly! (Not all Sqn Cdrs are like this I know, but I'm refering to the majority here)
Off again, and soon to return as the 'Staish where he is still very much the 'company man' but now apears to have mellowed just a little. 'Maybe he is returning to his roots you think??' Lets hope so. But NO........................
The next time we see our man, he is now of Air Rank, where he effectively IS the company, and he 'aint gonner rock the boat and change anything' - he has his positiion and pension to think about now (the position on the board that is!!)
I just wish I knew what happened to our little Fg Off types when they go 'off' in between ranks, because whatever it is, it sure does have a lasting impression on them.
It dosn't suprise me in the least to find Sir Mike now bashing his former boss's for what they didn't do. Sorry Mike, you have had the chance during the last few ranks of your life to make a real change, but either couldn't be bothered to take up the challenge or were thinking too much of that pension sh1t stuff! (or maybe that position on the board of 'Tanks are Us'
Get back to prunning your roses, you now have the rank of 'has been' (and failed)
Kind regards to all, and best wishes for Crimbo', especially to everyone out in the Gulf, Afghanistan and anyone away from their loved ones. Be Safe
TSM
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
I know General Sir Mike Jackson was an Army man all his career but seeing as his last job was as top military man for all three services and he's swam in purple waters for many years his briefing came across a little "the Army are great, oh and the other services helped a bit" .
His summation was all Army and even as an ex-Army type myself I found it a little distasteful given that the casualties RAF, RN and RM's have also taken fighting these damned ego trip wars.
His summation was all Army and even as an ex-Army type myself I found it a little distasteful given that the casualties RAF, RN and RM's have also taken fighting these damned ego trip wars.
"I just wish I knew what happened to our little Fg Off types when they go 'off' in between ranks, because whatever it is, it sure does have a lasting impression on them."
Off to the Adult Literacy Centre at Watchfield, no doubt?
Of course if they don't go, if they are good enough they eventually become grumbling Ancient Aviators who get right up the noses of the thrusting little to$$eurs back from their brain washing in Swindonia full of self importance..... Because these BOFs tend to speak the truth, not the 'management scribbldegook' spouted by the thrusters!
Off to the Adult Literacy Centre at Watchfield, no doubt?
Of course if they don't go, if they are good enough they eventually become grumbling Ancient Aviators who get right up the noses of the thrusting little to$$eurs back from their brain washing in Swindonia full of self importance..... Because these BOFs tend to speak the truth, not the 'management scribbldegook' spouted by the thrusters!
Last edited by BEagle; 7th Dec 2006 at 07:08.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Helpful Stacker said,
"I know General Sir Mike Jackson was an Army man all his career but seeing as his last job was as top military man for all three services and he's swam in purple waters for many years his briefing came across a little "the Army are great, oh and the other services helped a bit" .
His summation was all Army and even as an ex-Army type myself I found it a little distasteful given that the casualties RAF, RN and RM's have also taken fighting these damned ego trip wars."
He was CGS (G as in General not Marshal or Admiral). Nothing to do with the other Services.
"I know General Sir Mike Jackson was an Army man all his career but seeing as his last job was as top military man for all three services and he's swam in purple waters for many years his briefing came across a little "the Army are great, oh and the other services helped a bit" .
His summation was all Army and even as an ex-Army type myself I found it a little distasteful given that the casualties RAF, RN and RM's have also taken fighting these damned ego trip wars."
He was CGS (G as in General not Marshal or Admiral). Nothing to do with the other Services.
A spokesman for the MoD (said)….. the MoD was "staffed by civil servants and members of the Armed Forces working closely together... with a clear sense that their priority is to support our forces on the front line".
The latter may, in part, still be true, but rest assured these miscreants will continue to be hunted down and dealt with severely. The priority of an increasing majority in MB, DPA, DLO etc is to keep their heads down, do their time and stuff everyone else. I’ve had people with enormous authority gawp and then laugh in my face at the very mention of “support” and “front line” in the same sentence.
The latter may, in part, still be true, but rest assured these miscreants will continue to be hunted down and dealt with severely. The priority of an increasing majority in MB, DPA, DLO etc is to keep their heads down, do their time and stuff everyone else. I’ve had people with enormous authority gawp and then laugh in my face at the very mention of “support” and “front line” in the same sentence.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Flatlands
Age: 60
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I listened to the lecture, and was impressed with its content, although I agree with previous posts - it would have had far more impact had the General still wore the uniform. Perhaps there is a guilt trip here post job, that he wasn't ultimately able to make a significant difference, and change the tide of progressive "business-isation" of the Forces. He touched on this in his speech, that the Services were a "political football", kicked about across the corridors of MOD, who continued to enforce the latest corporate mantra to justify the cuts that were necessary. However, with no defined end product, this philosophy is difficult to maintain. How many bullets, bombs, missiles are needed to complete any given mission? Impossible to quantify, and thus impossible to apply performance indicators to.
As for the proposed Army bias - that was inevitable. He was a soldier, and therefore talks about what he knows. Would Sir Jock be any different?
What would be amazing is if MOD did actually sit up and take notice. As a cynic, this is of course never going to happen, but one can only hope.
As for the proposed Army bias - that was inevitable. He was a soldier, and therefore talks about what he knows. Would Sir Jock be any different?
What would be amazing is if MOD did actually sit up and take notice. As a cynic, this is of course never going to happen, but one can only hope.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although slightly late, at least he did raise the current issues and it is being discussed. Whether the discussions are being done in MoD, or will make any difference - only time will tell (refer to RAF in meltdown thread - ignoring RAF Club Dress hijack).
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 47
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many have slated Mike Jackson for not speaking out sooner whilst in uniform. Would any of them be the same people who complained about Gen Dannatt speaking out whilst serving as the current CGS?
The press and critics cannot have it both ways; if they expect serving senior officers to tow the party line then they cannot criticise Gen Jackson for speaking now instead of during his tenure as CGS. Besides, how do we know that Gen Jackson hadn't spouted all this behind closed doors as CGS; he's hardly a shrinking violet and would make mincemeat of Strangly Browne.
The press and critics cannot have it both ways; if they expect serving senior officers to tow the party line then they cannot criticise Gen Jackson for speaking now instead of during his tenure as CGS. Besides, how do we know that Gen Jackson hadn't spouted all this behind closed doors as CGS; he's hardly a shrinking violet and would make mincemeat of Strangly Browne.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well at least he did say something at somepoint, surely that's better than nothing. Perhaps he recognised the politicisation of the MOD when he was 'in the job' to realise that such comments would have been instantly dismissed or tucked away in a small column on page 23 of a newpaper followed by his early dismissal "an opportunity to spend more time with the family after many years of loyal service".
Whether he was in the post or not the comments he makes now may well have more to do with Tony Blair's last days in the castle where they'd have more of an affect. These comments
However it's again the general public that's to blame here, why didn't they note the slow but steady erosion of the armed forces around them. Why didn't they show more interest in the welfare of the armed services especially since they are being called more often than a pizza delivery boy and bodies are returning from overseas conflict. Labour resent the armed forces and just see them as an easy target to slash and cut, disrespectful. I'm all for cutting the massive benefits mechanism reduced to a more sensible and practical level and the money invested in other 'areas' of society and defence.
General Sir Jackson, good man, right then who's next from the General staff, anyone else approaching retirement.
Whether he was in the post or not the comments he makes now may well have more to do with Tony Blair's last days in the castle where they'd have more of an affect. These comments
However it's again the general public that's to blame here, why didn't they note the slow but steady erosion of the armed forces around them. Why didn't they show more interest in the welfare of the armed services especially since they are being called more often than a pizza delivery boy and bodies are returning from overseas conflict. Labour resent the armed forces and just see them as an easy target to slash and cut, disrespectful. I'm all for cutting the massive benefits mechanism reduced to a more sensible and practical level and the money invested in other 'areas' of society and defence.
General Sir Jackson, good man, right then who's next from the General staff, anyone else approaching retirement.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any criticism of 'the system' bites yer bum when you are 'in' (been there done that!). Therefore, I have some sympathy with the General's apparent silence when 'in post' - after all, he also has family/mortgage/outgoings to support (just a bit bigger than mine, I suspect). Getting the the Order of the Boot as a result of daring to point out that emperor was, in fact, naked, would therefore, weigh heavily on anyone's decision to say so. Luckily, I had Plan B up my sleeve but obviously General Mike didn't, so he kept 'schtum' until he left. He was also playing for higher stakes!
Yes, his comments would have carried much more weight if he was still in but he he is no lightweight retired has-been. Unfortunately, he is retired and so the effects of his comments are somewhat diminished. Nonetheless, those of us who still care for the Services we left should welcome the General's side-swipe at the bean-counting, faceless, spineless MoD mandarins and politicians, who are ruining our defence capability.
One hopes that our offspring will not pay with their lives for the last few years of inept leadership and management by our generation.
Yes, his comments would have carried much more weight if he was still in but he he is no lightweight retired has-been. Unfortunately, he is retired and so the effects of his comments are somewhat diminished. Nonetheless, those of us who still care for the Services we left should welcome the General's side-swipe at the bean-counting, faceless, spineless MoD mandarins and politicians, who are ruining our defence capability.
One hopes that our offspring will not pay with their lives for the last few years of inept leadership and management by our generation.
Last edited by flipster; 7th Dec 2006 at 10:00.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: WSM
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
General Jackson addressed the "Why didn't I speak up whilst in office question " during his speech. Along the lines of it being a 5 min wonder.
Some people seem to think he was CDS; he wasn't, that was Mike Walker prior to our own Sir Jock.
I doubt if he (Sir Jock) will fall on his sword at any time in office. He presided over the biggest kicking the RAF has ever experienced (IMHO) and although he said at various forums that a 41k Air Force was unviable, he let it happen. Could it be the difference between a 4* CAS at £150k pa and a 4* CDS starting rate of £197k rising to £214k had any bearing on his silence? I have my own view on that but decide for yourselves.
Some people seem to think he was CDS; he wasn't, that was Mike Walker prior to our own Sir Jock.
I doubt if he (Sir Jock) will fall on his sword at any time in office. He presided over the biggest kicking the RAF has ever experienced (IMHO) and although he said at various forums that a 41k Air Force was unviable, he let it happen. Could it be the difference between a 4* CAS at £150k pa and a 4* CDS starting rate of £197k rising to £214k had any bearing on his silence? I have my own view on that but decide for yourselves.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Is it still the case that retired Airships don't get a pension as such, but retire on half-pay? Taking endplay's figures: 150/2 = 75; 214/2 = 107 difference of 32, or nearly 50% of the 75 number....
Just watched bbc online's extract of the speech. Bravo old man! On yoof management speak and performance indicators:
"I am clear in my mind as to the only performance indicator which should matter to the armed forces: To achieve the objectives which are set, that is, to win!"
Before watching was feeling he should have spoken out whilst in tenure, but think that should put a rocket up someone somewhere anyhow!
"I am clear in my mind as to the only performance indicator which should matter to the armed forces: To achieve the objectives which are set, that is, to win!"
Before watching was feeling he should have spoken out whilst in tenure, but think that should put a rocket up someone somewhere anyhow!