Quota rules rob troops of medals

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Skynet, Jan 30, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. From The Sunday Times
    January 31, 2010
    Quota rules rob troops of medals
    Tim Ripley

    A WHITEHALL quota system that restricts the number of medals given to soldiers in wartime has resulted in more than half the recommendations for awards for bravery in Afghanistan being turned down.

    Many senior serving and retired officers claim the system is outdated, fails to recognise the intensive fighting seen by British troops in Helmand and has resulted in hundreds of servicemen and women being denied recognition for their courage.
    More
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7009680.ece
     
  2. Is this true? Do soldiers really think "If I can get over there, I'll be the only bloke in the unit with a MM." or does he think "If I don't get over there, we're going to be really fucked."?

    The criteria for medal awards is necessarily woolly - not all actions are the same - and precedent doesn't apply. So what's the criterion that prevents devaluing previous awards? Must the soldier be a bit braver than the previous recipient?

    Should the solution be the striking of a new medal - The Outstanding Effort Medal - with clasps for "50% risk of death", "75% risk of death", "miracle" and "posthumous", coupled with the cessation of issue of all other medals?
     
  3.  
  4. Well,there has certainly not been much change in the system then! I recommended 3 guys in the 70s.They ended up with one MiD between them.However their mates knew exactly what they had done.
     
  5. It is an unfair system to some extent. Units are only allowed so many per tour. Many blokes lose out on awards because there isn't enough to go round. Getting a bravery award is basically a lottery which in all fairness it shouldn't be. You either deserve one or you don't. Simple really.
     
  6. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    Hasn't it always been like that ?

    I seem to remember reading about RN ships crew units nominating personell for the V.C from the ships company which IIRC would be limited to 1 or two ratings and the same for the officer

    Like wise the MM & MC were brought in in WW1 to get round this for acts which didn't quite make V.C. or were limited by the alloted numbers

    Slightly of topic but still on

    IIRC Major Winters from BoB was recommended for the CMoH for his actions at Brecourt but the divisions allocated medal had already been won by a Col leading a bayonet charge
     
  7. It has always been the case that "X" ammount of soldiers, of whatever unit has done the fighting, had done tremendously brave things in combat and some have been quite rightly awarded whatever medal is recommended and the rest have gone unrecognised.

    Everyone in that Regiment/Unit knows what the ones that never got an award did and it is just the cookie crumbles.
     
  8. Yep. That makes it fair then as it's just the way the cookie crumbles. Those that were worthy of an award but dipped out because there weren't enough, well fuck 'em eh! Maybe next time.
     
  9. Nobody says life is fair :smooch:
     
  10. Medals should be awarded on a case by case. Just because a unit has been awarded x amount of medals should not come into it.

    Some units will see more acts of bravery than others. If a medal is warranted then it should be awarded.
     
  11. Medal citations get reviewed all the way up chain of command as well as going to an independant(ish) committee. It is about as fair as it can be in my opinion - if anyone can offer a better mechanism, I'm sure we would be happy to hear it.

    I am proud of what I did to get my Battle of Jubilee Medal - it is those LS&GC types I have a problem with. I thought soldiers were supposed to be bad-arrse fighters - what use is good conduct and long service? They should be fighting and laying down their lives! Slackers.
     
  12. what a penis!
     
  13. Seconded, what a lot of tosh!
    As to the current medal allocation, politicians want to play things down so lots of gallantry medals hitting the London gazette and the tabloids will just high light what the troops are up to and how much control the Government have lost. It was a bad news day for the Gov with Cpl Budds VC and then the admission that over a million rounds had been fired in a units deployment, that is not basic Counter insurgency Op it's a war!
     
  14. It was not only the RN who drew lots to determine the recipient of the VC where all were equally brave. It has happened in the Army.
     
  15. You have to take a view whether we want to change the traditional British system of "sparse-but-revered" awards into a US-style "medals for everyone", i.e. substitute "routine valour" for "exceptional valour".

    Unfortunately, someone in MoD has to be unpopular by standing back and measuring current ops against historical precedent. Do current operations produce more awards per head than - say - the infantry fighting in NW Europe in WW2?