Lord Touhig (Labour)
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-12-13a.106.0&s=pingat#g106.2
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Howell of Guildford on 9 November (WA 47-8) on armed forces medals, what was the basis for the "five-year rule"; when the rule was adopted; and what exceptions have been made to this rule since it became Government policy.
Hansard source (Citation: HL Deb, 13 December 2010, c106W)Email me when Lord Howell of Guildford speaksMost recent appearancesNumerologyFull profile ...
Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
It is long-standing policy that awards will not be approved for events or service that took place more than five years before initial consideration, or in connection with events that took place in the distant past. The rule is understood to have been laid down in the time of King George VI. It is based on the considered view that those closest to the activities in question are those best able to judge the appropriateness or otherwise of honours and decorations.
In 2005, the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals (the HD committee) decided to make an exception to the five-year rule to allow the Pingat Jasa Malaysia medal to be accepted, but not worn.
Exceptions were also made for the Russian 40th Anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War Medal, received by veterans of the Second World War Arctic convoys, and the General Service Medal granted to veterans who served in the Suez Canal zone between 1951 and 1954.
Does this answer the above question?
Yes! 0 people think so!
No! 6 people think not!
Would you like to ask a question like this yourself? Use our Freedom of Information site.
Hansard source (Citation: HL Deb, 13 December 2010, c106W)Annotations
Gerald Law
Posted on 14 Dec 2010 12:43 pm (Report this annotation)
This response from Lord Howell regurgitates the usual obfuscation supplied from the non-elected HD Committee. He states that the reason for the so-called 5 year rule is because those in office at the time of the initial consideration are better placed to assess the merits of a medal award. Maybe so, but the PJM was not available at the time of the Borneo Conflict - it was instituted by the Malaysians who then decided that service to their nation going back to 1957 qualified for the award. This decision was there's, and there's alone, to make and any attempt by British politicians/Civil Servants to impose British "rules" of qualification is an insult to the Malaysians and a mark of disrespect to British Veterans. It is simply the case that the PJM does not and never can be, included within the compass of British awards.Lord Howell admits the Russian award was approved for unrestricted acceptance and wear, so I would like to know what different criteria were applied to that decision that are not deemed valid for the PJM?
John Feltham
Posted on 14 Dec 2010 12:59 pm (Report this annotation)
The PJM is not a UK decoration. Its is a Malaysian award, therefore it is a Foreign Award and as such is covered by the London Gazette notice given under the hand of HM The Queen.
"The Queen has been graciously pleased to approve that Orders, Decorations, and Medals, conferred with Her Majestys permission upon United Kingdom Citizens not being servants of the Crown by the Heads of Governments of Commonwealth countries as defined above, or of foreign states, may in all cases be worn by the recipients without restriction."
To my knowledge, there has not been a notice in the London Gazette rescinding that notice.
London Gazette Notice, dated 3rd May 1968.
John Cooper
Posted on 14 Dec 2010 1:59 pm (Report this annotation)
I am grateful to Lord Touhig for his question, I trust there will be more to follow to ensure justice to fellow Britons
Lord Howell really needs to see the anomalies that the Cabinet Office conjure up at pantomime season time, with respect he should not take at face value what Civil Servants in the blinkered Cabinet Office tell him but listen to some of his own parties manifesto pledges about injusticies, do get a grip!
andrew nicoll
Posted on 14 Dec 2010 3:03 pm (Report this annotation)
The present Coalition Government issued a paper headed Coalition Programme for Government. In this they gave a pledge to reinstate the Military Covenant which was broken by the previous government.
The Military Covenant is an undertaking to every British soldier (and veterans) which in return for their pledge to make the ultimate sacrifice, they are promised value and respect.
Is our Prime Minister and his coalition government going to honour this pledge to the Military Covenant or are they just going to make another cast iron U turn (like the university fees!) and just ignore the attempts by unelected civil servants to destroy our democratic right to wear in public an honourable medal we have earned in the mosquito infested jungle and stinking swamps of Malaysia and Borneo.
Lord Howell says that the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals (the HD Committee) decided to make an exception to the five year rule to allow the Pingat Jasa Malaysia medal to be accepted but not worn. So are we British citizens to be ruled by a committee of civil servants?
Lord Howell does not appear to be able to accept that a foreign medal issued by a foreign country, like the PJM, is not a British award and he also does not appear to be able to accept that the PJM was awarded by the King and Government of Malaysia to British veterans who are now all civilians not under the rule of Whitehall. Perhaps, his previous employment as a senior civil servant prevents him from being aware that there is civilian life outside Whitehall and the House of Lords.
STUART MATHEWSON
Posted on 14 Dec 2010 10:17 pm (Report this annotation)
The Government can make laws retrospectively, and can do anything they want if and when it suits them. WW1 soldiers who were executed for so-called cowardice were rightly given pardons decades after they were "court martialled." The Govt can overturn decisions made decades before. Medals can easily be awarded restrospectively too if the Govt were inclined to do so. Who runs this country, politicians or civil servants???
Paul Alders
Posted on 15 Dec 2010 7:57 am
Not only has the 5 year rule been broken so many times that it is hardly a rule at all; also this rule is only intended to apply to medals being accepted and has nothing what-so-ever to do with the wearing or non wearing of medals.
Once a foreign medal has been accepted London Gazette Notice 5057 of the 3rd May 1968 applies.
Civil Servants have no legal right to ban the wearing of the PJM.
