HMS Cornwall Debacle - Commons Defence Committee's Report

#1
I'm not sure if this be posted in Current Affairs, the Fleet or Naval History. Please relocate as appropriate.

The House of Commons Defence Committee have just issued a report condemning the decision of the MOD not to take any disciplinary action against civvies or service personnel involved in the Cornwall debacle earlier this year.

Report on BBC Online (14 Dec 07)

HC Defence Committee

Conclusions of the Report (HC 181, 2007-08 session)
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/defence_committee/def071214.cfm

Fourth Report of the Committee (2007-08 session) (HC181) - in PDF format
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmdfence/181/181.pdf
 
#2
yeah I heard something about this on Radio 1 news

They said it was an embarassment allowing them to tell their stories
 
#5
Re: HMS Cornwall Debacle - Commons Defence Committee's Repor

jackspratthesecond said:
tommo said:
yeah I heard something about this on Radio 1 news

They said it was an embarassment allowing them to tell their stories
What's embarrassing is that we had the only Sea-Going Commodore together with Cornwall's Commander permitting this nonsense.
If we could have persuaded one of our many shore-bound admirals to attend things might have been different. But, by the time Cornwall had returned to the Dockyard to have additional Admirals Day and Sea cabins fitted in addition to the Commodores and Captains with additional Stewards and Chefs accommodation --the boarding party would not have been necessary anyway.
Arthur and the Fat wren would have been excused such opprobrium.
Hello Norm Nice to see you back
 

Seaweed

War Hero
Book Reviewer
#6
I think I detect some spin - 'allowed them to tell their stories' - I got the distinct impression that it was Govt policy to get ratings' stories out as being more credible accounts of their treatment than putting out a Govt/MoD statement. Uproar was then such that those who had not actually signed contracts with the media were then stopped from doing so. At least that's what I inferred - for 'allowed' read 'encouraged' but that would put a MoD press minder on the mat and we can't have that if he's a civilian, can we? Becauise that would point the gun not at a L/hand and an AB but at the MINISTER.

It's the rich wot gets the pleasure, it's the poor wot gets the blame.
 
#8
Re: HMS Cornwall Debacle - Commons Defence Committee's Repor

Yea, second that seaweed," let the lads take the flak for it".(literally and metaphorically) that was some peoples answer.(not mine, thank god they are all safe with their families this crimbo and f4ck the bad publicity.

If that boarding party had opened fire, they would have been (a) killed.(b) started a fight with at least the third set of middle eastern peoples in five years, probably not the greatest move ever (c) been outside there ROE?? if they had fired first?? Yes, outside, arguably. (And boy would it HAVE BEEN ARGUED ABOUT). Sorry, hit the caps lock button.

Not a massive amount of politicians volunteering to resign/be disciplined over the 100s of f£ck ups recently viz foot and mouth, northern rock, two discs lost, summit signings, nimrodgate, cash for peerages (allegdly not).
So why should an AB or little MOD minion take the lash??

Anyway, me spelling and grammar are going, something to do with it being Saturday night and alcohol - Im off to the ball, have a good night lads - Nostris.
 

Similar threads