Seniority or Excellence: Does it Have to be One or the Other?

Despite having long ago given up any attempt at trying to convince the Chief of Army to return 1st Armoured Regiment to a combat role, the 1 Armd Regt Association “has been advised that lobbying is still occurring in the background”.

‘CONTACT’ magazine, where my letters are often published twice a week, receives over 19,000 page views per day. This is a campaign focussed directly on the target audience, rather than something ‘in the background’.

Current members of 1 Armd Regt read these letters, though they’ve been ordered not to respond. [Thanks again to those who posted info before the order was given … it added considerably to our understanding.]

So, what are the challenges to a public awareness campaign involving the RAAC’s most senior unit? You might think that after 75 years’ service, 1 Armd Regt’s reputation would speak for itself. Sadly, this is not the case.

There is no doubt that, although members of the armoured corps have a very close bond whilst serving, this quickly breaks down on discharge. Unit associations do much to maintain ties, however, as with the 1 Armd Regt Assn, there is an understandable focus on organising reunions and other get-togethers, rather than persisting in arguing a case to change the role of their former unit (despite the Assn’s well-argued letter to this end).

There is also considerable difficulty in keeping members abreast of changes affecting RAAC units.

I was speaking to a retired member of the Corps a couple of days ago … he had no idea that 1 Armd Regt had been stripped of its tanks.

Of particular concern, in terms of the passage of information, is the fact that the only Armoured Corps newsletter is ‘IRONSIDES’. In the Head of Corps’ words, this “is an internal-to-Defence product”. This means that any public statements contained in it which are contrary to Army policy, amount to ‘insubordination’. The following passage, contained in a draft article for the Corps newsletter, didn’t pass the censor in this regard:

“At a time when, after 75 years’ service to the nation crewing tanks, the Chief of Army has decided to remove 1 Armd Regt from the Order of Battle and give it a different role as a non-combatant, it is worth reflecting on a time when members of the Regiment gave their all to meet the Army’s needs”.

Writing in the 1955 regimental journal ‘Tracks’, Brigadier Murdoch, CBE, explains that “The Regiment, in addition to preparing as a unit of the field force for possible operational tasks, has training responsibilities in regard to the corps, as a whole”. Although factually correct, an underlying inference of criticism was detected.

Obviously, there’s no place for any thoughts of free ranging discussions abouts the merits or otherwise of ideas relevant to the armoured corps. An example was provided by the Corps Conference … it was clear on the need for another battle-group HQ to command the tanks in Townsville. Unfortunately, that recommendation has been tossed aside (the Conference has no authority).

Heavens forbid that anyone challenge that which has been decreed by those more senior.

Those who have been promoted to the rank they hold are obviously those who are best qualified to decide how we’re going to fight (and what with). In the unlikely event that they need new ideas, they’ll ask for them.

A favourite saying of the CA’s is: “The time is now, and we are it. We must be ready to fight tonight”.

What a pity we do so with no opportunity to challenge ideas, to test them, and accept only the best (no matter who’s they are).

The selection of our strategy, tactics and equipment is all predicated on seniority, rather than excellence. We are an Army destined to stumble blindly through the darkness.

Lieutenant Colonel Bruce Cameron, MC, RAAC (Ret’d)

 

FILE PHOTO (July 2025): An Australian Army soldier from 1st Armoured Regiment briefs Chief of Army on some of his units new experimental fighting equipment in Shoalwater Bay training area in Queensland during Exercise Talisman Sabre 2025. Photo by Captain Joanne Leca.

.

.


.


.