1st Armoured Regiment: The Ethics of Manipulation

The Chief of Army wrote to me earlier this year, partly in response to a paper I had submitted advocating that a Code of Ethics be adopted by the ADF. He thanked me for passing on my thoughts; illustrated as they were, by a number of Case Studies. In one of these, I pointed out that:

“Defence Instructions specifically prohibit manufacturers of equipment being considered for acquisition by the ADF, making gifts to units associated with the capability. Not long ago, one particular Army acquisition was very keenly contested by a number of different manufacturers. During this period of competitive assessment, it was revealed that cash handouts amounting to tens of thousands of dollars were being made to a unit by one of the manufacturers. As payments direct to unit funds would show up in financial audits, the money was ‘masked’ by channelling it through the affiliated unit association.”

Although clearly in breach of all rules and regulations, the practice was condoned by senior officers who simply ‘looked the other way’. Sometimes ethical misbehaviour is not so clear cut, however. In 2024, 1st Armoured Regiment celebrated its 75th Anniversary. The year before, the Defence Strategic Review (DSR) deemed that it was to be stripped of its tanks and, as a non-combatant, would become responsible for managing new and emerging technologies.

There were two drivers behind the decision. Firstly, the need for such a unit was long overdue and it would have to ‘hit the ground running’ to make up for lost time. Secondly, there was a pressing need to save money in the Defence budget and reducing the operating costs of the RAAC would contribute to this. Although 3 Brigade in Townsville was supposed to be an armoured brigade, the commander agreed to manage without a tank squadron, a cavalry sqn and a battle group headquarters (despite this being more than a 30 per cent loss of armoured combat power).

Although arrangements were made well in advance, everything was kept quiet until the DSR was released. Secrecy was important. 1 Armd Regt was the Australian Army’s most senior field force unit (only preceded by the Corps of Staff Cadets). It had been awarded three battle-honours and a Unit Citation for Gallantry in Vietnam and its arbitrary removal from the Order of Battle would undoubtedly provoke a backlash.

The psychology was clever. Make it appear that 1 Armd Regt was still on the ORBAT and nothing had changed; heritage and traditions to stay the same; the Standard to continue to be paraded; and Cambrai Day to be commemorated each year as normal. This is why the CO and RSM have to make it clear that they are “committed to upholding the customs and traditions of 1st Armoured Regiment”. The farce has to be maintained, if the backlash is to be avoided.

Of course, ethical behaviour is all about being honest and open; nothing at all to do with manipulation.

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

 

FILE PHOTO (20 November 2017): Family, friends and past members of the 1st Armoured Regiment watch on during a parade to mark the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Cambrai. Photo by Corporal Craig Barrett.

.

.


.


.