|
The MoD's Dr. Fox & his Guy
Hello Dr Fox, in the second week of May 2011 you made the following remark while touching upon Mr Andrew Robathan MP, having joined your team at the MoD; “Andrew’s appointment will I hope send a very clear signal about the commitment of the Government to the well being of our forces, their families and our veterans.”
Well Dr Fox, on Friday 24th June 2011 Michael Powell, the defence correspondent at The News, in Portsmouth, published an article titled, ‘Artic heroes confront minister – but he still ignores their pleas.’ Dr Fox, to put it mildly, from the reported terms within that article it looks like the Buffoon, you chose to place your hopes in, has slackened the nail that your jacket hangs upon.
Within the article published in the Portsmouth newspaper, ‘The News’ there was the following which I now quote for its terms therein; “Cdr Grenfell, 91, of Portsea, travelled to Winchester to confront Mr Robathan in The Great Hall where he signed a New Armed Forces Community Covenant with Hampshire County Council – a pledge to look after and respect veterans, servicemen and women, and their families.
But the minister wriggled out of Cdr Grenfell’s questions and said: ‘Why do you need a medal? ‘We know what you did and you have our praise and respect.’
Rattled Mr Robathan was told it was the aging veterans dying wish to be awarded a medal for serving in the dreaded convoys.
Turning on his heels, the minister barked. ‘Your dying wish? It’s your dying wish to be awarded a medal?
Both Cdr Grenfell and a fellow Arctic veteran Lieutenant Commander Roy Dykes replied ‘Yes’
Prompting a silent response from the red-faced Mr Robathan.” Unquote. On the 15th Jun 2010 in a letter reference number MSU/04/04/02/12/cc. Robathan, in replying to a letter from Alex Neil MSP, who had written on behalf of the Scottish Parliaments Public Petitions Committee in relation to ‘Public Petition 1312. From Robathan, letter for its terms therein I quote; * “As a result of the petition and the concerns that have been raised by naval veterans over a number of years, a review has been conducted by the Department into the institution of the ‘Yangtze 1949’ clasp to the NGSM. I enclose a copy.
You will see from this that, quite apart from the long standing Government position of successive administrations that no consideration can be given to reviewing medals that were instituted many years previously, there appears to be clear a clear reason why HMS CONCORD was not included in the list of ships and units that are eligible for the clasp therefore see no grounds for reversing the decision. I recognise that this will be a disappointment for the veterans concerned; but this does not, of course, detract from HMS CONCORD’s service on the night of 30/31st July 1949 or the respect in which her crew deserve to be held.” *Unquote.
Note, the Buffoon Robathan, refers to HMS CONCORD’s services on the night of 30/31st July 1949 when in fact HMS CONCORD’s service role in the Yangtze Incident, began 28th July 1949 and ended 31st July 1949.
By the way Dr Fox, the news on the grape-vine is that Robathan, is livid at the criticism that has been levelled at him as a result of DRAFT review, which Lt. Col. GV de la F Woyka, sent out to sources campaigning about medals, and that he Robathan, believes this criticism is ‘unfair’ well being that he is a foreigner to the truth, he will be an authority on ‘unfairness’.
To conclude, I wonder, would Mr Robathan, deem it to be unfair if the Cabinet, were called upon to have him explain in detail what his inference amounted to when he wrote in his letter to Alex Neil MSP; “there appears to be a clear reason why HMS CONCORD was not included in the list of ships and units that are eligible for the clasp therefore see no grounds for reversing that decision.” Sincerely, William Leitch.
|
