Admiral Boyce - is he quitting?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Admiral Boyce - is he quitting?
Daily mail reports that Boyce is going early in protest at Government spending plans + also over SHAR fiasco.
Is it me or is there something seriously rotten in Whitehall right now? The two most senior RN Officers have quit (1SL + CDS) over the SHAR and defence cuts, and yet the media continues to ignore this. When was the last time we had senior officers resigining like this? Come on you media types, pick this story up and run with it!
More seriously for the RAF the DM article suggests that Gen Walker will be next CDS - meaning that RAF is going to have gone a very very long time without producing a CDS.
Is it me or is there something seriously rotten in Whitehall right now? The two most senior RN Officers have quit (1SL + CDS) over the SHAR and defence cuts, and yet the media continues to ignore this. When was the last time we had senior officers resigining like this? Come on you media types, pick this story up and run with it!
More seriously for the RAF the DM article suggests that Gen Walker will be next CDS - meaning that RAF is going to have gone a very very long time without producing a CDS.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: preston
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cds
the last raf cds (mraf harding) quit in 94 when the news of the screws revealed he was having a relationship with lady buck(no not a misprint!). unlike our political masters he fell on his sword straight away. on the subject of present cds's replacement, if its a pongo have we gone back to each service taking it in turn? on subject of am day, ive heard bad things about him when he was oc 72sqn.
I'm told by a friend who knows these things that Mr Harding's very existence has been expunged from the Air Force List,Soviet style.
As for the CDS resigning / quitting early / whatever, if he has fallen on his sword he's showing a good deal more backbone than some of his predecessors, although scrapping the SHAR, inadequate, subsonic thing it is seems a strange thing to get upset about per se. That said, depriving the fleet of organic air defence, then sending it into harms way is little short of criminal.
One must always remember, though, that not evrything printed in the Daily Mail is 100% true. They said Henman would win Wimbledon.
As for the CDS resigning / quitting early / whatever, if he has fallen on his sword he's showing a good deal more backbone than some of his predecessors, although scrapping the SHAR, inadequate, subsonic thing it is seems a strange thing to get upset about per se. That said, depriving the fleet of organic air defence, then sending it into harms way is little short of criminal.
One must always remember, though, that not evrything printed in the Daily Mail is 100% true. They said Henman would win Wimbledon.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Geriatrica, UK
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Mr" Harding is still very much MRAF Sir Peter Harding.
And the MOD has not left him out of their list of CDSs
http://www.mod.uk/aboutus/staff/f_cds.htm
And the MOD has not left him out of their list of CDSs
http://www.mod.uk/aboutus/staff/f_cds.htm
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: England
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now perhaps a media-worth story would be the way we pay these guys - who admitedly have sold their souls to get there - their equivalent ranks pay and pension for the rest of their lives.
If I can't have the right kit for the place I'm going, cos of cuts, fair enough, but if we're wasting the saving by paying into the air officers retired fund then something is amiss.
Is this situation true or junior ranks/officer propaganda ?
If I can't have the right kit for the place I'm going, cos of cuts, fair enough, but if we're wasting the saving by paying into the air officers retired fund then something is amiss.
Is this situation true or junior ranks/officer propaganda ?
From my favourite broadsheet....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...06/ixhome.html
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Michael Boyce going?
Having worked with the man and found him to be someone who is generally interested in the conditions of those who work for him, as well as wanting as big a bang for the buck, it can only be bad news. Despite the fact that he is a Submariner, he has a good grasp and understanding of the role of organic air power. So, If it is true something must be up!
By the way, the Harrier may be small and subsonic, but it has a big stick and a good radar that talks to it, ask an F3 pilot if that is the case with his AMRAAM.
By the way, the Harrier may be small and subsonic, but it has a big stick and a good radar that talks to it, ask an F3 pilot if that is the case with his AMRAAM.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max B is in fact correct. "Sir" PH has indeed been "expunged from the Air Force List", but only because it lists all living MRAFs as active. Seeing as he resigned his commsision he can hardly be called active I guess.
...and as for the Scottish Group Capt, a streak of humanity is now reported as being spotted on occasions! It grips me to admit it - but he would get my vote as the lesser of two evils.
...and as for the Scottish Group Capt, a streak of humanity is now reported as being spotted on occasions! It grips me to admit it - but he would get my vote as the lesser of two evils.
I'm relieved that a usually reliable source has been confirmed as correct, Mr Harding is an ex MRAF. The good radar and big stick is all relative. The radar in question is ok, but nothing more. The big stick goes further if you launch it high and fast - try that in a SHAR.
As for the scottish Group Captain, it will be a sad day indeed if that odious little man becomes CAS or CDS. A good administrator, perhaps, but a self-serving toad, with very few fighter hours. He would, though, understand that a favourable air situation is a prime requirement for operations. Try achiieving that without organic air defence.
As for the scottish Group Captain, it will be a sad day indeed if that odious little man becomes CAS or CDS. A good administrator, perhaps, but a self-serving toad, with very few fighter hours. He would, though, understand that a favourable air situation is a prime requirement for operations. Try achiieving that without organic air defence.
