The MoD housing farce is destroying the army’s morale

Junior Soldiers parade on the Regimental square as they graduate from the Army Foundation College

The Ministry of Defence has proposed new rules for housing the armed forces. Instead of the size of the house allocated to service members being based on rank, it is now set to be dictated by the number of children in the family. This is farcical; woke collectivism dreamed up by consultants and faceless, inexperienced civil servants who think it will save a few pounds. Nobody with any sense for military life would have proposed them.

Life serving in the Armed Forces is like no other. It is not a job, it is a vocation.  There is no other role on the planet which expects men and women to fight and possibly die for their nation in the way it demands. I have fought the Queen’s and King’s enemies for the last 35 years, and on this very day 33 years ago I was fighting in 14/20th King’s Royal Hussars, a tank regiment, liberating Kuwait from the illegal Iraqi invasion. Over the ensuing years I did many tours in Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan. All the while, my wife and children were in a secure Army house in German or the UK.

Over the course of my career, I was responsible for many people. When I commanded the 1^st Royal Tank Regiment, that responsibility extended to over 500 soldiers and their families.  I was given a subsidised army house, big enough so I could invite almost every one of them to supper or drinks so I could get to know them all. To paraphrase our greatest general, Field Marshall Slim, officers must know their soldiers intimately, know what motivates them, those who need careful encouragement and those who need a kick in the backside.  I would never have been able to develop this knowledge in the 3-bedroom house or flat the new policy would have provided

And I repeat, you need to know your men. You carry a heavy burden of responsibility. You are required to lead soldiers into battle, usually from the front, and to take accountability for what comes from your decisions. They rely on you, and you rely on them. Building these bonds is important.

But there is also another, simpler point. In almost every job you can think of, there are perks offered to the higher ups. There are likely some in the MoD who think the new policy will win support from the ranks. But enlisted men aspire to be the leaders of tomorrow, and if the rewards of extra responsibility and work are removed, their motivation for promotion will be much diminished. Nobody joins the Army to become rich, but officers do expect to be well looked after. When housing is made worse, the “offer” to the men and women of this country of a career leading in the military is much diminished.

At a time when the Army is desperately short of personnel, thoughtless policies like this one will hasten many good people out of the service and discourage new ones in. I know a thing or two about this; I was an Army child, I was an Army officer and I now have a child aspiring to be an Army officer. I humbly suggest the MoD speaks to people like me when it formulates new policies affecting the service of the men and women in the Armed Forces, rather relying on civilian employment executives who have never fired a shot in anger, or seen a mate blown up. They might then understand why something like housing matters so much.

%n

Sign up to the Front Page newsletter for free: Your essential guide to the day’s agenda from The Telegraph – direct to your inbox seven days a week.