Rum Ration
the Navy Network

Originally Posted by Frustrated

Jasper - Fair point, and I'll action it. Second point - yes.

You should change your name to Frustrating. You put forward your draft paper and ask for response. I ask a legitimate question "Is this a one man band or are others involved?" and I'm dismissed with a single word reply, "Yes".

I suspect one of the reasons people are warming to BAFF over your NDA is that it is directly focused on improving the lot of servicemen and women. BAFF seem to be more in touch with problems affecting Jack, Tom and Nigel and that is always going to interest them more than distant political haggling. Your own personal style of connecting with people is not strong. You may want to consider that.

I'm probably being niave here but the core of the NDA is to lobby for getting the Defence Forces the Nation needs and deserves. Great but isn't reality a little different. I'm no fan of the current Govt but at the end of the day they have only got a finite budget to play with. What makes you think that you are going to get the Govt to switch funding from Hospitals, transport infrastructure, etc, etc. The theory is fine but the application is just pie in the sky, is it not?

If you give me another dismissive answer I will withdraw from this response seeking thread.

Fangita - I too have looked at the British Forces Foundation website and found it impressive, and I will get in touch with them, although I think that 'co-operation' rather than a 'takeover' might be the aim.

As to the name of this organisation - a lot of thought went into it - but that doesn't necessarily make it right, and I'd welcome any suggestions you might have.

Jasper - you have your point of view and I do 'see where you're coming from', but here we must agree to differ. You could, of course, be right - but I hope you're not.

Originally Posted by Jasper

I'm probably being niave here but the core of the NDA is to lobby for getting the Defence Forces the Nation needs and deserves. Great but isn't reality a little different. I'm no fan of the current Govt but at the end of the day they have only got a finite budget to play with. What makes you think that you are going to get the Govt to switch funding from Hospitals, transport infrastructure, etc, etc. The theory is fine but the application is just pie in the sky, is it not?

Whether or not the concept of the NDA based on the core objectives rather than the add ons suggested to try to make it all things to all men, succeeds it is still valid. Assorted governments over the recent past have blythly stripped away defence capability and at the same time not adjusted the tasking to suit the money they are prepared to pay. Some one does need to challenge this as there is a desperaate need to bring the tasking in line with the funding. That needs a national debate, which means some one has to argue with the government of the day otherwise it will not be that long before the defence forces collapse through lack of funding, lack of personell, and a surfeit of tasks. Success at the end of the day may not be measured in additional funding but a reduction in the tasking of the defence forces so that they can actually do the jobs requested without the continual robbing of Peter to pay Paul.

Peter

Originally Posted by Frustrated

As to the name of this organisation - a lot of thought went into it - but that doesn't necessarily make it right, and I'd welcome any suggestions you might have.

Without sounding flippant, "a lot of thought"? I would have thought that your aims are more that of a Society or Campaign rather than an "Association" (after all, who's going to want to join a lobbying group?). And if you analyse the phrase "National Defence Association", you either conclude that they want to defend the nation (in either a civil defence or nationalistic way) or they are a trade group for lawyers. You could go more descriptive:

Forces Support Society
Campaign for British Forces
British Assocation for Support of Armed Services
Armed Forces Support Association

Or you could be more original and modern:

Defence UK
Echelon!
Protecting the Protectors (PtP)

Or, you could appeal to tradition, with a solid British sounding name:

Defence of the Realm Society
National Society for the Armed Forces
British Forces Foundation ( )

And they're made up in 5 minutes after a hard day in a pusser's non-air-conditioned office!

Originally Posted by Frustrated

Jasper - you have your point of view and I do 'see where you're coming from', but here we must agree to differ. You could, of course, be right - but I hope you're not.

My dear Frustrated, you still haven't answered Jasper's question. So, are you a one man (married couple!) band? Or is there a secretive group of retired SO1s and Naval Review subscribers about to launch themselves on the General Public?

It would seem the NDA, despite the almost certain need for such an organisation, is not ready yet to discuss what it is really about in the open.

Peter

This is probably because as I suspect it being a one man show there is no way he can keep up with the debate amongst his work, lifestyle, etc issues. The benefit BAFF seems to have is that they have formed a steering group of 10-15 odd people to progress various aspects. That means that there are always 2 or 3 people available to debate the issues at any one time. I suggest that the NDA, if it really wants to get going should do a similar thing.

Gentlemen - I did quite like 'Defenders of the Realm' but NDA stays as it is, at least for now, and is self explanatory. National for the whole country, Defence for the subject matter, and Association because - as is made clear in the draft founding paper - the intention is to draw together, 'associate' all those people, businesses, organisations with a common interest in the effective defence of this nation.
I did, in fact, respond more or less straight away (and thank you for your concern as to my work overload) but the reply seems to have vanished into the ether. Finger trouble ? or 'these things happen'. Anyway, have a good day.

I hope you are right, and that they do get their act together, we do need some one to engage in that activity.

The cynic in me feels that this may be an attempt to derail BAFF by trying to muddy the waters at what is perhaps a critical time in the development of BAFF.

Peter