Image of the PJM Medal
Banner Text = Fight For the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
Civil Servants
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post Civil Servants 
We have on good authority that many Civil Servants log on to this web site, you are most welcome.
Why don’t you register? Your name or email address will not be disclosed unless you want it to and you can use a no deplume as a user name if you wish. May I suggest some names for you?
Blunt, Philby, Burgess or even Maclean would do for starters.

Joking aside come on in and join us.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post CIVIL SERVANT'S 
WOT A GOOD IDEA,AS AN X MATELOT AND X CIVIL SERVANT TOO,(SORRY GUYS HAD TO LEAVE, IN CASE MY INITIATIVE DISAPPEARED!), WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT TO RECRUIT THE H. D. ,s TEA LADY, GET HER TO PUT A COUPLE OF DROPS OF SILVER NITRATE IN THEIR TEA,I HAVE IT ON AUTHORITY, THIS IS WHAT ENGINE ROOM BODS USE TO DO TO 'RUPERTS' THEY DIDN'T LIKE, RESULT, A GOOD DOSE OF THE S===S, AS EXPERIENCED BY PJM'ers. ALSO A BIT OF ADVICE, CONTRARY TO MOD MANUAL 9, THINGS DO EXIST OUTSIDE THE MANUAL,AND YOU'VE JUST FOUND ONE OF THEM. SO SIGN UP AND CHUCK EM UP, WORST THAT CAN HAPPEN IS PROMOTION.REGDS TO ADM SEETHRU-LONGJOHNS,ANY CHANCE OF GETTING 'im OVER HASLAR FOR CHECK UP FROM THE NECK UP? I DO LOVE YOU ALL REALLY, SPECIALLY THE ONE'S AT BLACKPOOL,(PENSION'S) Wink

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Officers 
I thought only the Army called officers "Ruperts" the RAF called them "Zobetts" and the Navy called them "Pigs"

What we need now is a nickname for Civil Servants?

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Officers 
Paul Alders wrote:
I thought only the Army called officers "Ruperts" the RAF called them "Zobetts" and the Navy called them "Pigs"

What we need now is a nickname for Civil Servants?


Paper shufflers or shiney ar$e$


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post CIVIL SERVANT's NICKNAME. 
Rolling Eyes THIS COULD BE FUN, DEPENDS HOW FAR UP THE SYSTEM YOU WANT TO GO,SOCIAL SERVICES, ARE 'WARDERS' , PEOPLE IN FUNNY HATS, AND STRANGE NOISY VEHICLES ARE ,'WOODENTOPS', 'PARKING ATTENDANTS, ARE 'FOREIGNERS',MINISTERS SPOKESMEN,'YO-YO'S,FATWATINJAG 'CROQUET PLAYER',SENIOR NAVAL OFFICERS(SERVING), 'LUVVIES',MANDARINS, BECOME 'TANGOES'.PM,'KINLYER'. H.D. BODS, WELL HERE I THINK ITS A CASE OF 'MATRON' WHO AM I'. H.RH.EDDY 'WAR HERO' ON ACCOUNT OF HIM HAVING MORE MEDALS THAN ME, THO MOST ARE FOR PUTTING UP, WITH NAUGHTY JOKES FROM THE MARINES.WELL GOTTA GO OVER TO 'TEAM PJM'



Last edited by ro5=6372 on Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Twisted Evil For some [not all] EVIL SERPENTS.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post . . . . . . More medals than . . . . 
Methinks the civil servants could well try to make a big deal of this one :- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/5264565/Award-of-Afghan-medals-could-be-reviewed-after-allegations-that-citations-were-incorrect.html


_________________
Veni vidi vinci
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
If so disposed, Kentsboro, one can only watch this story about bravery awards unfold, but I do see your logic with regard to the whole medal topic possibly being tainted. At least campaign gongs and those such as the PJM have indisputable provenance to back them up, all well documented on this site and proved correct. It is also nice to see that in this case the RMP and maybe their SIB branch are dealing with the matter.


_________________
Mike Barton
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: . . . . . . More medals than . . . . 
Kentsboro wrote:
Methinks the civil servants could well try to make a big deal of this one :- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/5264565/Award-of-Afghan-medals-could-be-reviewed-after-allegations-that-citations-were-incorrect.html



Yes, it is sad that this should happen but as MB says, we have to see how the Telegraph story unfolds and lets hope there isn’t any substance in it but even if there is I don’t see how Civil servants should feel that they have a right to shout loudly, …some of them have been awarding themselves undeserved medals and awards for years


_________________
KenN
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Reply with quote
Post  
Twisted Evil

Quote: "There has been concern about so-called “medal inflation” creeping into the Armed Forces, under which units have ended up with a larger haul of medals for actions in Helmand than they would have received under similar circumstances in previous conflicts" unquote. I object to the term "haul"; why not simply " a greater number"(if that is the case). In any case, I find it unlikely that a recommendation would be forwarded on the mere say so of the individual being recommended; I believe the details of the action and in particular, the incident for which the award had taken place, would have to be corroborated by witnesses, including ORs (it has happened before). Even CSs OBEs/CBEs are presumably recommended and approved by Senior Civil Servants with seniority over those recommended.

Is it possible to be in an ambush and not come under fire; what could possibly be the purpose of an ambush otherwise?

The idea that the Ceremonial Departments , particularly MoD Sec should monitor awards for bravery and or leadership is laughable. Do you remember the Glasgow Airport fiasco when Mr Brennan was reported in the press to have said, basically, that the action had to be premeditated in so far as risk had to be considered and accepted, as opposed to an impulsive reaction without consideration of the risks involved and therefore no award was made under the circumstances. And the withdrawal of the GSM in 1960 because of the "lack of rigour", again assessed from a safe and comfortable office in Whitehall.

Firstly, whether or not Commanding Officers recommend awards is a matter for the CO or (OC in some cases) concerned which probably accounts for some units and not others earning recognition. Moreover, If I remember rightly, recommendations go through the chain of command and are ultimately recommended/approved or not by the GOC or other Senior Officer; ergo Majors and Lieutenant Colonels make only the intitial recommendation which could be turned down anywhere along the line.

Before any further powers of awards or decorations are vested in Civil Servants, an investigation by a Parliamentary Committee, and I have a Chairman in mind, should be arranged to assess whether the present Ceremonial Departments of Government and the HD Committee advisers are capable, and have the integrity, to assess and validate recommendations without working to a convoluted civil service procedure where rules can be withdrawn or new rules invoked at will.

Seems, mates, as if we are back to "proliferation" again!

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Further to the Telegraph article.

"But that all began to change in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq and the insurgency which followed. In 2004, the 1st battalion of the Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment became embroiled in some of the most intense fighting experienced by British troops since the Korean War. The battalion was based in the town of al Amarah and daily fought pitched battles with insurgents who were trying to over run the isolated British base. At the end of the tour, a total of 37 medals and awards were won by the battalion, including a Victoria Cross, two Conspicuous Gallantry Crosses, ten Military Crosses and 17 Mentioned in Dispatches. It was a phenomenal haul for a unit which had only been in existence for 12 years. [ PWRR was formed on 9-9-1992 by the an
amalgamation of the Queens Regiment and the Royal Hampshires; the Queens Regiment itself was the result of an amalgamation of 6 County Regiments]

Whilst 1PWRR were fighting for their lives in Al Amarah, the 1st battalion the Cheshire Regiment were embroiled in an equally bitter battle with insurgents in Basra. The battalion was involved in battles from the middle of July until the end of August. In Basra City, a small detachment from the Cheshires based at Old State Building, were attacked every night from dusk to dawn and on several occasions faced the very real prospect of being overrun. But while 1PWRR won *37 medals and awards, the Cheshire Regiment received a single Mention in Dispatches". [Units(Companies for example) of 1 PWRR as a Battle Group were consigned to Al Amaraha, Basra and other locations, as indeed were units of the Cheshires Battle Group]

Comparisons, in my view, are always odious. As far as 1PWRR are concerned, I would recommend a Book by Professor Richard Holmes, Author, Renowned Military Historian, and TV presenter -"Dusty Warriors". Richard Holmes served with the Territorial Army for 33 years, during which time he commanded the 2nd Battalion the Wessex Regiment. Subsequently he became Director of Reserve Forces and Cadets at MoD as a Brigadier. He was appointed Colonel of the Regiment of 1 PWRR, and in this capacity he visited 1 PWRR, which in fact was known as 1 PWRR Battle Group, one of three Battle Groups under a Brigade, in Iraq in 2004. Perhaps you will agree with me that Richard Holmes credentials, and the fact that he actually saw what went on, make him a more credible author than a Telegraph reporter looking for a story he can embelish to fit his own agenda.

Again the apparent disparity of awards between different units can, I believe, be explained by the fact that recommendations are the concern of COs or OCs who recommend or not as they see fit, or as the occasions demands; conversely, they can also be rejected as part of the process.

The Telegraph report, understandably, cannot be comphrehensive, but the is no reason why it could not have been more accurate when making its judgements. It was a normal, 6 months tour; the accuracy of the medals and other awards must be challenged for this period.

For those interested: "Dusty Warriors" ISBN 978-0-00-721285-9 RRP £8-99.

1 PWRR Honours and Awards - Iraq 2004 (with acknowledgement to Professor Richard Holmes - Dusty Warrior)

* 1 VC, 3 CGC, 2 DSO, 1 MBE, 7 MC ( 4x1 PWRR) (1x RIR att.) (2x1RWF/ 1PWRR Battle Group): 3 MIDs, 1 Queens Commendation, 7 Joint Commanders Commendation; a total of 23 awards all told for that 2004 period of their tour, of which 13 were medals).

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Telegraph article 
The only reason I mentioned the article was because of one snippet or comment within the text which I saw as the typical thing the "servants" would extract (albeit out of context), which they could try and use in relation to our medal some time in the future. That snippet said - "There has been concern about so-called “medal inflation” creeping into the Armed Forces, under which units have ended up with a larger haul of medals . . . . . ", and for no other reason.


_________________
Veni vidi vinci
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Telegraph Article 
Tony,

It was not your post that promted me to write as I did. I read the article myself, and the conclusions I made were:

1) the exageration of reporters who's main objective is to present their reports in a sensationialist way, regardless of the accuracy of what they offer as facts. The period he discussed was 2004, when 1PWRR were in Iraq for a tour. The medal count alone , factually, as given above was a 23 of all classes for that tour, and not the 37 ,the total for the whole Brigade, perhaps. He was not acquainted with the notion of battle groups and the deployment of units from, say 1PWRR having to detach a particular company to join the Cheshires in Basra while 1PWRR remained in Al Amarah with in, fact a detachment from another unit from another Battle Group supporting 1 PWRR ,for example a troop of tanks/armour or other unit; his report therefore appeared unbalanced because of his lack of research.

2) My posts were, you will appreciate, a personal view, however unecessarily long and convoluted you may think they were, and, of course you are entitled to your own opinion. Whether or not the CO or OC chooses to recommend personnel for an award, as I said, is a personal matter for them. I feel their is a strict enough process as it is without bringing in the Civil Servants at MoD to frustrate the system. DS Sec, a Major General, I believe, should be able to tighten the system if required without involving the MoD Ceremonial Department, by direct communication to Commands.

3) Proliferation. The MoD reaction is typical of the Civil Servants with whom we have had to deal. In my view in the type of close quarter fighting which 1 PWRR and the other Battle Groups have to undertake, the incidence of acts of oustanding individual bravery, paticularly on more than one occasion (Pte Johnson Beharry VC - two separate acts of oustanding bravery) are likely to be greater than in a conventional type of conflict; usually they are small groups of soldiers often, initially, outnumbered. Outstanding bravery should not go unrecognised because the MoD conclude that awards should be rationed to stop perceived "medal inflation".

Tony, I hope I have caused no ill-feeling - that was not my intention.

Regards,

David

View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum