Am I alone in thinking that the restructuring of the Army is a good thing, on balance? Yes, it's gobsmackingly naive of anyone to think they are anything other than a god-given opportunity for Gordon Brown to scavenge more money from Defence (and Hoon, his old enemy), but let's consider what we're getting in return: 1. An Army far better organised internally to deal with tour after tour after tour. 2. An end to the formal Arms Plot fiasco. 3. A far more robust recruiting structure, allowing young men and women to be better informed about their chosen career paths and Regimental home. 4. Far better support structures at the home base to support the wider Regimental family, by way of closer links with the communities they draw on. 5. A streamlined Divisional system, allowing our people to be posted around the depth and breadth of the Service without the traumas and career 'black marks' that traditionally accompany such moves. 6. The opportunity for individual Battalions to become (and remain!) as experts in their specific roles (AI, Mech, Air Assault etc). 7. A badly needed opportunity to drag the Army (with all it's sacred cows and shibboleths) into the 21st Century, without necessarily destroying centuries of history. No-one has suggested the removal of the vast majority of connections and affiliations with Counties and Region. Over to you - I suspect that I am in for a rough time! Can I just say, however, that I will regard your comments (both good and bad) with disdain if you are not a serving or former member of the Army. If you aren't, and you wish to comment on today's events, send an email to Question Time.