Service Chiefs to loose seats on the Defence Board

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by P2000, Jun 23, 2011.

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. BBC's Laura Kuenssberg has just broken this on Twitter:

    @BBCLauraK Heads of Army, Airforce + Navy, to lose their place on the Defence Board, MOD's senior decision making body

    Apparently this is a recommendation in a report to be published next week. Fox likely to accept. CDS to represent all three services.

    First reaction: seems petulant, even if it's actually a proposal with a long gestation. Can't se the RN / RAF being delighted at CDS being their representative, given his track record during SDSR.

    Still, divide and conquer. Government business as usual.
     
  2. Why have people in the know doing such jobs when you can employ a few highly paid civil serpents...

    Whilst we have 3 separate forces then 3 separate heads shut sit at that table and bring their experience to it.
     
  3. Which "individual chiefs" is she referring to, do you think?

    Her tweet: Twitter
     
  4. Very interesting - I'm guessing new board will be CDS, PUS, Ministers plus CDM, maybe CJO?

    I've not seen the report, but I'd guess that we'll see a dimishing set of powers for the CINCs and realignment to 3* level, an increase (and probably rustication to the country) for the 4* service chiefs. Service chiefs will focus on getting their forces ready to fight, with CDS acting as their rep, and the DB being more of a top level decision making shop. Right now DB seems weakened as service chiefs use it as a chance to push single service agendas, or push for studies into studies into studies (if you think CS are bad, wait till you've seen a service chief try procrastinating!). A streamlined DB will hopefully hammer through tough decisions like PR11 cuts, meaning that the service chiefs implement them rather than spend the whole time trying to dump them on someone else...
     
  5. Yep - a bit of a move to the US Model. Single Service Chiefs provide the forces to the day they deploy, CJO will be the only Officer to "Command" them on operations. I doubt he will be on the DB.
     
  6. I understood every word of that and concur wholeheartedly.
     
  7. \eeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
     
  8. Actually the only through is through the communications system. Messages to execute are sent from the President/Sec of Def through the military communications network hosted by the Joint Staff. I did notice General Franks (then CENTCOM) characterization of the Service Chiefs as Title X As______s.

    It does beg the question of why the Joint Staff keeps growing?, when it’s the Combatant Commanders who plan and conduct the operations with forces that are provided by the service commanders. However, they have been doing a pretty good job at ensuring joint interoperability of the kit the services are buying. F-22 being a notable exception.