ROYAL GLOUCESTER BERKSHIRE AND WILTSHIRE REGIMENTAL ASSOCIATION
Branch Committee Members for 2005/2006
ASSOCIATION AND BRANCH FUTURE EVENTS
WHERE ARE THEY NOW
LOOKING FOR LOST FRIENDS
Memorial Stone at Wardrobe Salisbury
Salisbury weekend 2000
FARMERS BOYS
MILITARY MUSEUMS
4th Battalion the Wiltshire Regiment
THE ROYAL FOREST OF DEAN BRANCH
DUKE OF EDINBURGHS COMPANY SOCIAL NIGHT 2005
SUSTAINER ONLINE
SERVICE PALS
BISCUITS BROWN
MILIITARY VEHICLES
BRANCH PRESIDENT
CAP BADGES
REGIMENTAL HEADQUARTERS RGBW
COLD WAR WARRIORS
BRANCH ANNUAL DINNER 2002
PHOTO OF BRANCH MEMBERS
ARMED FORCESPENSION SCHEME (AFPS)
WAR MEMORIAL PLAN TAKES STEP FORWARD
BRITAINS SMALL WARS 1945 - 2003
COMRADES AND COLLEAGUES
ARMY PENSIONS - SOLDIERS - CURRENT RATES
SALISBURY WEEKEND 2002
THE ARMY BENEVOLENT FUND
Forces Pension Society
NATIONAL EX-SERVICES ASSOCIATION
GALINA INTERNATIONAL BATTLEFIELD TOURS
Royal Gloucestershire Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment
COMMONWEALTH WAR GRAVES COMMISSION
RGBW Coy RIFLE VOLUNTEERS
Forces Re-united
Website updates
THE ULSTER ASH GROVE
ARMYNET
FORCES TRAVEL
MESSAGE FROM THE COLONEL OF THE REGIMENT
OPEN LETTER
Ferozeshah 2004
BRANCH DINNER 2004
GAME FOR A LAUGH
Buckingham Palace visit 2002
STANDARDS ON PARADE
FOVANT BABGES
FUTURE ARMY STRUCTURE: MAIN CHANGES
ARMY RUGBY FINAL
RGBW TO BECOME A REGIMENT OF THE LIGHT INFANTRY
SAVE THE REGIMENTS
ATTENTITION ! RECOATS ON CAMPAIGN
THE FUTURE OF THE RGBW
WW2 PEOPLE'S WAR
Contact Information for Paul Fennell
Message Board
Guestbook
Event Calendar
Mail Form
What would you like to see more of on this site?
|
OPEN LETTER
 Don't destroy all our values
I AM totally disgusted with the dismemberment of my old regiment. It seems that the Government is determined to destroy all the values that we stood for.
When I joined the Army in 1970, at the age of 15, the regiment had only several years previously amalgamated to the form The Duke of Edinburgh's Royal Regiment. This was, of course, an amalgamation of the Royal Berkshire and Wiltshire regiments. Although there were some moans and groans it soon stabilised and we became proud members.
The most important factor was the maintenance of battle honours and the proud history of both regiments. More recently, after the amalgamation with the Royal Gloucestershire Regiment there was much concern and in fighting as to which honours, cap badges, even museums, would be more predominant.
There is surely a sensible limit on how far history can be crushed into a disposable entity.
From the age of 15 I learned to stand up for what I felt was right! I was and still am a very patriotic and loyal subject to the crown and to the services of this country.
Nothing could be more demoralising than to find that the recently formed regiment is to be sliced up and discarded in this way.
They are tinkering not just with tradition and moral values but with the very essence and structure of our armed forces and indeed the country as a whole.
M VERTANNES
(Ex Corporal 1st Battalion)
Thorney Park, Wroughton |
MESSAGE FROM MAJOR GENERAL R D GRIST
The following article has been written for the Gloucester Citizen by Major General (Ret'd) Robin D Grist CB OBE DL
Major General Grist was the last Colonel of the Gloucestershire Regiment and the first Colonel of the Royal Gloucestershire Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment.
The Government announcement that the Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment is to be dismembered came as a complete shock. My reaction like many others, particularly those currently serving in the Regiment at Hounslow, was one of bewilderment, anger and hurt. It is like forcing a happy and successful married couple with a large family to divorce. The Government intends that part of the Regiment, that coming from Gloucestershire and Bristol and formerly the ‘Glosters’, should merge with the Devonshire & Dorset Regiment and then become an additional battalion of the Light Infantry. Those coming from Berkshire and Wiltshire will merge into the Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment.
Since the RGBW was formed in 1994 by the amalgamation of the Glosters with the Duke of Edinburgh’s Regiment (DERR) it has performed magnificently on operations, in its peacetime duties and on the sports field. It was recently described by the General commanding London District as “an exemplary infantry battalion in every way”. I never heard this said about another regiment. The RGBW is fully manned, it has 3 vacancies, (there are 26 other regiments far more under strength, several are over 50 short) and forecasts show this can be maintained. How well a regiment retains its trained manpower is important as this reduces the costs of recruiting and training replacements and means a more experienced regiment. The RGBW has always had good retention; currently there are only two regiments in the infantry that do better.
Why therefore has the Government decided to dismember the RGBW? I have to confess I don’t know but I am absolutely convinced it is not because the RGBW have failed in any way. I think it is because the Army is not confident that other regiments can sustain themselves without larger recruiting areas and they have therefore decided to recommend splitting up the RGBW in this way. In the long term this will work but in the short term it poses huge problems. There are only a very few serving now who were ever either in the Glosters or the DERR. Dividing everyone up is going to be just as painful as divorce.
The changes will not happen until 2006 and in the meantime the RGBW will continue its current role of public duties in London, they are working over Christmas guarding Buckingham Palace and of course being available to deal with an incident. They will go on recruiting because later in 2005 they will move to Chester and then undertake an operational tour in Bosnia. Keeping everyone’s ‘head up’ and maintaining an excellent performance will be a huge leadership challenge but I would back the RGBW to deliver this when others might not.
Mr Hoon said yesterday “in implementing the new system the Army will ensure that the regimental traditions, heritage, culture and local connections will live on in the new arrangements.” How this will be done in the case of the RGBW we do not know but the campaign led by the Citizen to ‘Save the Back Badge’, and the support of so many people for it, has been magnificent and has been hugely appreciated by the Regiment. As a result Mr Hoon is well aware of its importance. However the battle is not won, the Light Infantry will resist so don’t give up yet. It is important to save it partly because it is unique, no other regiment in the world wears a Back Badge, but partly because when one wears it one joins a special club where one knows that there are exceptional standards and comradeship. Those who wear it continue a proud tradition and know it. Part of that proud tradition is what the RGBW have achieved over the last ten years added to what the Glosters did before that.
Despite yesterday’s announcement it is not a ‘done deed’. Every reorganisation of the infantry has been changed between announcement and implementation. Some readers will remember the Glosters being ‘saved’ in 1969 only fourteen days before amalgamation. General Sir Mike Jackson has said he would like to retain the four battalions but cannot do so “within current resources”. The world situation is not static; much can change in the next 12 months. The RGBW must therefore not only plan for the changes that have been ordered but ensure that should it be decided to ‘save’ battalions they are at the top of the queue. To do this they will continue to need the sort of support that the people of Gloucestershire have given in recent weeks through the media and MPs for many months to come. The quality of the RGBW is such that if they can be saved to become a battalion in the future Army the Army will be the better for it.
|
Toby North comments
 | Response to the Army restructuring announcement made on Thursday 16th December 2004 by the Secretary of state for defence in the house of commons.
Firstly I would like to congratulate Geoff Hoon on getting the titles right of the former Regiments, something that many close to home seem to loose sight of.
How convenient to resurrect the Duke of Edinburgh’s Royal Regiment, at a time when survival of the fittest seems to spring to mind and ensuring that high regimental stakes are protected.
How sad that the soldiers who joined as RGBW soldiers, saw active service in country’s like, Kosovo, Bosnia and Northern Ireland and left as RGBW soldiers were not even mentioned!
Bizarre springs to my mind.
So to changes and looking forward, those that have spoken to me seem to have a number of questions that they would like some response to.
A summary of these, are as follows.
The Wardrobe in Salisbury as we understand was leased to the Duke of Edinburgh’s Royal Regiment for a period of 99 years, the funds to secure this lease came from Regimental money and serving soldiers pay. This should be recognised by the building being renamed:
Duke of Edinburgh’s House
Therefore ensuring a focal point for the Regiment.
Financial support for Salisbury is taken into account when the current Regimental Association funds are re-distributed.
3. The Original Branches of the Duke of Edinburgh’s Royal Regimental Association to be
Re-instated, taking our guidance from Salisbury.
The continuation of Annual Regimental events organised at Salisbury, Hungerford and Swindon.
5. Adoption and financial support of the Farmersboys website so that world wide communication can be continued.
These various points are my own summary of comments made to me, which I would fully support. I cannot state that these points are fully supported by everyone but firmly believe that they do represent a large majority.
Toby North
Chairman, Reading Branch
|
|
Comments by Terry Harrington
 Seldom (I Think this may be the first time) am I moved to put into print what I feel are the failings of others. I am of the opinion that there are individuals and groups who are in a position and expected (PAID) to look after the best interests of the Regimental family both past and present.
Although I receive regular personal emails (like the one repeated below) and briefings, of the current situation all that I have seen is a request to sign a petition or to send a letter. I will admit that I live outside of the recognised county boundaries of the current regiment and do not see what is being done there. But in all the media coverage of this topic not once have I heard, read or seen the Regiment mentioned - Black Watch - Cheshire's and others yes (neither near where I live) but not Glosters (Glorious or otherwise nor RGBW).
Why have not the media, in the form of National TV and Newspapers, been bombarded with material to use in their coverage? It is of little use to regale those of us who already know of the accomplishments of the regiment, both recent and historical. The message has to reach a much wider audience to be of use in pressuring those that have the power of change.
It would seem to me that the answer is in the message I have just received from the Colonel of the Regiment, which includes the following statement -
"as well as our support for the necessary move to larger regiments, should have been recognised by a more sympathetic view on how best to decide our future" -
Once again it would seem to me that a statement like this demonstrates that he, and others of the ilk, conceded before any fight started and have thrown their hat into the ring with the reformers expecting to be treated with mercy or as is stated "sympathy" as a result of this capitulation. What type of fighting spirit does that display?
Akin to this is a section on the notice board reporting what was said (or at least perceived by one person) at the Swindon meeting e.g.
"he explained in detail why the battalion is being split in two. (in a nutshell) no one wanted the RGBW as a whole battalion in their division i.e. Cheshire's, Stafford's, WFR said no. The same goes for the light div. and queens div. the compromise is what was announced yesterday "
What type of approaches were made to these organisations? Or did the "Regimental body" sit back and wait to be treated sympathetically? Is the reaction of those listed above a reflection of what they think of the decision to go along with reform? Was there a perception by them of a lack of fighting spirit among our representatives at this level?
Or are we simply "Billy no Mates?
I feel as though I am rambling now and if I am fair I may be well wide of the mark, however these are my current feelings at the loss of something held dear to me for many years past. Please show me that my comments above are wrong and unfair and show that apart from fine words and comments something has been, and will be done to fight what is being done to our fine Regiment.
Those who still serve at high levels are reminded that just following orders is no defence. Nor is it a sound tactic to depend on Politicians to be fair or sympathetic. It is well past time to stand up, Act and make some noise. Remember that others have sacrificed much more than a future career in service of the Regimental cause.
Terry Harrington
Area Safety Adviser
University of Southampton
Tele 02380 592806 (internal 22806 )
E-mail: j.g.harrington@soton.ac.uk
. Thankyou to all those who replied to my rant pre Xmas reference defence of our Regiment.
2. Appologies if this takes up too much space on the message board.
3 & main reason for this message. Appologies to 2 Senior Officers although with reservations under the heading How much and when or too little too late.
Alex (Maxie) Hall pointed me in the direction of a letter printed in the Telegraph on 27 Dec 04 which I reproduce below. whilst looking for that I also found mention of the regiment as included below which formed part of a bigger article but shows that someone did put their head up although I note that there is still the expectation of sympathy & generosity from a group singularly lacking in either. I appologise to you both.
Daily Telegraph 5 Dec 04
Secret report urges Army to defy Hoon over cuts to fighting forces
By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent
(Filed: 05/12/2004)
In a strongly-worded letter, Gen Kevin O'Donoghue, the Colonel of the Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire - one of the regiments to be disbanded - tells the chief of the general staff of his disappointment at how the debate is being conducted. He said: "I am disheartened by the lack of generosity of spirit shown by many of those involved in the debate over the future of the RGBW.
"In particular, I am deeply disappointed that this lack of compassion has led the executive committee to consider, in effect, disbanding the RGBW...I cannot believe that it is the committee's intention to reduce the combat power of the infantry by breaking up such an operationally effective regiment."
In another letter, Gen O'Donoghue launches a blistering attack on Maj Gen Christopher Elliot, the Colonel Commandant of the Prince of Wales's Division, over suggestions that his regiment is not fully manned. Both officers are members of the same division of infantry.
He writes to the director of infantry: "Christopher Elliott has written to you with his views on the future structure of the Prince Of Wales Division, which although loosely based on the discussions at our Colonels of Regiments meeting on October 4, give a very negative and far from unanimous set of options...
"Christopher's letter misses the point in three areas. First he persists in referring to the poor manning record of the RGBW. This is a fallacy."
The annex contains letters in a similar vein from the colonels commandant of the Prince of Wales's Division, the Devonshire and Dorset Regiment and the Light Division.
No way to treat an exemplary regiment (extracted from Daily Telegraph 27 Dec 04)
Sir - Members of the Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment (RGBW) were guarding Buckingham Palace on Christmas Day. They first heard that they were due to be dismembered as part of the recent defence cuts announced by the Government via the television - which seems to sum up the way that they and other regiments have been treated during this debacle. Our Prime Minister did not even have the courage or the respect to sit beside his Secretary of State for Defence as he announced these wide-ranging cuts and changes.
The RGBW does have the advantage of having recently served in Iraq and does not happen to be located in the Prime Minister's constituency, so it represents an easy target politically.
The fact is that it is fully recruited and has one of the best retention rates of any infantry regiment. In addition, it was recently described as an "exemplary infantry battalion in every way" (General Officer Commanding, London District). It is the first to understand that change and development are necessary, especially given its exceptional record since its extremely successful amalgamation in 1994, but even those at the forefront of the regiment find this incomprehensible and are left with the almost impossible task of explaining this to their men and encouraging them to maintain their exemplary standards.
Maj Gen Robin Grist (rtd), Colonel, the Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment, 1994 - 2001, Warminster, Wilts
|
LETTER SENT TO LOCAL MEDIA
| From:
Regimental Headquarters
The Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment
Custom House 31 Commercial Road Gloucester GL1 2HE
Tel: 01452 – 522682 Fax: 01452 – 311116 Mil: (9)4249 – 8400
E-mail: regimental-secretary@rgbw.army.mod.uk Website: www.rgbw.co.uk
RHQ/387 21 January 2005
Letter sent to local media
THE FUTURE OF THE ROYAL GLOUCESTERSHIRE, BERKSHIRE
AND WILTSHIRE REGIMENT
As you will be aware, Mr Hoon announced on the 16th December, on the advice of the Army Board, and as part of the Government decision to reduce the infantry by four battalions, that he had decided to ‘dismember’ the Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment [RGBW]. No infantry regiment has been disbanded since 1945; no precedent for dismembering a regiment exists. If the RGBW had not been a successful amalgamation in 1994, then this drastic action might have been justified but the RGBW has been outstandingly successful. The Army Board said that the guiding principles for the Future Infantry Structure were that regiments should be treated equitably, the best of the regimental system should be maintained, and there must be a golden thread linking former regiments with the new regiments. None of these principles have been adhered to in the case of the RGBW; no other regiment is to have its ashes spread further afield.
He announced that "the prior ‘GLOSTERS’ element of the RGBW is to merge with the Devonshire and Dorset Regiment and together form a new battalion in the Light Infantry, whilst the prior 'Duke of Edinburgh’s Royal Regiment' [DERR] element of the RGBW is to merge into the existing two battalions of the Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment". 75% of the RGBW were never in either the GLOSTERS or the DERR; they have joined the RGBW since 1994.
This decision was reached despite a huge amount of support from a wide range of people who either wrote directly or signed petitions. The regiment was delighted to have this strength of support and wishes to thank everyone who gave it. In the hope that many will want to go on supporting the RGBW, this letter sets out what we are doing and the help we need.
The first question many people have asked is why? The Army Board decided that the only criteria to be used in deciding where the cuts should be made was ‘sustainable manning’. The Director of Infantry carried out a study for the Army Board based on historical manning over the last ten years. This therefore took no account of the situation facing those regiments formed ten years ago as a result of Options for Change such as the RGBW. The study was then 'adjusted' to remove those regiments that it was felt could not be cut for wider reasons but this did not, as it should have done, also remove regiments formed under Options for Change. Little account was taken of 'retention' - some regiments are four times better than others at retaining trained manpower; those that are best cost least and obviously contain most experience. The infantry were told which regiments were likely to be cut in the summer before the Government announcement in July so the ‘wide-ranging and detailed consultation exercise, with the infantry being invited to express their views on how the restructuring should be implemented’, was heavily biased before it started. The RGBW should, in all fairness, have been excluded from amalgamation again given that it is regarded as "an exemplary infantry battalion in every way" and has the third best retention rate of any battalion in the infantry. Neither is it the worst manned regiment currently in the Prince of Wales Division; five of the seven regiments are worse. The proposal, therefore, to dismember the RGBW is both incomprehensible and scandalous.
The decision to decimate the regiment, rather than amalgamate it complete with the Devonshire and Dorset Regiment was, we believe, made just a few days before the announcement. It seems to have been because of a wish to ‘balance’ recruiting areas without any thought of the misery this would cause to those serving today.
The RGBW now needs to do two things immediately. Firstly, the 1st Battalion must stay operational and effective; the changes are not due to take place until 2006 at the earliest and possibly not until 2008. The battalion will move from Hounslow to Chester in August and then undertake an operational tour overseas in September. They will, therefore, continue to recruit officers and soldiers and thus offer young men in Berkshire, Bristol, Gloucestershire, and Wiltshire the opportunity to serve in one of the best infantry battalions in the Army. We need everyone to help to spread the message that for the time being it is 'business as usual' for the RGBW.
The House of Commons Defence Committee has begun to investigate the cuts. The RGBW therefore needs to argue that the cuts in the infantry are wrong and ill judged, and to persuade the Committee to recommend a re-examination of the decision and the appalling treatment of the RGBW. Whilst the cuts can be justified mathematically, based on a reduced need in Northern Ireland [if this happens] and changes to the Arms Plot, it does not recognise that, since the Strategic Defence Review, the whole scene has changed. Indeed the Government has changed the mission to one of being a 'force for good in the world'. This means that we need to be able to embark on expeditionary warfare to wage war on global terrorism. It simply isn't enough to 'secure' ourselves, although this is vitally important. What we need to do is to act to defeat global terrorism; the continuous costs of higher security will otherwise be a constant drain on the Exchequer.
It is said that the cuts in the Army manpower are needed because otherwise there are insufficient resources to introduce more high tech equipment across the services. However much of that high tech equipment will seldom, if ever, be used in anger whilst the infantry are certain to be used - not only in anger but in the critical role of peacekeeping - because the flow of new recruits into terrorism will only be reduced if the infantry wins 'hearts and minds'. Increasingly we are already seeing infantry battalions being required to do the job of two or even three. This will eventually lead to a catastrophe.
The argument against reducing the infantry needs to be made repeatedly and loudly in every possible forum until eventually common sense prevails. There is no doubt that RGBW is being treated inequitably and grossly unfairly. We believe it vitally important that MPs continue to be lobbied by their constituents, particularly in advance of an election.
We very much hope that you will bring this to the attention of your readers, viewers and listeners in the hope that they too will want to take up the decision with their local MP or prospective parliamentary candidate.
|
|
MEMBERS OF THE REGIMENTAL FAMILY
Members of the Regimental family
The announcement that the Regiment was to be dismembered, just prior to Christmas, was both devastating and a complete surprise. The Army Board have taken the decision. We believe that we must question that decision, but time may not be on our side. I am therefore attaching a copy of the
letter that has gone out to influential people across our four counties.
We hope that many members of the Regimental family will wish to question this decision over the next three months with the object of getting the Government to task the Army Board to review the decision. You may wish to ask your own questions. Otherwise, a selection of questions that might be
asked are as follows:
POINTS THAT RETIRED MEMBERS MIGHT USE IN POSING QUESTIONS
The cut in the infantry by four battalions is not right because......
* It reduces the Army's capability to be a 'force for good in the world', which is the Government's stated intention. This makes the mathematics irrelevant compared to the need for infantry
* We need to be able to embark on expeditionary warfare to wage war on global terrorism
* No commentator has agreed that it is a sound and sensible decision; most believe it is putting the country at unnecessary risk.
* High tech equipment will seldom, if ever, be used in anger whilst the infantry are certain to be used, both in anger and in the critical role of peacekeeping.
* The infantry is already over-stretched and battalions being required to do the job of two or even three. This will eventually lead to a catastrophe.
* The TA is losing over 4% of its strength annually - these cuts are likely to make this situation worse.
The decision to focus cuts on the RGBW was wrong because......
* The Director of Infantry's study into 'Sustainable Manning' was 'massaged' to remove those regiments that it was felt could not be cut for wider reasons (not Options for Change) and this inevitably led to the
wrong result.
* The study looked back NOT forward; unsustainable battalions are therefore being retained whilst the Army is losing one of its best-manned and most cost effective battalions - RGBW.
* It is certainly not the most cost effective solution, yet this is supposed to be about cost saving. Perhaps it should be referred to the 'Audit Commission'.
* How can Mr Hoon praise 'a successful amalgamation like the RGBW' by name [Daily Telegraph] and, within a month announce that he is punishing their success by 'dismembering them'?
* Some regiments are four times better than others at retaining trained soldiers; RGBW, in spite of undertaking 'Public Duties' for over three years, is second only to the D & D and has been consistently good over the last ten years.
* The option of cutting the three Guards 'incremental companies' based in Chelsea Barracks seems to have been overlooked but a battalion, giving the infantry more capability and flexibility, could replace them. [Three Guards regiments currently have a Bn + Coy]
* The infantry were told which regiments were likely to be cut in the summer before the Government announcement in July. Mr Hoon's claim that " there has been a wide-ranging and detailed consultation exercise, with the infantry being invited to express their views on how the restructuring should be implemented" is misleading.
Question the 'dismemberment' of the RGBW on the grounds that......
* Having chosen the wrong regiment to cut, this created a 'blood clot' in the South and dismemberment seems to have been the drastic surgery chosen for which there is no precedent.
* It assumes that it is possible to undo decisions implemented over 10 years ago; it isn't - it merely destroys success.
* It also punishes those individuals who have made RGBW so successful as 75% of the soldiers were never in either the GLOSTERS or DERR.
* There is a very real risk that some first class officers and soldiers from RGBW will leave the Army when the decision is implemented, probably in 2006.
* How can 'golden threads of identity be preserved" in these circumstances.
* It was a last minute change by ECAB, probably promoted by D Inf [Brig Jamie Balfour, late RGJ] to prevent the LI and RGJ having to absorb a complete battalion, but this did not justify butchering RGBW.
SUPPORTING FACTS AND FIGURES
* The GLOSTERS and DERR components of 1 RGBW are only 25% of RGBW today and diminishing month by month.
*
* In effect, this decision will break up operationally effective teams, friendships and encourage the most excellent officers and soldiers to leave early rather than deliver their full potential to the Army. It
is neither cost effective nor justified.
*
* The Foreign & Commonwealth soldiers serving in RGBW, principally Fijians, have all joined since RGBW was formed; RGBW is their 'home' in the UK.
*
* The dismembering of RGBW will make it almost impossible to preserve the 'golden thread', which S of S claims is so important. County connections will inevitably further diminish.
*
* The dismemberment of RGBW was NOT recommended to ECAB by the Regiment or the Prince of Wales's Division in the consultation. To call it '...the result of detailed consultations' is simply not true; it
wasn't.
*
* RGBW are currently 19 men under strength and forecast to remain at this level
*
* D& D are currently 50 men under strength and forecast by 1 Jun 05 to increase to 68 under strength.
*
* If the whole of RGBW were to go with the D&D to the Light Division, and all maintained their current strengths, the Light Division would end up some 15% over strength. Applying the same assumption to the King's and Scottish Division, they would be 15% and 11.5% respectively over strength
so there is no justification for dismembering RGBW.
*
* By contrast the combined Mercian and Welsh Regiments will be 250 or half a battalion under strength and are probably destined to being permanently undermanned, particularly the current RRW (95 under strength by June), the CHESHIRES (72 under) and the STAFFORDS (69 under).
*
* The RGJ have 192 Foreign & Commonwealth soldiers, the LI 20. RGBW and D&D together have 128, which together amount to 12% of the future strength of the Light Division.
*
* PWRR are 15 over strength now. The whole of the Queen's Division are only 16 under strength. The PWRR already recruit from Hampshire, Surrey, West and East Sussex and Kent. Neither they, nor the Queen's Division need a larger recruiting area so to allocate them Berkshire and Wiltshire is quite unnecessary and does not in any way justify dismembering the RGBW.
Capt [Retd] Ian Spence
Regimental Secretary
The Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire & Wiltshire Regiment
01452 522682
01452 311116
regt-sec@rgbw.army.mod.uk
Should you wish to e-maila preworded letter based on the following to the all party, House of Commons Defence Committee, who are curently investigating the proposed.
Please click the link below
|
FUTURE OF THE REGIMENT
 | BACKGROUND BRIEFING: THE FUTURE OF THE ROYAL GLOUCESTERSHIRE BERKSHIRE AND WILTSHIRE REGIMENT (RGBW) - 09/02/05
OVERVIEW - The RGBW believes that it has earned the right through its exemplary performance, its cost effectiveness and its support of the Army corporate image, to be retained in the Future Infantry Structure as a complete battalion. Ministers should be pressing ECAB to review their reasons for recommending disbanding the Regiment.
Latest Developments
· Jan 2005: Geoff Hoon says RGBW “unlucky” and he would be willing to reconsider splitting the Regiment if Executive Committee of the Army Board (ECAB) recommended he should.
· 1 RGBW now has the best rate of retaining trained manpower of any infantry battalion in 2004/05, clear evidence of their cost effectiveness.
· As at 1 Jan 05 1 RGBW was the 16th best manned infantry battalion (of 40) and is forecast to be 8th best manned by 1 Jun 05.
· Jan 2005: Gen Sir Mike Jackson, the Chief of the General Staff visits the 1st Bn RGBW and admits that the RGBW been treated more harshly than any other regiment.
· Feb 2005: RGBW beat the Royal Welch Fusiliers, one of the best Army rugby teams, 18-8 in the quarterfinals of the Army Rugby Cup.
The Facts
· The RGBW are the result of an outstandingly successful amalgamation of the Glosters with the Duke of Edinburgh’s Royal Regiment (DERR) in 1994.
· On 16 Dec 04 it was announced that "the prior ‘GLOSTERS’ element of the RGBW is to merge with the Devonshire and Dorset Regiment (D&D) and together form a new battalion in the Light Infantry, whilst the prior DERR element of the RGBW is to merge into the existing two battalions of the Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment (PWRR)".
· 75% of the RGBW were never in either the GLOSTERS or the DERR; they have joined the RGBW since 1994.
· The proposed changes will not take place until 2006, at the earliest, and in the meantime the RGBW need to stay fully manned, as they have been warned that they will be deployed on operations in September 05.
The Case for Changing the Decision to Disband the RGBW
· The decision is wrong as it is not in the best interests of the Army and the infantry, is grossly unfair and the ‘due process’ that was laid down was probably not followed.
· ‘Sustainable Manning’ was intended to be the only criteria for deciding which regiments should be amalgamated. The study into which regiments had the most ‘Sustainable Manning’ was 'adjusted' to remove those regiments that it was felt could not be cut for wider political reasons, thus invalidating the criteria.
· It is becoming increasingly likely that an early decision was taken in the MOD that within the Prince of Wales’s Division (PofW Div) the cuts should fall on the RGBW and the D & D, regardless of their future manning prospects, to avoid either of the two Welsh regiments being effected, for political reasons, or the three Mercian regiments (Geoff Hoon’s constituency is part of the Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters Regiment (WFR) area and Bruce George, Chairman of the House of Commons Defence Select Committee, is a Stafford MP). The option of a large Prince of Wales’s Regiment of 2 Wessex, 2 Welsh and 2 Mercian battalions, which would have been highly cost effective and least disruptive, was therefore ignored.
· To ensure the RGBW were targeted the Infantry were told which regiments were likely to be cut before the Government announcement in July. Mr Hoon’s claim that "there has been a wide-ranging and detailed consultation exercise, with the infantry being invited to express their views on how the restructuring should be implemented" is misleading.
· Furthermore the PofW Div did not put forward the option selected by ECAB during the consultation process. Nor did ECAB advise the Cols of PofW Div Regts that this option was under consideration, or invite them to comment on it.
· The RGBW retention rate is the best in the infantry. From Apr – Nov 04 just 16 trained soldiers left the RGBW early, whilst the rate in four other regiments was over 45. The cost of recruiting and training a new infantry recruit is £26,000 so replacing this wastage will cost an additional £750,000 per regiment.
· It is impossible to understand how retaining unsustainable battalions whilst the Army is losing one of its best manned and most cost effective battalions can be “in the long term interests of the Army and the Infantry” as is claimed. The 2 Welsh and 3 Mercian battalions are currently an average of 41 under strength and by June this is forecast to increase to 61 under strength or three rifle companies.
· As a less cost effective solution has been selected it might properly be referred to the ‘Audit Commission’.
· Mr Hoon knew of the quality and record of the RGBW as he praised them by name in an article in the Daily Telegraph yet within a month announced that he was punishing their success by disbanding them instead of defending excellence.
· A complete battalion could replace the 3 Guards ‘incremental companies’ based in Chelsea Barracks and this would provide more capability and flexibility.
· There is an assumption that it is possible to undo decisions implemented over 10 years ago, it isn’t - it merely destroys success and punishes those individuals who have made the RGBW such an exemplary infantry regiment.
· The promised ‘Golden threads of identity’ cannot be preserved as, since 1994, these have gone through the RGBW and cannot simply be ‘airbrushed’ away.
· The PWRR are 17 over strength now. The whole of the Queens Division are only 18 under strength. The PWRR are already allocated for recruiting Hampshire, Surrey, West and East Sussex and Kent. Neither they, nor the Queens Division need more recruiting area so to allocate them Berkshire and Wiltshire is quite unnecessary, and does not in any way justify dismembering the RGBW.
The Case Against Cutting the Infantry by Four Battalions
· It reduces the Army’s capability to be a 'force for good in the world', which is the Government’s stated intention. This makes the mathematics irrelevant compared to the need for infantry
· It is not simply rebalancing the Army and putting manpower where it is most needed in the support services, which is needed. It is also an actual cut in the funded strength of the Army by 1,500 trained personnel simply because of funding constraints.
· High tech equipment will seldom if ever be used in anger whilst the infantry are certain to be used, in anger and in the critical role of peacekeeping.
· Already the infantry is overstretched and battalions being required to do the job of two or even three. This will eventually lead to a catastrophe.
· The TA is losing over 4% of it strength annually – these cuts are likely to make this situation worse.
Contact: Regimental Headquarters RGBW – 01452 522682. Spokesmen: Maj Gen (Ret’d) Derek Crabtree, Brig (Ret’d) Simon Firth and Maj Gen (Ret’d) Robin Grist.
ENDS |
|
EVENING ADVERTISER ARTICLE FEBRUARY 05
Date Published: Tuesday 15 February 2005
Taken from the Evening Advertiser
Regiment set for trouble spot
AS the campaign grows to save Swindon's own army regiment, the men serving in it have been warned that within months they are to be sent to one of the world's trouble spots.
Exactly where the Royal Gloucestershire Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment (RGBW) is to be deployed on operational duty has not yet been made public.
But it is expected to be either Bosnia in September or Afghanistan early next year.
The decision to disband the RGBW was announced by Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon as part of an overall plan to streamline the army and cut costs. But the RGBW and its many supporters argue that the regiment's outstanding record and its cost effectiveness has earned it the right to be kept going as a complete battalion.
The RGBW was formed in 1994 following the successful amalgamation of the Glorious Glosters and the Duke of Edinburgh's Royal Regiment.
And now some of the army's big guns; including retired Major General Robin Grist who was the last Colonel of the Gloucestershire Regiment and the first Colonel of the RGBW are throwing their weight behind the battle to save the regiment.
|
The Future
| From: Major Gen Robin Grist 18th March 2005
The Future
Don't give up, I'm not. We have won a minor battle but we will not have won the war until the whole of the 1st Battalion stays together. It is going to be tough, its going to take a long time but resilience is a quality of our Regiment.
I know some are concerned about heritage, Association etc but the discussions on all these have hardly started and as far as I am aware nothing has been decided.
I am working on a new letter to all supporters, should be out on Monday, your support so far has been invaluable but please keep it up and go on supporting 1RGBW because if they do not stay excellent we won't win.
Best wishes to all
RDG
|
|
FUTURE OF THE RGBW
| From: Major General (Retd) RD Grist CB OBE Issued 24 March 05
Dear Supporter,
THE FUTURE OF THE ROYAL GLOUCESTERSHIRE, BERKSHIRE
AND WILTSHIRE REGIMENT
Most of you will be aware that Mr Hoon has recently announced a change to the decision he announced in December last year. The Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment (RGBW) will now amalgamate with the Devonshire and Dorset Regiment (D & D) and form a new battalion within the Light Division. As a result many have believed that the RGBW has been saved; it hasnt. At the same time as Mr Hoon was making his statement General Sir Mike Jackson, the Chief of the General Staff issued a message to the Army about the change which included: however, this amalgamation will be conducted (as had previously been planned) on the basis of a third of the RGBW's manpower amalgamating with the D and D to become 1 LI, and the remaining two thirds being distributed elsewhere in the Army.
Although it is a small change for the better that is, in itself, an achievement and the fact that the heritage of both the RGBW and its antecedent regiments will now go in one direction is welcome. This would not have been achieved had it not been for the wave of protest by so many people at the original decision to disband the RGBW; consequently I would like to thank on behalf of the Regiment everyone who has been part of that protest in any way whatsoever. In particular we are most grateful to most of our MPs, through whom so many have been able to express their dismay, and to the media who have publicised this thoroughly unjust decision.
Serving officers and soldiers have welcomed the change. It acknowledges the success of the RGBW; it gives a home in the Light Infantry to most of our officers and soldiers (while only one-third of the Regiment will move to the new 1 LI, it is likely that another third of the RGBW will go to other battalions in the Light Division), and this means that most of our soldiers should continue to serve with friends (individuals will regularly move from one battalion to another within the Division once Arms Plotting ceases). The final third will have to move elsewhere in the Army but this may benefit individual careers. The future consequently appears brighter for the serving members of the Regiment as a result of Mr Hoon's latest announcement.
Nevertheless the change is, in reality, a very small adjustment. Despite its magnificent record this exemplary infantry regiment, the RGBW, will still be amalgamated and dispersed across the Army. This is not in the interests of the County, the Army or the Infantry and neither is it a fair or a just outcome. We therefore intend to go on campaigning for what is right, the retention in the future Army of RGBW as a complete battalion. To achieve this we will continue to need your support.
Most commentators believe that the Army reduction, particularly the cut of four battalions, is totally unjustified and is merely being done to save money, despite the risks to our security. However it is unlikely that the present Government will make further changes unless external circumstances alter. This may happen:
The Conservative Party have already announced that, if they formed the next Government, they would increase the size of the Army to 108,500 from the current funded strength of 103,500, maintain the infantry at its current level and retain the existing Regiments.
The situation in Northern Ireland may prevent the reduction that it was assumed would be possible when the cuts were announced.
Some quite unforeseen threat to our security or our vital interests may erupt somewhere in the world making it necessary to retain as many infantry battalions as possible.
Of course the changes may eventually be implemented. Planning will therefore continue to ensure that every serving officer and soldier is properly looked after. In addition the way in which the heritage of the RGBW is taken forward into the Light Infantry in general, and the 1st Battalion The Light Infantry in particular, needs to be resolved. Despite reassurances from the Prime Minister, Mr Hoon and General Sir Mike Jackson, we need to ensure that the RGBW heritage, which incorporates that of the Gloucestershire Regiment and the Duke of Edinburgh's Royal Regiment, is carried forward in a publicly visible way and that any transition period is many years. Whilst this is largely a matter for the serving officers to resolve, the public pressure to get this right and to retain local links has been, and will continue to be, important.
In a wider context we must continue to question the wisdom of the cuts in our defence capability and the RGBW. We need your support to argue, along with everyone else, that the cuts in the infantry are wrong and ill judged and justifying them mathematically, based on a reduced need in Northern Ireland and changes to the Arms Plot, simply does not recognise that, since the Strategic Defence Review, the world scene has changed and is changing. We need to be able to embark on expeditionary warfare to defeat global terrorism. It simply isn't enough to 'secure' ourselves, although this is vitally important; unless we defeat terrorism the continuous costs of higher security will otherwise be a constant drain on the Exchequer. We must also be able to intervene in humanitarian situations and to continue to defend our interests in the world. In all these cases we need trained, experienced, and disciplined infantry like the RGBW.
There is expected to be a General Election in early May. Defence is unlikely to be one of the key issues in the campaign, although it probably should be. However it can be locally, and it is important that each candidate is questioned about their position, and that of their party, on defence in general and the infantry in particular. Serving officers and soldiers may not become involved in politics but those who are retired and our supporters can and, if they believe these cuts are wrong and put the security of the nation at risk, should do so. In this way, whoever is elected must continue to be made aware of the issues.
In the meantime it is critical that the RGBW remains an exemplary battalion, and for all who come into contact with them to recognise it. They have shown, since the first announcement last December, their determination not to allow morale to drop and to maintain their very high standards, exemplified by winning the Army Rugby Cup this month. They have now learnt, to their delight, that they are to deploy to Afghanistan on an operational tour in the autumn, another measure of the confidence senior commanders have in them.
Much of our media has given us outstanding support and I hope that the Press will continue to remind their readership and listeners of what is happening. The RGBW are still being split up unlike other Regiment. I attach a Background Briefing Note, which I hope will help to keep you informed of some of the arguments that can be used.
With very best wishes,
Robin Grist
Attachment: Background Briefing
BACKGROUND BRIEFING: THE FUTURE OF THE ROYAL GLOUCESTERSHIRE BERKSHIRE AND WILTSHIRE REGIMENT (RGBW) – 21/3/05
OVERVIEW - The RGBW believes that it has earned the right through its exemplary performance, its cost effectiveness and its support of the Army corporate image, to be retained in the Future Infantry Structure as a complete battalion. Under present plans this will not happen.
Latest Developments
Jan 2005: 1 RGBW has the best rate of retaining trained manpower of any infantry battalion in 2004/05, clear evidence of their cost effectiveness.
As at 1 January 2005 1 RGBW was the 16th best manned infantry battalion (of 40) and is forecast to be 8th best manned by 1 June 2005.
Jan 2005: Gen Sir Mike Jackson, the Chief of the General Staff visits the 1st Bn RGBW and admits that the RGBW been treated more harshly than any other regiment.
Mar 2005: RGBW won the Army Rugby Cup beating the Royal Scots 31-24.
Mar 2005: Mr Hoon announces that, instead of splitting the RGBW as he had originally decided, the reduction will be achieved by the amalgamation of the Devonshire and Dorset Regiment with the RGBW. The resulting new regiment will become the 1st Battalion The Light Infantry. But this is not quite what it seems (see below).
Mar 2005: It was announced that the RGBW will deploy to Afghanistan on an operational tour in the Autumn of 2005.
Mar 2005: Defence Select Committee publishes report expressing concern at the cuts in the services in general and the infantry in particular.
The Facts
The RGBW are the result of an outstandingly successful amalgamation of the Gloucestershire Regiment (GLOSTERS) with the Duke of Edinburgh's Royal Regiment (DERR) in 1994.
On 9 Mar 05 Mr Hoon announced that the RGBW would not be disbanded but would amalgamate with the Devonshire and Dorset Regiment to form the 1st Battalion The Light Infantry. However in a letter to the Army about this change Gen Sir Mike Jackson has written “the RGBW will now amalgamate as a single entity with the D and D, and the resulting new regiment will become the 1st Battalion The Light Infantry (1 LI)…. However, this amalgamation will be conducted …on the basis of a third of the RGBW's manpower amalgamating with the D and D to become 1 LI, and the remaining two thirds being distributed elsewhere in the Army.
The effect of this change therefore still means that only a small proportion of the RGBW will remain together in a new battalion.
The heritage of the RGBW will now go to the 1st Bn The Light Infantry but how this will manifest itself has still to be determined.
The proposed changes will not take place until 2006, at the earliest, and in the meantime the RGBW will carry out an operational tour in Afghanistan from Oct 05.
The future structure of the TA has yet to be announced.
The Case Against Cutting the Infantry by Four Battalions
The infantry cuts reduce the Army's capability to be a 'force for good in the world', which is the Government's stated intention. This makes the mathematics irrelevant compared to the need for infantry.
It is not simply rebalancing the Army as is claimed. More manpower is needed in the support services but this is an actual cut in the funded strength of the Army by 1,500 trained personnel simply because of funding constraints. General Sir Mike Jackson has said he needs more infantry but this is not possible “within existing constraints”.
Risks are being taken with training because the infantry are overstretched, and have been for years. Increasing the availability of infantry by ceasing arms plotting should be used to reduce overstretch but the cuts will ensure that it continues.
There are currently two artillery regiments in Iraq in the infantry role.
11 of the 36 future infantry battalions will continue to arms plot.
The infantry reduction was also partly based on finalising the peace process in Northern Ireland, an outcome that currently appears to be further away than was assumed.
The TA is losing over 4% of it strength annually – these cuts are likely to make this situation worse.
The Case for Changing the Decision to Amalgamate the RGBW
The decision is not in the best interests of the Army and the infantry, and is unfair on a Regiment formed by amalgamation as recently as 1994.
It means the whole of the South West Region will, in future, be represented by only two infantry battalions.
Sustainable Manning was intended to be the only criteria for deciding which regiments should be amalgamated. The study into which regiments had the best Sustainable Manning statistics was 'adjusted' to remove those regiments that it was felt could not be cut for various reasons, thus invalidating the criteria; excluding regiments that had been recently formed through amalgamation was not one of them.
The option of creating a large Prince of Wales's Regiment of 2 Wessex, 2 Welsh and 2 Mercian battalions, which would have been highly cost effective and least disruptive, was ignored because it would have meant the amalgamation of the Cheshires and the Staffords, ordered under Options for Change but then stopped.
The RGBW retention rate is the best in the infantry. From Apr – Nov 04 just 16 trained soldiers left the RGBW early, whilst the rate in four other regiments was over 45. The cost of recruiting and training a new infantry recruit is £26,000 so replacing this wastage will cost an additional £750,000 per regiment.
It is impossible to understand how retaining unsustainable battalions whilst the Army is losing one of its best manned and most cost effective battalions can be in the long term interests of the Army and the Infantry as is claimed. In February the 2 Welsh and 3 Mercian battalions were an average of 48 men under strength and by August this is forecast to increase to 68 under strength or the equivalent of more than three rifle companies.
A complete battalion could replace the 3 Guards incremental companies based in Chelsea Barracks and this would provide more capability and flexibility.
Contact: Regimental Headquarters RGBW – 01452 522682. Spokesmen: Maj Gen (Retd) Derek Crabtree, Brig (Retd) Simon Firth and Maj Gen (Retd) Robin Grist.
ENDS
|
|
|
