Letters
to the Editor
Big
blue for Army
I unfortunately
chose to watch an episode of White Collar Blue on Monday, October 28,
2002, on Network Ten for the first and last time.
I chose
to watch this particular episode as it was advertised as having a military
flavour and I was waiting for the very excellent Band of Brothers to
start .
It was
to my horror that besides having to watch the very poor acting, this
episode was allowed to be filmed at North Head (the old School of Artillery).
The episode
portrayed the Army in a very poor light indeed.
It basically
showed the Army to be an unprofessional bunch of homophobic buffoons.
Other areas of concern were:
- Senior
Army officers attempting to cover up a potential murder
- Withholding
evidence
- I cannot
remember the last time I saw a person smoking large cigars in the
mess as portrayed
- Getting
into the barracks is hard enough yet here the MPs allowed one policewoman
in because her daddy was a general (without proof) and
- Refused
entry to her partner
- The
list goes on. I won’t even start on the standard of dress and
bearing which, while not expected to be good, was unacceptable.
Surely
if Army is going to allow these shows to be filmed on Defence property
we should have some say in the way in which we are portrayed. Even allowing
for artistic license this show was an embarrassment to all soldiers
wearing the uniform.
After this
show and the recent episodes of Neighbours we will never meet our recruiting
targets. Why do we allow this to happen?
Maj Martin Southwood
CSI-BNE
Take
a hard look
I am hopeful
that this opinion is widely held. The recent involvement by Army in
the television show White Collar Blue (October 28, Network Ten) was
an example of an appalling PR decision.
The current
nationwide Army recruiting campaign for the Reserve has, in my opinion,
been severely tarnished by this episode.
Thankfully,
the show is a second-rate Australian drama with reasonably low ratings,
which may have saved Army’s reputation.
This sort-of-sanctioned
participation only contributes to a popular opinion that Army protects
criminals and conducts half-arsed investigations into potential wrong-doings.
The public
has already been exposed to real life cover ups involving Defence, even
if not expressly caused by Defence, in recent times, and this brand
of “advertising” does not help the cause.
I sat in
disgust through an hour of continuous anti-Army inuendo. My civilian
friends have already commented on the episode.
With no
military experience or exposure they were shocked at Army’s attitudes
and invovlement.
Army’s
invovlement in Neighbours was bad enough in its demonstration of unorderly
and unprofessional conduct.
This has
taken the cake. Someone needs to have a good hard look at themself.
Capt Lachlan Burg
7 Fd Regt
Sydney, NSW
Jim
Cannon, Director Defence Reputation Systems, replies:
The
invovlement of ADF personnel and assets in this program is being examined.
The location
used by the program is no longer under the control of Defence.
The issue
of the portrayal of Army as an organisation and as individuals is to
be taken up with the producers of the program.
Lack
of coverage
On November
1, Battle Wing Canungra closed its doors and was re-rolled into the
nucleus of the Combat Training Centre (Live) with a move to Townsville
thrown in. But make no mistake BWC is closed. A Closing Parade marked
this sad day in history.
Battle
Wing Canungra in one form or another has been at the forefront of training
soldiers and preparing them for war.
Between
1942 – 1946 it was known as the Jungle Warfare Centre, training
and preparing soldiers being sent to the jungles of New Guinea.
In 1954,
it was renamed BWC and to the fateful day on November 1 it conducted
the necessary training required to prepare soldiers for overseas service.
The soldiers
that passed through here included personnel being deployed to Malaysia
(then Malaya) or on their way to Vietnam.
This type
of training continued through to the present day in the form of SUTs
(sub-unit training) as well as conducting pre-deployment training for
units deploying to Timor.
This included
training officers and soldiers of other nations through the JOCCIT program,
here at Canungra or Overseas. The countries included Philippines, Thailand,
Fiji and NZ.
As you
can see and probably already know BWC has a long and distinguished history.
So that
brings me to the point of this letter – why this closing was not
covered by Army, considering this was a milestone in history.
I was assured
by my unit that the media was contacted and would be in attendance,
for some unforseen reason this did not occur.
I realise
that you are very busy covering events like gumboot throwing and piano
playing.
I think
it is a sad reflection of the military and the way some soldiers think
when you close a unit down with this amount of history with a shrug
of the shoulders and say well that’s it.
Could you
explain to me why this did occur?
Sgt Robert Jackson
CTC(L),
Canungra QLD
Editor’s Note:
I have no record or recollection of being contacted by Battle Wing Canungra
about the closing parade.
At present
I have only five reporters to cover the entire Army, here in Australia
and around the world. If I had known of the parade, I would have attempted
to arrange coverage.
Frontline
replies to its critics
Thank you
to our customers Cpl G. Frew, Cpl T. Gibson and Cpl T Schmidt for their
comments published in the recent Army news edition 1063 [November 7].
Frontline
does not hide from complaints, nor is it afraid to hear criticism and
I invite customers to direct their feedback to me so I can listen to
them personally and our business can learn from the experience.
Bringing
some of the material comforts of home to Australian soldiers and airmen,
wherever they may be sent to serve their country, is the special service
Frontline was set up by the Commonwealth to do.
As with
most Government businesses today, Frontline is required to be a self-funding
business in order to deliver unique benefits to its customers. Frontline
is a not-for-profit organisation in-so-far as it:
- Pays
cash dividends direct to its shareholders – soldiers and airmen
- The
balance of profit is re-invested in the business
- No
dividends are paid to any other party
You will
see new evidence in coming weeks that Frontline is in an exciting phase
of redevelopment and expansion to improve its retail offer, pricing
policy and service to customers.
Spanish
inquisition – Cpl Glen Frew
I
have spoken with Cpl Glen Frew to discuss his concerns and apologise
to him for finding it difficult to get answers.
Everyone deserves the right to have their issues and questions answered.
Summarised
answers to many of Cpl Frew’s important questions are as follows:
- Frontline
was established in 1981 and has traded as Frontline Defence Services
since 1997 and is owned by the Commonwealth of Australia.
In reality, uniformed soldiers and airmen are its shareholders.
- Our
business is run by eight directors.
Four members from Army and Air Force are appointed by the respective
Service Chiefs not below the rank of brigadier or air commodore.
These four Directors receive no remuneration.
- The
majority of profits (71 per cent in 2002) including those made in
East Timor and overseas operations are returned by way of cash payments
called “distributions”.
In the financial Year 2002 this amounted to $740,000 – from a
profit of $1.036 million. Profits retained are used to re-invest in
the business.
In addition, Frontline uses its operating profits from larger bases
to support smaller bases that make no profit because of their size.
In 2002 this amounted to $830,000.
Since 1981, distributions of $17.7 million have been paid directly
to units.
Frontline is not involved in the determination of how the distributions
fund individual welfare and amenity programs.
This is entirely at the discretion of base commands.
Looking
elsewhere – Cpl T. Gibson
The reality is that some goods and services provided duty-free overseas
can be purchased in Australia cheaper.
This is
no different to any other commercial environment where competition exists.
However,
let me assure readers that Frontline does not seek to use its position
overseas to extract benefit. Across a broad range of products most Frontline
products (genuine products with manufacture warranty) are very competitive
or cheaper than competitors in East Timor or in Australia.
Our pricing
is simple:
Landed cost plus freight plus margin sufficient to keep the business
operational.
Profits
from overseas go back to Australia and are used to fund our cash distributions.
In addition,
we contribute cash towards services and facilities used by our customers
while they are deployed.
For example,
in 2001 we paid $84,829 and in 2002 we paid $19,652 primarily to provide
audio visual equipment and satellite connections to enable those personnel
serving in East Timor to keep up to date with Australia.
Domestic
Operations
Our stores in Australia are in the convenience market (like a “7/11”
or service station convenience store).
We do not
purport to be anything else.
We are
not a supermarket or a chain store.
With a
product range as diverse as we have (15,000 product lines) there will
always be someone who will offer an alternative cheaper and from time
to time will offer products below their cost price to quit old and slow
moving stock.
We do guarantee:
- A fair
price for convenience products and services.
- Cash
dividends paid back to the customers – no one else provides this
to you.
- Warranty
of product and services.
- “Pay
Plan” unique product to Frontline – no interest, no fees,
no strings attached and easy-term repayment method up to 24 pay allotments.
Competitive
... not – Cpl T. Schmidt
Frontline has annual sales in excess of $41 million.
This compares
to major retailers such as Harvey Norman and Woolworth’s which
have sales figures in the billions of dollars.
We are
small relative to the big boys and as such our buying will not always
match their super specials or promotions.
We continually
work with suppliers to keep our retail pricing as low as possible.
In the
case of Cpl Schmidt’s purchase of an Xbox Genuine Memory Unit he
was charged the wrong price. This was a genuine mistake for which we
apologise.
This will
be fixed. We are investigating our records to ensure no other customers
were charged incorrectly. This will enable us to take the necessary
corrective action with all our customers.
Again our
apologies for the inconvenience to Cpl Schmidt and thank him for the
time to advise us of the problem.
Please
do not hesitate to contact us to have your say. We welcome your comments.
Michael Hume
Managing Director, Frontline Defence Services
PO Box 1461 Milton Qld 4064
Email: helpdesk@frontlineds.com.au
See Frontline’s
services explained in a comprehensive advertorial here
Patches
of pride
I have
just read the Colour Patch section in Army, November 21, and I have
found need to make a correction to the information supplied to the 1
Div Cash Office Colour Patch, written by Cpl Philip Blackwell for Colour
Patch Corner.
The unit
he is referring to has been retitled Deployed Forces Cash Office (DFCO)
and is in fact a sub-unit of 9FSB.
The DFCO,
a fully integrated unit located at Enoggera Barracks, has applied to
wear this colour patch, however, in the meantime proudly wears the colour
patch of 9FSB.
WO2 Paul Furness
Deployed Forces Cash Office
Gallipoli Barracks, QLD
Queen’s
shilling
In reply
to Capt Park, “Use the real thing”, Army, November 21, 2002.
Sir, the recruiting method you suggest is almost exactly that which
the British Army uses, and it’s an excellent idea.
The Brits
call it KAPE – Keeping Army in the Public Eye, and yes, the best
soldiers from each regiment or corps get to spend about six months touring
the UK, putting on dog and pony shows everywhere they go.
Participation
in KAPE is seen as a reward for outstanding service and excellence in
trade. This is how it was explained to me by numerous British NCOs with
whom I have worked.
Why don’t
we do it? Think of all those advertising consultants and media advisers
who would be out of work if Defence did not support their existences!
Are we
as soldiers to think that we might possibly be able to represent our
respective corps to prospective recruits?
Bring back
pub recruiting, I say, and let’s go around dropping the Queen’s
shilling into pint glasses everywhere. If it worked for the Navy back
then, it can work now. And if that’s not a cheaper alternative
than media saturation, I don’t know what is.
LCpl J.J. Gardner
126 Cdo Sig Sqn, 4 RAR (Cdo),
Holsworthy NSW
Using
IT power
The DEFWEB
is a large and complicated site to negiotiate. Have the DEFWEB administrators
thought of sending out to all Defence members, once a week or month,
all the new documents, updates and features?
Many people
may find this useful as it will outline all the facts at their fingertips
and may bring to their attention, items that they hadn’t thought
of or seen before.
Capt Dennis Maddock
26 Tpt Sqn
Puckapunyal, Victoria
|
