The difficulty with using the TA is the …

Comment posted Axed Argylls deployed to Olympic Games security by newsroom.

The difficulty with using the TA is the impact on the economy of employers losing 3,500 staff at short notice.

This part time nature of TA membership and the impact on businesses of using it at a serious level, also casts doubt on the achieveability of the MoD’s plan to double its size and use it more intensively in theatres of war, with the new slimmed down army.

Recent comments by newsroom

  • Gigha community ownership on brink of failure
    We have never said that you ‘authored the main text’.
    If you state without equivocation that you did not write any of the final report issued by the LRRG, we will unhesitatingly accept that – as we have already said.
  • Perfect fit in new partnership marketing initiative for Cowal’s Creggans Inn
    Had a grin at your imagineering of ‘a sobering run to Dunoon by HM finest’.
    This sort of occasion is obviously about staying overnight and we had expected that this was central to the marketing strategy – but we will inquire.
  • Gigha community ownership on brink of failure
    [Updated below] A sentence in the opening section of this article has been removed:
    ‘Wightman was also allowed personally and unacknowledged, to write a major section of the final report of the Land Reform Review Group [immediately identifiable by its style] – although that was the formal responsibility of others.’
    Mr Wightman has simply said to us:
    ‘This statement is untrue. Please remove it.’
    So of course we have removed it.
    However, the sentence is actually a multiple statement so, for the record because one issue is important – we have asked Mr Wightman to clarify which of its internal statements is incorrect – or if all of them are:
    ‘Did you write any section or sections or parts of any section or sections of the final LRRG report?
    ‘Is it incorrect to suggest that you were ‘allowed’ to write an element or elements of the report, where, for instance, you may have seen this as a right?
    ‘Is is incorrect to suggest that your authorship of elements of the report was ‘unacknowledged’ where we may have failed to notice such an acknowledgement?
    ‘Is it incorrect that the writing of the report was ‘the formal responsibility of others?’
    For Argyll is aware that sections of the final report of the Land Reform Review Group were indeed written by Advisers to the Review Group rather than, as one is entitled to expect – by the topline membership [albeit a regularly shifting one] of the Review Group itself.
    Our analysis of the language style and content analysis of major elements of the report as being both distinctively different from other sections of the report and arguably authored by Mr Wightman, who was an Adviser to the Review Group.
    The passage on ‘ Statutory limitation on land ownership’ seemed a particularly attributable; and the passage ‘Inheritance rights changed to break up established landholdings’ scored a possible similar authorship.
    These analysis may well have come to the wrong conclusions – and if Mr Wightman assures us that he was not the author of any of the main text of the final LRRG report, we will be glad to accept that without equivocation.
    In our article of May 2014 on that report [http://forargyll.com/2014/05/final-land-reform-report-substantial-challenging-provocative-not-final/], we said:
    ‘The lack of philosophical, conceptual and tonal strategic unity weakens the report. It demonstrates the impact of specific influences pulling aspects of it in different directions – sometimes asymmetrically. There is no evidence of any kind of the necessary final editorship. Responsibility for this must lie with the Group’s chair since its inception, Dr Alison Elliot, former moderator of the Church of Scotland.’
    24.00 update:
    Mr Wightman has refused to clarify his position on any of the questions which, as above, we o]put to him, saying: ‘I have no intention of responding to the range of bizarre and unsubstantiated allegations that you make below.’
  • Gigha community ownership on brink of failure
    There is no dishonour in an honourable attempt which fails.
    The Gigha buy out has always been an honourable attempt, whether it succeeds or fails.
    There is also no shame in failure – so much in life is down to the luck of the draw.
    One community buy out may succeed where another may fail.
    Problems arise, though, where the possibility of failure is not factored in to the thinking and where failure is disguised.
    Amongst other aspects of this, where failure is acknowledged lessons may be learned from it that may protect other initiatives from failing.
  • Gordon Brown to stand down from Westminster at General Election
    This was always a puff. Gordon Brown never had any position from which to act as such a guarantor.

powered by SEO Super Comments

3 Responses to The difficulty with using the TA is the …

  1. I don’t suppose I’m the only one to wonder what will happen in future when our army has been cut by another 20,000. Say, for example, another foot and mouth outbreak coinciding with our forces being fully committed to another of the vanity wars which seem to have become a rite of passage for our recent prime ministers. Shudder.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. I do understand why officers of the British Army have to used to provide security at the Olympics. Surely members of T A could beused at a fraction of the cost.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • The difficulty with using the TA is the impact on the economy of employers losing 3,500 staff at short notice.

      This part time nature of TA membership and the impact on businesses of using it at a serious level, also casts doubt on the achieveability of the MoD’s plan to double its size and use it more intensively in theatres of war, with the new slimmed down army.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.