WHY DOES THE AGC NOT HAVE ROYAL IN ITS NAME

#1
This is not a dig, but a question I have just thought of. Why is the RLC royal yet AGC are not?

RLC formed from Rct, Raoc, acc, Re (P&C)

AGC Formed from Rmp, Rapc, wRac, Raoc (Staff Clerks), Raec, alc

Not that I begrudge the royal title to the RLC, but this just occurred to me while reading their thread that I see no reason for their title to include royal yet AGC does not.

Apart from the fact that their is no royal AG does anyone have any idea, or is it yet another indication of the lack of thought that went into this miss-mash of a corps?
 
#3
Inf/MP said:
This is not a dig, but a question I have just thought of. Why is the RLC royal yet AGC are not?

RLC formed from Rct, Raoc, acc, Re (P&C)

AGC Formed from Rmp, Rapc, wRac, Raoc (Staff Clerks), Raec, alc

Not that I begrudge the royal title to the RLC, but this just occurred to me while reading their thread that I see no reason for their title to include royal yet AGC does not.

Apart from the fact that their is no royal AG does anyone have any idea, or is it yet another indication of the lack of thought that went into this miss-mash of a corps?
Imagine you have got it there. Plus, perhaps it was felt they weren't worthy?
 
#4
They don't bother making the gay corps Royal.

That's why the AAC are not royal :D
 
#6
Plus, perhaps it was felt they weren't worthy?[/quote]

well, I got it........[/quote]

No need to be down about it...
 
#7
good point...considering the number of right ROYAL cnuts in the AGC?
 
#8
Awwwww bless he wants to be a royal, sob sob boo hoo.

Why worry about trivial things when there is a bigger picture than you.
 
#9
No Corps with Monkeys and a sh*te Records Office like Glasgow will ever deserve the title "Royal". As Mr Royle would say "Royal AGC my Arse"!!!
 
#10
Whilst not defending the complete muppetness that is the AGC; all the Army have Glasgow as their 'Records Office'. Anyway, the AGC have 'green berets', what more could they want for? Perhaps a Winged Pen for those who have done the Imprest Holders course?
 
#11
GreenSlime said:
Whilst not defending the complete muppetness that is the AGC; all the Army have Glasgow as their 'Records Office'. Anyway, the AGC have 'green berets', what more could they want for? Perhaps a Winged Pen for those who have done the Imprest Holders course?
Easy now...apart from a pass plus on milling at P Coy, my only A grade on a course was Service Funds Accounting! It's not easy you know counting beans, especially when the number of beans that make five is constantly under review at the 2 star level.
 
#12
Well personally I do not actually care as I am no longer in. This was just a question, and I see that like me no one on here actually knows.
 
#13
The AGC has THREE crowns on the cap badge, how much more Royal do you want them to be...? :cool:
 
#15
Apparently it is all to do with the Adjutant General not being a royal as in RAGC, AGRC would suggest that the AG could call anything belonging to him royal as in the Adjutant General's Royal dog, etc!!.

Personnaly I think the Corps should have been christened the Royal Army Personnel Corps or RAPC - now that has a better ring to it!!
 
#16
Inf/MP said:
This is not a dig, but a question I have just thought of. Why is the RLC royal yet AGC are not?

RLC formed from Rct, Raoc, acc, Re (P&C)

AGC Formed from Rmp, Rapc, wRac, Raoc (Staff Clerks), Raec, alc

Not that I begrudge the royal title to the RLC, but this just occurred to me while reading their thread that I see no reason for their title to include royal yet AGC does not.

Apart from the fact that their is no royal AG does anyone have any idea, or is it yet another indication of the lack of thought that went into this miss-mash of a corps?
You forgot the The Royal Pioneer Corps of your list of constituents of the RLC.

But what a question form someone from a part of the AGC that refuses to actuall wear the cap badge, use the corps colours on it's unit signs and gets upset if they are called AGC rather than RMP. Maybe once everyone in the AGC joins together and becomes a single corps, not ashamed to admit that they are AGC, royalty may decide that they are worth bestowing the honour of 'Royal' to their title.

Until then the RMP doesn't exist as a Corps and you'll just have to be happy as AGC (Provost).
 
#17
Plant-Pilot said:
Inf/MP said:
This is not a dig, but a question I have just thought of. Why is the RLC royal yet AGC are not?

RLC formed from Rct, Raoc, acc, Re (P&C)

AGC Formed from Rmp, Rapc, wRac, Raoc (Staff Clerks), Raec, alc

Not that I begrudge the royal title to the RLC, but this just occurred to me while reading their thread that I see no reason for their title to include royal yet AGC does not.

Apart from the fact that their is no royal AG does anyone have any idea, or is it yet another indication of the lack of thought that went into this miss-mash of a corps?
You forgot the The Royal Pioneer Corps of your list of constituents of the RLC.

But what a question form someone from a part of the AGC that refuses to actuall wear the cap badge, use the corps colours on it's unit signs and gets upset if they are called AGC rather than RMP. Maybe once everyone in the AGC joins together and becomes a single corps, not ashamed to admit that they are AGC, royalty may decide that they are worth bestowing the honour of 'Royal' to their title.

Until then the RMP doesn't exist as a Corps and you'll just have to be happy as AGC (Provost).
Is it - I wonder - that the RMP does not wish to be associated with the rest of the AGC or - perhaps - that the rest of the AGC doesn't wish to be associated with the RMP ? Either way I would suggest that placing the RMP within any chain of command that it might find itself investigating presents a huge potential conflict of interest. Independant reporting line for RMP with the PM(A) reporting direct to the CGS is the only solution to this problem.
 
#18
So wearing a different cap badge, having different corps colours as well as having a bright red hat is enough to keep them away from a call of 'conflict of interests'? Whatever you say it's a bit of a halfway house and not good for the corps. You are either in, wearing the AGC badge but on a red hat and being called AGC, or you're out and do your own thing without the backup of the corps. Anything else is pathetic.
 
#19
Plant-Pilot, personally I suspect that RMP would prefer the option of being out of the AGC and remove any connection at all.

However, just as they were forced into the AGC like everyone else they, will not be given this option. Apart from being the victim of defence cuts (just like almost everyone else), no one has ever told me in what way beign a part of the AGC has ever helped RMP. I do not think the RMP need the AGC in anyway shape or form. On the other hand the only benefit I can see for the AGC containing RMP and MPS is that it means that the AGC can claim to have some actual units. Though I am not sure why that should be a good thing especially as these units make it quite clear to everyone both inside and outside of the AGC their views on the matter of their membership of the AGC.

Remember it is not just RMP within the AGC who wear their own cap badge: its RMP, MPS, ALS and ETS as well and I have yet to see or hear anyone from those branches who thinks that the AGC as a whole is of any relevence to them. Dumping RMP and the others into the corps designed to combine the admin functions of the RAPC, unit clerks, RAOC staff clerks and the odds and the left overs of the WRAC was just an exercise in cost cutting based on these former corps reporting to the AG.

As a result when anyone mentions AGC they really mean AGC (SPS) only unless they specifically mention that they want to include the others, otherwise you talk about the RMP or MPS etc in their own right.

I suspect that the RMP will not remain in the AGC for too long. I suspect that eventually RN Regs, RM Police, RMP and RAFP will eventually combine in similar fashion to the CFMP in Canada. Not as good as being an independent corps in it own right, but at least a combination that has some logic behind it.
 
#20
At the risk of answering the question, and spoiling a typical Arrse slagging thread the answer lies in with the legal corps bods. The Legal folk do not owe any alleigance to the Queen and this is probably as the legal bunch are a state institution, created by the state and not for the Queen. Thus they cannot have royal warrant (or decree or appointment or whatever it's called) as this would impinge on their (alleged) impartiality.

That could of course be complete bo11ocks; make your own mind up, but it sounds good.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Top