SURRENDER!
Cash-strapped Army blow up to £2 million to ditch ‘Be the Best’ slogan... as PC top brass say it’s elitist and frightens off recruits
THE British Army is ‘wasting’ millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to scrap its famous ‘Be the Best’ motto – because top brass say it is elitist.
An official document leaked to The Mail on Sunday also reveals that from January, the Army will drop its historic crest, depicting a set of crossed swords, a crown and a lion, after expensive image consultants deemed the cherished emblem ‘ non- i nclusive’. Critics last night described the politically correct image overhaul as ‘futile lunacy’, and experts predicted the move would cost millions at a time when the Armed Forces are facing an unprecedented funding crisis.
The news comes as The Mail on Sunday
revealed last month that nearly 200,000 personnel will not get the one per cent pay rise in April 2018 that they were promised in the autumn budget.
We reported how defence chiefs must save £ 9.8 billion to afford essential military equipment. The decision to spend huge sums on a rebranding exercise will also cause anger among hard-up junior troops who are forced to spend Christmas i n damp, rat- i nfested military accommodation.
The Ministry of Defence last night confirmed it had hired top advertising executives to reassess the Army’s public image.
According to industry experts, the year-long project, which included extensive market research, is likely to have cost about £1.5 million. The iconic cross swords crest can be seen at hundreds of British Army establishments around the world. The cost of replacing these signs – as well as the reprinting costs for logos and letterheads – could run into millions of pounds.
The project is the brainchild of the Army’s most senior officer, General Sir Nick Carter, the Chief of the General Staff. His team also wrote the document The Army Brand, which was circulated among senior officers l ast month. It attempts to justify the removal of the Be the Best slogan from all Army documentation and imagery, including logos, posters and signs.
It says: ‘Be the Best was a recruitment strapline from 1993 and has appeared on Army branded material ever since. But it was never a researched or defined brand.
‘Market research in May 17 found that Be the Best did not resonate with many of our key audiences and was considered dated, elitist and non-inclusive.
‘The ECAB [Executive Committee of the Army Board] therefore agreed that its use should be phased out as soon as affordably possible. The retirement of Be the Best will commence immediately with all planned refreshes of Be the Best branded material cancelled in favour of brand compliant products.’
Last night, Julian Lewis, chairman of the Commons Defence Select Committee, was taken aback by t he withdrawal of f Be the Best as the Army’s recruiting slogan.
He said: ‘Being the best is nothing to be ashamed of – it is a matter for pride and a very positive message to transmit. Why should we be afraid of excellence when we are constantly saying our Armed Forces are the best in the world?’ The document also claims that establishing the Army as a brand is necessary to protect its ‘institu- tional credibility’ and to ‘reinforce the pride and sense of belonging of soldiers and their families’.
But these claims were dismissed as absurd last night. Colonel Richard Kemp, the former commander of UK troops in Afghanistan, said the Army’s credibility was based on its fighting capability, not on a slogan or a logo. Col Kemp said: ‘Credibility is secured by our abilities on the battlefield, our fighting spirit and our resources. And at a time when the defence budget is being squeezed, it is lunacy to squander money on a futile branding project.
‘Be the Best is popular because it encapsulates the desire for our troops to be better than their enemies. It has never been about them looking down at anyone in society, so any suggestion it is elitist is nonsense. The Army needs to be the best and to know that it is.’ And public relations guru Mark Borkowski suggested military chiefs should focus on tackling the defence spending crisis and buying better equipment.
The official launch of The Army Brand next month follows a 12- month collaboration between Gen Sir Nick and advertising bosses, who formed what defence sources described last night as a ‘branding council’. The launch will include the unveiling of the Army’s new logo: a fluttering Union Jack with Army written in bold letters underneath.
But the change of l ogos has caused fury inside the Army. One officer told The Mail on Sunday: ‘The Army’s own research has consistently shown support for the crossed swords over the Union Flag as the Army’s main logo.
‘Also, Be the Best was an aspiration and instilled pride. It was certainly better than ‘This is Belonging’ – the tagline used in recent Army recruiting TV adverts.
‘A lot of people are angry. The document used by the Army to promote the branding has also been ridiculed for its meaningless, corporate-speak language.’
Gen Sir Nick’s efforts to rebrand the Army may be to no avail, according to Mr Borkowski, the founder of the successful company Borkowski PR. He said prevailing concerns about the state of Britain’s Armed Forces would work against the project.
He said: ‘Somebody at the top of the Army has looked around them, seen a world changing faster than ever and, in a bid to grasp some sense of modernity, they’ve hired external influencers. Top advertising executives don’t come cheap. The whole project would have cost at least a million pounds.’
The squeeze on t he defence budget has also led to major Army battlefield exercises being cancelled, orders for much- needed equipment such as t anks and armoured vehicles being frozen, and funding for Army museums across the UK being cut off.
Since 2010 the size of the Army has shrunk from 102,000 to 78,000 soldiers. Last night, the MoD said: ‘Like all organisations we adapt our brand to make sure it is up to date. Be the Best has been used since 1 9 9 3 a nd, f o l l o wing det a i l e d research, we’ve decided to update our branding at a cost of £520,000.’
‘Why should we be afraid of excellence?’ ‘Top advertising bosses don’t come cheap’
ONE of the worst legacies of Tony Blair’s New Labour – yet to be reversed – was the capture of Government by PR men, image experts and spin doctors.
They had an image for everything, and knew the reality of nothing. The country was subjected to years of superficial, expensive change. What lay underneath was often left unaltered or – in many cases – made worse.
Few institutions escaped. But the Army was one of them. It needed no image, with centuries of battle honours based on courage and chivalry, and the traditions of beloved regiments stretching back into the far past.
It said three simple words to its recruits: ‘Be the Best.’
It is true that in recent years the Army has suffered. But this is not because it has the wrong branding. It is because the Treasury, under both major parties and the Coalition, has carved it to the bone and beyond with unwise cuts.
Many regiments have been merged out of existence. Others have been hollowed out. During conflicts, vital kit has come too late or not at all.
Experienced men and women, disillusioned by this, have quietly left. Young men and women who would once have signed up, now sense decay and stay away from recruiting offices.
So it is not just absurd and ridiculous that Ministry of Defence chiefs are planning a rebranding operation early in the New Year, in which scarce money will be squandered on ‘retiring’ the perfectly good ‘Be the Best’ slogan. It is proof that they have lost their way. If the MoD wants to attract new talent, then it must end and reverse cuts which have already gone far too far, threatening the integrity of the Army itself as well as the safety of the country.