Ministers continue to ignore many Brits service, but our Queen and Allies take a different view, spot the difference:
" Operational service has long been recognised by the award of campaign medals and more recently by the New Zealand Operational Service Medal. With the exception of awards for long service, however, there is no medallic recognition for the many men and women in the New Zealand Defence Force who have not served on operations.
For this reason, a Joint Working Group is being tasked to identify the criteria for the recognition of non-operational service. I expect that the Joint Working Group will suggest eligibility criteria for the proposed New Zealand Defence Force medal to me, later this year.
The NZDF will communicate widely about the proposed medal and the Joint Working Group in the near future......”
Wayne Mapp
Minister Of Defence"
And now the UK response (the minister replies via a civil servant):
“ With the exception of long service awards, it has never been the Government's policy to consider service in the Armed Forces as the sole justification for the institution of a medal. British campaign medals are not awarded as a record of service, as is the case with some countries, but as a result of particularly difficult circumstances, considered to be over and above the usual conditions of Service life.
The Ministry of Defence is aware of the Australian and New Zealand Government’s decision to issue a Defence Medal to its Armed Forces personnel. They withdrew from the Imperial Honours System many years ago and have since introduced a number of medals for which there are no British equivalents. The decision to institute these awards, and any approval which The Queen may have given as their Queen, would have been on the advice of Her Australian and New Zealand Ministers. These awards are the sole responsibility of the countries concerned and the British Government is under no obligation to follow suit.”
Mr Coney
(Civil servant on behalf of MR Kevan Jones, MP, Minister for Veterans)
Why does the British Government feel no obligation?
Could it be they are too busy looking after themselves. And does this demonstrate a general attitude which also applies across other aspects of military life?
Share This Page:
Spot the Difference NZ vs UK
Take your point, but to many now no longer in uniform, not all I might add, this would constitute the only way they could demonstrate official honourable and loyal service to Queen & Country of less than 15 years.waynepe wrote:I for one would feel a greater pride wearing a medal I distinctly earned and deserved than one I had been given for just staying in the forces along with all others. It would then become a decorative part of my uniform rather than a badge of honor I wore with pride.
Remember every ribbon tells its own tale. I also think it could help stop the proliferation of commemorative medals on offical parades.
The Vets badge is from the MoD not the Queen as in all official awards by the way.
I agree to a point, I honestly think an official Medal could see the demise of Bling. It is because so many have nothing at all often for many years service (including infantry etc) that some clever chaps have moved in to exploit those wishing to show they served. Unfortunately it was the RBL that opened the door with the National service medal. Now it is almost a new one every month.Tab wrote:I think I would rather see some action taken to stop all this Bling being worn by all these chairborne warriors
The Aussies don't suffer the same problem on Anzac day because they had a fresh look at the problem. We need to get a grip and cherry pick the best ideas from Australia, New Zealand and Canada, all have now opted out of the imperial system, and all have headed off the Bling culture, without taking the USA path. All it will take is a bit of forward thinking at the MoD. It ain't rocket science and our Queen has already approved them.
