Bishop Hill The redundant rear-admiral
Apr 2, 2012 Climate: WG2 Climate: WG3 The UK Foreign Secretary William Hague has a guest post from Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti, who is "the UK Government’s Climate and Energy Security Envoy".
Britain famously has more admirals than warships and one often wonders what all these highly paid people actually do all day, so it is good to have this clarification that the Ministry of Defence is setting up "jobs for the boys" schemes to keep redundant sailors up to their necks in our tax money.
Hague's decision to allow Morisetti a guest post on his facebook page rather seems to endorse the corruption too.
Morisetti's article is largely content-free, but he manages to demonstrate an almost complete ignorance of how business works, suggesting that supply chain disruption for businesses needs to be addressed by government policy.
That a redundant sailor doesn't understand that this is the kind of thing purchasing managers worry about on a day-to-day basis is understandable. That he should be paid a huge salary to advertise his ignorance is not.
Reader Comments (56)
Geez, Bish, you sound just like the ignorant journalist who wrote the Telegraph article equating the number of admirals with the number of ships in the Royal Navy. What is it about civilians that they feel the need to demonstrate their total lack of understanding of military (broadly defined).
A little less of the ignorant snidery would go a long way towards keeping your military and former military readership on side.
"electronic consumables such as hard drives" haha
Come on. He probably doesn't cost you and me much more than a wind generator or two - and he spoils the view less.
So admirals opining on supply chains is laughable, but accountants opining on climate science is not?
Your newfound zeal for respecting domains of expertise is noted.
My eyes! My eyes!
Mailman
Mique
THe article quoted one Commander John Muxworthy as saying "What is really appalling is not that we have 41 admirals but that we only have 40 warships". I assumed that Commander Muxworthy was perhaps a naval man?
Frank
The word "laughable" does not appear in my post. Please don't misrepresent what I said.
Perhaps you could explain to us ignorant and snide civilians what it is about our military that requires an unlimited number of top management roles - irrespective of the number of activities to be managed.
In any other field of management, senior roles are naturally adjusted to the number of business units to be managed - this happens every time one business takes over another or even when public service activities are outsourced.
I expect someone as knowledgeable as you about such matters knows that the US military understands this and operates under a statutory restriction on the number of admirals who may serve at any one time.
They seem to manage with a somewhat lower "admiral/ship ratio":-
There are 285 active ships in the Navy. This number includes about 48 submarines.
Total officer complement (from Ensign to four-star Admiral) is 52,291. Wikipedia says:
Quote:
U.S. Code of law explicitly limits the total number of admirals that may be on active duty at any given time. The total number of active duty flag officers is capped at 216 for the Navy. For the Navy, no more than 16.3% of the service's active duty flag officers may have more than two stars, and no more than 25% of those may have four stars. This corresponds to 9 admirals.
(Translated, that says that the total number of Rear, Vice, and full Admirals is 216, that no more than 35 may be three or four stars, and that no more than nine may be four-star Admirals -- and they only get the fourth star if appointed to a position that is to be held by a full Admiral. These caps may be waived by the President in time of war or national emergency.)
This is hardly surprising.
This stems from the ingrained and deluded belief that governments "run the economy". That delusion also seems to permeate into all echelons of public servants.
Having been in the senior management team of a manufacturing company during the 2008/2010 financial disaster and seen the response from Government to requests for help from the Government I would not ask for any help again. You just get caught up in endless meetings and being used to provide the local Politicians with sound bits for local rags, action zero. The politicians make the right noises and then pass you on to the civil servants, cue grinding stop and lots of job justification and nothing else.
what's also "interesting" is this inter-departmental post he occupies:
"In September 2009 he took up a new cross government post as Climate and Energy Security Envoy for the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and the Department for Energy and Climate Change."
Forgive me for wondering about the value of such a position. I don't doubt that staff members need to keep track of various relevant info on energy and climate for their superiors but what exactly is the need for an Admiral of Climate Change (my sarcastic title).
"Foxgoose's Law" states :-
At any given time, there are an infinite number of individuals capable of generating an infinite amount of unproductive activity for an infinite amount of time in order to maintain a congenial lifestyle at the expense of their fellow citizens. Whether this effect self limits when it becomes asymptotic to the gross national product of the host community has yet to be established.
@Skiphil Apr 2, 2012 at 9:47 AM
He's probably in training to become the perfect model of the Admiral of Sustainable Development!
I hope he didn't write this drivel on "my time" - the time my taxes are paying for.
I thought this government was supposed to cut out this useless waste ?
Oops should i post this - when will the door be broken in ?
I have the utmost respect for what the Royal Navy has been and for so many feats of valor over centuries. I'm not at all sure about what it's becoming, if this Admiral is any indication.... to the extent that protecting supply chains and "warehouses on the sea" (in merchant ships and tankers) is the mission, pontificating about climate change is of far less significance than being able to actually project decisive force in a crisis. The US Navy's 11 carrier battle groups (along with assorted other ships and planes, attack submarines, etc.) will have to do the actual protection of sea lanes in most conceivable crises, since the Royal Navy is being scaled down to a point at which there may be no operational carrier air group (??). So long as the UK doesn't need to achieve too much on the seas in a context that is not actively protected by the USN, there may not be a problem. But I would think that any "serious" officer of the Royal Navy (and any citizen of the UK) ought to be a lot more concerned about the declining independence of naval force projection than about vaporous discussions of "climate change"...
The 9 most terrifying words in the english language
In short in matters climate-al, political, sustainable,
He is the very model of a modern rear admiral.
BoFA
"the response from Government"
As a council officer friend of mine was once told, "every assistance short of actual help"
PM
G&S knew about the staffing situation, too:
Stand by your desks and never go to sea
And you'll soon be rulers of the Queen's Nav-ee
Why would an admiral worry about the sea level rising, anyway?
In the gravy
Yes, you can save the seven seas
In the gravy
Yes, you can put your bank at ease
In the gravy
Come on now, people, lend a hand
In the gravy, in the gravy
Come on, protect our planet's land
In the gravy
Come on people, and make a stand
In the gravy
So I can join this fellow Mann
In the gravy, in the gravy, in the gravy...
I'm an American civilian and I don't begin to know what the strategic posture and force projection capabilities of the Royal Navy ought to be for UK interests, but I note that this (below) retired Admiral and First Sea Lord seems far more concerned about the declining force levels than about "climate change" (in any case, hypothesized threats to shipping and supplies which somehow result from "climate change" cannot be addressed without adequate forces):
Lord West Says cameron is Failing the Royal Navy
Perhaps it has to be that the US Navy does much of the heavy lifting in any far flung naval crisis nowadays, but I'd think that citizens of the UK and France ought to be aware (if not concerned) of their increasing dependence upon US policy and action for myriad situations.
Is it any great wonder why Hague and rear admirals should make such happy bedfellows?
"After initial training at Britannia Royal Naval College in Dartmouth he (Morisetti) held shore postings and attended the University of East Anglia and graduated with a Bachelor of Science"
Doesn't this say a lot? As an ex-RN man, he strikes me as similar to Admiral "Lord" West, a Blair peer, who has done more damage to the Navy than anyone else. A cousin of mine was a contemporary of West, and says he was always thought of as a complete idiot.
The skill of bureaucrats of all kinds in inventing new roles for themselves should never be underestimated. Climate Change has been a glorious gift to many. When even some old sailor can re-invent himself as a climate change thinker and activist, how many more have done it already, (for whom we are paying - a mere detail, in the eyes of our masters of the parallel universe)?
Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti is a Freeman of the City of London, which is a bit more useful than being able to drive sheep over London bridge without toll or tax, if you read the bits of the Magna Carta (1215 & 1297) that are still active.
I expect his position is more about protecting the City of London in the draft of the UN global governance mandate.
Arrgghhh!
Why does everything that's wrong with this friggin' country lead back to the "creative writers" at the University of Easy Access.
Did he do a modular "intercalated" degree combining Naval Strategy, Climate Science and post-modern poetry by any chance?
CMDR Muxworthy's comment (as quoted) was perfectly reasonable (if not exactly appropriate for such a relatively junior officer). It's the government's prerogative to determine how many ships will be in commission at any given time, and their prerogative to determine how the RN's admirals will be employed. I was commenting merely on the assumption that the admiral had somehow been given a sinecure outside the Navy (perfectly possible, of course, but no suggestion that this was the case in this instance), and that he was free to express his own opinion and not that of the government that is paying him.
As for the other issues.
1. It's irrelevant how the USN organises its forces and whether or not it caps the number of flag rank officers on active duty at any given time. We're talking about the situation in the UK.
2. The armed forces are not readily comparable to any other business activity, and ships are no more "management units" than, say, a single truck in a transport company or a single oil rig in an oil exploration company, a single shop in a retail chain, or a single dumptruck in a large mining venture. Naval ships, and equivalent units in the civilian environment are normally commanded by relatively junior officers (a typical USN CVN is commanded by a mere Captain, as are the biggest and most powerful ships in the Royal Navy). Admirals command higher formations or staff even higher commands and policy areas, and whether these commands exist in reality or largely just on paper, which is increasingly the peacetime norm, the relevant expertise needs to be retained and practiced. Unlike the civil service in general, or private businesses, you can't hire Naval expertise or capability with a few ads in the Times. So whether we like it or not, senior officers need to be retained to provide essential expertise in case the force needs to be ramped up quickly or simply to provide a degree of selectivity to replace higher ranking officers as they retire.
If you have a problem with Morisetti's article, blame his political masters for putting him in what must be a very humiliating situation for any military officer. He'd have had very little choice in the matter. Second, blame the civil service drone who would have written the article for him, no doubt at the direction of a Sir Humfrey.
"a very humiliating situation"
No so humiliating that he declined it, though; but then maybe he's not so employable in the real world.
"The 9 most terrifying words in the english language
I'm from the government and I'm here to help
Apr 2, 2012 at 10:06 AM | Unregistered CommenterJack Hughes"
And the 10 most terrifying words in the english language:
"...and one of our viewers has sent in a poem..."
There are people lining their pockets with "climate-change" throughout society. It comes as no surprise that within the ranks of the navy there is at least one free-loading subsidy chaser.
But as "Mique" points out - these types just do what their political masters decree. We should not expect moral, political or scientific conscience from them. So perhaps it's not his fault - he was only following orders.
In the US it is Home Depot, WalMart, FedEx, First Energy and others in the private sector that are first to respond to natural disasters such as hurricanes. Government agencies can rally manpower and provide security but chainsaws, drywall and ice come from the big box stores.
Seriously, Mique, he didn't want to do it, and didn't do it anyway. In what strange realm is his name attached to it?
=========
My father was a Flight Lieutenant who didn't fly, a Squadron Leader without a squadron, a Wing Commander without a wing, and a finally a Group Captain without a group, so I can't see a problem with being an Admiral without a ship.
I'm surprised that anyone found anything to disagree with in Morisetti's post, as to me it appeared to be content free.
James P: "Why would an admiral worry about the sea level rising, anyway?"
Classic, James!
He's clearly the ideal man for the job.
It seems his UEA degree is in "Environmental Sciences" (the rear admiral's bio is second from bottom of the webpage).
I see no reason to accept the suggestion of "Mique" that the article was written by a civil servant drone on his behalf. The rear admiral's qualifications are entirely adequate for producing a page of climate change fluff all by himself.
I don't know what a rear admiral's salary is (the salary of a Commodore - the rank immediately below rear admiral - is in the range £97,030 - £100,963) but I am confident that he earns every penny of whatever it may be.
[I wish I could remember who it was that said "if a subject has the word 'science' in its title, then it is probably not science".]
@I wish I could remember who it was that said ...
That hits the spot =)
Gilbert and Sullivan did have it right:
I see from the Navy List that in 2009: he was posted as "Climate Security Champion" - quite a guy - but no mention in the Navy List of UEA
Nelson was blind in just one eye - this "gold lace" is blind in two.
Good to see the Navy will be protecting shipments of hard drives "on the global trade routes which pass through the parts of the world where climate change will have the greatest impact and are therefore vulnerable to disruption".
"What is less certain is how it will impact on humans and global stability", yet he knows which "parts of the world where climate change will have the greatest impact and are therefore vulnerable to disruption"?
Nelson was brilliant but vain, This Rear Admiral is brilliantly vain.
[I wish I could remember who it was that said "if a subject has the word 'science' in its title, then it is probably not science".]
Apr 2, 2012 at 12:31 PM | Martin A
I like that!
Climate Science.
Political Science.
Social Science.
As he is still on the Navy List, I assume the post is a secondment and his salary is being paid by the MOD and DECC. No doubt if he hadn't got the job, they would be paying someone else to do it. I don't see any fault in the Royal Navy for this matter. As to to the '41 Admirals and only 40 ships' this is a load of tosh, the RN currently has 76 vessels in active commission, not to mention 29 'stone frigates' (shore-based establishments).
In an act of deep empathetic social sympathy Hague gave read admiral Morisetti a task equivalent to digging a hole and filling it in again.
Presumably all the curb stones had been painted around the admiralty. With Morisetti's educational background, the only make-work task left was pontificating about climate change.
They probably have a house master in common, or something.
Makes perfect sense.
Salopian, does your tally include HMSML Gleaner, the only Royal Navy vessel ever to visit Switzerland?
Roger C
Thank you! Sadly, I can't take all the credit, as I had this at the back of my mind, as well at Jack Hughes's original remark...
Link
Jonathan; Yes, I did include her as she is under active commission (albeit only 26 tonnes). I did not include HMS Victory (even though she is still technically the flagship of the 2nd Sea Lord), or the training ship HMS Bristol, or those under construction.
Salopian,
Is the discrepancy arising from how one defines "warships" (I notice the article used the qualifier "fighting ships")??
Perhaps they don't mean to be comparing with the number of all commissioned ships, although in any case the issues of how many Admirals a navy "needs" cannot be resolved by any of us.... as Mique emphasizes the functions are quite different from command of any specific ship.
@ artwest 11:45 AM
"And the 10 most terrifying words in the english language: "...and one of our viewers has sent in a poem..."
In fact (slightly modified) lyrics to a popular song. You could try switching off the offending box and getting out more.
Skiphil,
Agreed; I don't see where the figure of 40 came from. If you only include assault ships, destroyers and frigates it only comes to 22. if you add subs it is 33. The remaining 43 in my list are mine-sweepers, patrol vessels and survey ships - so how can you get to 40? BTW, don't put too much value on what Muxworthy and the UKNDA say until you've checked out their website.
Ah, the proud history of our island race - written in the blood & guts of our old sea dogs:-
Drake smashed the Spanish Armada
Blake built the Royal navy
Benbow hung his cowardly captains in the Caribbean
Nelson routed the French at Trafalgar
Jellicoe faced down the German battleships at Jutland
Harwood beat the Graf Spee
................... and Morisetti went to UEA and worried about whether it was getting a bit warmer (or if we might run a bit short of widgets for Hondas).
As a recent former 'Overseas Trained agency teacher' of Design Technology in a small number of Comprehensive schools in the UK for a few years, when I began teaching in the UK I was bemused by the fact that each school I worked in had sold the majority of their engineering and woodworking plant once used to provide a hands-on experience for their pupils and that the subject had become largely a paper exercise; it seems clear that current and recent UK governments apply this line of thinking to everything within their orbit - school workshops denuded of equipment seems to fit well with the philosophy of an aircraftless Air Force and a shipless Navy. Perhaps a Rear Admiral who has nothing to do with warships and pontificates about climate is not so odd in the current post-modern UK?
I was relieved to discover when I recently returned to New Zealand that our equivalent schools have upgraded their Design Technology equipment but, under the last Labour Govt, the PM, Helen Clarke, now a senior UN appointee, oversaw getting rid of the fighter wing of the RNZAF and redesignated our armed forces as 'Peace Forces'.
Jack Aubrey eventually became a Yellow Admiral.
Why shouldn't today's Royal Navy have Green Admirals?