Coming to a Lib Dem bar chart near you – politicalbetting.com

TheScreamingEagles said:

algarkirk said:

bigjohnowls said:

Sean_F said:

Expectations are so low, that if the Conservatives finished with 200 seats, it would probably seem like a victory.

I think they will exceed 200

Sir John Curtice seems to think Lab need at least a 12% lead over Con to get a Majority. If that is true NOM represents very good value IMO

The issue of what actual voting % figures will produce what result WRT seats in July seems to me (as a bit innumerate) an extremely vexed one. Any chance of an expert analysis of the various opinions?

I agree that if Labour need a 12 point lead for a majority, they are highly likely not to get one. But I am not convinced this is true maths.

This is what the morning thread is on.

Thanks.

edit

Scott_xP said:

I hope this is a spoof

@kateferguson4

BREAKING!

Rishi Sunak will bring in compulsory national service for all 18 years olds if the Tories win the election

They should think themselves lucky he's not bringing back the Work House...

bondegezou said:

dixiedean said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

HYUFD said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Alanbrooke said:

RochdalePioneers said:

On the helicopter thing. Its the long campaign for another week, and the chopper means he can cover more ground. Its already priced in that he likes to fly above the plebs, why stop now?

More oddly why have Labour decided to deprive themselves of using helicopters ? If Starmer steps on one he's now open to accusations of hypocrisy. As you say they have been used extensively in most election campaigns.

e.g. Lightning strikes Blair's plane
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4490809.stm

Blair on a plane, Howard planned to use a helicopter but had to use a plane. Cameron used helicopters.

Do people really think that leading politicians during a GE campaign are on the National Express to all these campaign visits?

Well, Ed Davey was swanning around on a YACHT in Chichester earlier, like some kind of Bond villain and/or Russian oligarch.

I might be exaggerating slightly there, but it was a bit Howards Way.

Ted Heath used to do the same and Davey is targeting Heathite Remainer Tories in the Chichester area by taking a boat around the Solent

Heath was genuinely a very good yachtsman, and it was pretty impressive to win the Admiral's Cup (at the time quite a big event) as PM. Alright, it's a team thing and his was third British yacht over the line, but still better than most of us achieve in sporting terms.

I think most of us are of an age to only really remember Heath as a portly, sulking gent towards the end, but he was really considered rather dashing at that time, and not totally without merit.

He also participated in D Day, was mentioned in dispatches, commanded a firing squad at an execution, was awarded an MBE for his War service, and ended up a Lieutenant-Colonel after the War.
Although politicians of those days didn't go on about it, their War record was widely known.
See also Denis Healey.

Memories of the war can still hang over politicians and their ideas today, albeit not necessarily in good ways.

This being what I was referring to: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpddxy9r4mdo

Absolutely bonkers.

kle4 said:

So that's Casino Royale out, is there anyone else willing to donate their body to the Tory campaign?

I would, but only for a friend.

Scott_xP said:

I hope this is a spoof

@kateferguson4

BREAKING!

Rishi Sunak will bring in compulsory national service for all 18 years olds if the Tories win the election

BBC News has it. Confirmation that the Tories are looking to the voters missing in action currently supporting Reform and DK.

Theuniondivvie said:

My pic of the day. Think ManU are a bit arse but I like Fergie.

As an Aberdeen supporter, I have to support Man U because of Fergie. As an Aberdeen supporter, GTF Rangers!

megasaur said:

MattW said:

Wine Question:

Is Redbeard Bacchus 2020 any good? Keep or Drink?

(It was a free bonus.)

Wine which improves with keeping is way above almost anyone's pay grade and is not called names like Redbeard. Otoh genuinely undrinkable wine is almost unheard of these days. Drink it is my advice.

I don't think that entirely true. Even average Rhone wines benefit from a year or two in the bottle to soften the tannins.

That said, a free bonus bottle is unlikely to benefit greatly, so drink up. Or save it for cooking.

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

bigjohnowls said:

GIN1138 said:

bigjohnowls said:

JohnO said:

Heathener said:

bigjohnowls said:

bigjohnowls said:

Opinium
@OpiniumResearch
Our latest polling with
@ObserverUK


Labour starts the #GE2024 campaign with 14-point lead:
· Labour 41% (-2)
· Conservatives 27% (+2)
· Lib Dems 10% (+1)
· SNP 2% (-1)
· Greens 7% (n/c)
· Reform 10% (n/c)

Fieldwork: 23-24 May.
Changes from 15-17 May.

Todays Opinium

LABOUR maj 186

National Prediction: Labour majority 186

It’s Labour not SKS so I’ve corrected it for you. We vote for constituency MPs. It’s not a Presidency.

Almost the same as my prediction the other day.

Lab 42.5%
Con 28.5%
LibDem 9%

Seats
Lab 421
Con 160
LibDem 30
SNP 14

Lab Majority 185

That’s about what I’m expecting too seats wise.

No chance imo

Lab have a 50% chance of getting 326 imo

Lab 38
Con 33
Green 8

SKS fans would have a lot to explain with that...

Well if Opinium is accurate and Lab are only on 41 I think Lab will be lucky to get 38 by Polling day

It is more of a stretch for Con to get to 33 but as propoganda keeps on that a vote for Reform lets Lab in i can see their vote collapsing to say 5%

I am on NOM at 6/1 and Lab to get less than the 12.83m votes it got in 2017 at an incredibly generous 8/1

Yeh - Rishi was right, it's gonna be a hung parliament of chaos.

Scott_xP said:

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

A review that could cost billions?

RobD said:

Scott_xP said:

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

A review that could cost billions?

Defence procurement innit

AlsoLei said:

kle4 said:

So that's Casino Royale out, is there anyone else willing to donate their body to the Tory campaign?

I really hope that HYUFD is spending the weekend applying to everywhere within striking distance of Epping Forest!

He would be a rare breed, an honest Tory! I would vote for him. I would also vote for Casino, Rochdale, Tissue Price, and anyone else on PB who is standing, as they have more practical political knowledge than most of the actual candidates.

Heathener said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

bigjohnowls said:

Sean_F said:

Expectations are so low, that if the Conservatives finished with 200 seats, it would probably seem like a victory.

I think they will exceed 200

Sir John Curtice seems to think Lab need at least a 12% lead over Con to get a Majority. If that is true NOM represents very good value IMO

I thought he said 9%? But I agree on the value.

I’m finding this one of the hardest elections to bet on at the moment. Anyone else?

As others have mentioned, and @TSE wrote about, it wouldn’t take much to see dramatic seat share shifts.

Actually I think it's one of the easiest. So long as you're prepared to take a view - i.e. that the stats aren't everything.

My own view accords with what you've been saying for a couple of years(?) - this is annihilation time for the Tories imo. Everything flows from that. My only difficulty is entry tbh - there will surely as someone else said earlier in the thread be "wobbles" along the way for labour, so do I wait for them or get involved immediately? Bottom pickers have sticky fingers and all that. Generally speaking I'm getting involved but keeping most of my powder dry. EG on the spreads - started buying Labour (I'd normally be shorting Tory given the bid/offer spread but I think other parties a bit too high too) but I'm hoping price comes down so I can lift offers around 380.

I am also only betting in ways I can exit and lick my wounds should the above view change.

Foxy said:

algarkirk said:

bigjohnowls said:

Sean_F said:

Expectations are so low, that if the Conservatives finished with 200 seats, it would probably seem like a victory.

I think they will exceed 200

Sir John Curtice seems to think Lab need at least a 12% lead over Con to get a Majority. If that is true NOM represents very good value IMO

The issue of what actual voting % figures will produce what result WRT seats in July seems to me (as a bit innumerate) an extremely vexed one. Any chance of an expert analysis of the various opinions?

I agree that if Labour need a 12 point lead for a majority, they are highly likely not to get one. But I am not convinced this is true maths.

I don't think anything like a 12% lead is needed for a Lab majority.

Tonight's Opinium give a 186 seat Labour majority on a 14% lead for example on UNS.

Incidentally it seems the raw figures for Opinium are unchanged. The 4% drop in Lab lead is to do with how they handle the DKs.

https://x.com/Samfr/status/1794446635101196603?t=JcdR_1aWypDusJM67SUBgw&s=19

I've found it pretty interesting that lots of our Tory-leaning posters have reported that they've heard very little about the election from their friends and acquaintances, and that "it's boring so far, nothing's broken through, no-one cares about it".

And yet, where I am in North London, I've seen Labour out leafleting, heard people chattering about politics in the street, and seen Rishi's "Things Can Only Get Wetter" speech become the primary topic of office small talk in a way that hasn't been seen since the finale of Succession. I've never seen such a high level of engagement with politics before.

Now, obviously, all of that reflects only the very tiny bubble in which I find myself, but I do wonder if the differential turnout which usually can be relied upon to help the Tories might fail to occur this time round.

But we're told that Rishi has been spending the day cooking up a new flagship policy - it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out to be something like abolishing inheritance tax altogether. Would that be enough to re-engage the disaffected Tories?

@rafaelbehr

The last time I checked, professional armed forces definitely *not* keen on compulsory national service because it wasted time and money coralling non-soldiers who really don't want to be there.

But I'm sure Team Sunak has completely thought this through.

bondegezou said:

bondegezou said:

bondegezou said:

dixiedean said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

HYUFD said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Alanbrooke said:

RochdalePioneers said:

On the helicopter thing. Its the long campaign for another week, and the chopper means he can cover more ground. Its already priced in that he likes to fly above the plebs, why stop now?

More oddly why have Labour decided to deprive themselves of using helicopters ? If Starmer steps on one he's now open to accusations of hypocrisy. As you say they have been used extensively in most election campaigns.

e.g. Lightning strikes Blair's plane
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4490809.stm

Blair on a plane, Howard planned to use a helicopter but had to use a plane. Cameron used helicopters.

Do people really think that leading politicians during a GE campaign are on the National Express to all these campaign visits?

Well, Ed Davey was swanning around on a YACHT in Chichester earlier, like some kind of Bond villain and/or Russian oligarch.

I might be exaggerating slightly there, but it was a bit Howards Way.

Ted Heath used to do the same and Davey is targeting Heathite Remainer Tories in the Chichester area by taking a boat around the Solent

Heath was genuinely a very good yachtsman, and it was pretty impressive to win the Admiral's Cup (at the time quite a big event) as PM. Alright, it's a team thing and his was third British yacht over the line, but still better than most of us achieve in sporting terms.

I think most of us are of an age to only really remember Heath as a portly, sulking gent towards the end, but he was really considered rather dashing at that time, and not totally without merit.

He also participated in D Day, was mentioned in dispatches, commanded a firing squad at an execution, was awarded an MBE for his War service, and ended up a Lieutenant-Colonel after the War.
Although politicians of those days didn't go on about it, their War record was widely known.
See also Denis Healey.

Memories of the war can still hang over politicians and their ideas today, albeit not necessarily in good ways.

This being what I was referring to: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpddxy9r4mdo

Absolutely bonkers.

"Under the plans, young people could choose a full-time, 12-month placement in the armed forces or UK cyber defence, learning about logistics, cyber security, procurement or civil response operations.

"Their other option would be to volunteer one weekend per month - or 25 days per year - in their community with organisations such as fire, police and the NHS."

Join the army or do one day per fortnight with St John Ambulance... these are not equivalent.

Virtually every sixth former in the UK has a part time job at the weekends, so this seems a tad unworkable.

The staffing rotas of McDs, KFC and the supermarkets would be decimated.

RobD said:

Scott_xP said:

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

A review that could cost billions?

I would post the bit that explains it, but I am over my quota

Eabhal said:

rottenborough said:

Scott_xP said:

I hope this is a spoof

@kateferguson4

BREAKING!

Rishi Sunak will bring in compulsory national service for all 18 years olds if the Tories win the election

They've no more votes to lose in the 18-24 bracket, so this is just aimed at those pensioners who think the 1950s were UK's golden era.

This is Core Vote 2.0

Yes. This is for Reform voters 60+

Alternatively, this is Day 1 of a grid where Sunak ramps war with Russia, Argentina, Spain, Scotland, China. We might get a big announcement like "Black Watch to garrison Kyiv".

Scott_xP said:

I hope this is a spoof

@kateferguson4

BREAKING!

Rishi Sunak will bring in compulsory national service for all 18 years olds if the Tories win the election

Oh fuck off Sunak.

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

@rafaelbehr

The last time I checked, professional armed forces definitely *not* keen on compulsory national service because it wasted time and money coralling non-soldiers who really don't want to be there.

But I'm sure Team Sunak has completely thought this through.

I'd assume the options being presented being so different in scale suggests they think virtually no one will be conscripted into military service, and nearly everyone would go for the community volunteering once per month.

Dave's National Citizen Service failed miserably, which was similar (albeit voluntary).

Rishi clearly hates young people

@euanmccolm

someone told me about the national service thing a couple of hours ago and i was like “don’t be stupid. no way that’s happening.”

Carnyx said:

Malmesbury said:

Carnyx said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

dixiedean said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

HYUFD said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Alanbrooke said:

RochdalePioneers said:

On the helicopter thing. Its the long campaign for another week, and the chopper means he can cover more ground. Its already priced in that he likes to fly above the plebs, why stop now?

More oddly why have Labour decided to deprive themselves of using helicopters ? If Starmer steps on one he's now open to accusations of hypocrisy. As you say they have been used extensively in most election campaigns.

e.g. Lightning strikes Blair's plane
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4490809.stm

Blair on a plane, Howard planned to use a helicopter but had to use a plane. Cameron used helicopters.

Do people really think that leading politicians during a GE campaign are on the National Express to all these campaign visits?

Well, Ed Davey was swanning around on a YACHT in Chichester earlier, like some kind of Bond villain and/or Russian oligarch.

I might be exaggerating slightly there, but it was a bit Howards Way.

Ted Heath used to do the same and Davey is targeting Heathite Remainer Tories in the Chichester area by taking a boat around the Solent

Heath was genuinely a very good yachtsman, and it was pretty impressive to win the Admiral's Cup (at the time quite a big event) as PM. Alright, it's a team thing and his was third British yacht over the line, but still better than most of us achieve in sporting terms.

I think most of us are of an age to only really remember Heath as a portly, sulking gent towards the end, but he was really considered rather dashing at that time, and not totally without merit.

He also participated in D Day, was mentioned in dispatches, commanded a firing squad at an execution, was awarded an MBE for his War service, and ended up a Lieutenant-Colonel after the War.
Although politicians of those days didn't go on about it, their War record was widely known.
See also Denis Healey.

The very apologetic tank commander in A Bridge Too Far who could not advance (for good reasons) to relieve the British at Arnhem was based on Lord Carrington (MC) who was first across the bridge at Nijmegen in a Sherman.

Poor sods. They didn't even have the special heavily armoured M4A3E2 spearhead assault version of the Sherman that the Americans had.

Advancing up a single road? Even if you were in Jagdtigers you were stuffed.

Better chance of getting out, though.

Actually, if you were in a Sherman with wet stowage and not piles of loose rounds everywhere, your chances of surviving a hit were better than pretty much everything the Germans had. The tank might be o/c, but more crew survived.

rachelkennedy84

Are there even enough people in the armed forces to look after all the new people who don't really want to be in the armed forces

We don't know whether the policy is a terrible one till we see the detail.

What we do know is that it's completely inauthentic. Sunak has been PM. His Government had another 6 months on the clock. Where was anything to do with this idea then?

@alexmassie

Conquest’s second law: the easiest way to explain the behaviour of a given organisation is to assume it is secretly controlled by a cabal of its enemies.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Conservative party’s plan to reintroduce national service.

Maybe Voders conspiracy theory about Sunak is going to step down and hand it over to Cameron isn't mad twitter bollock after all....

@drjennings

Compulsory national service is not popular with any age group apart from the over-65s. Is it possible for the Conservative vote with under 25s to go any lower?

The £2.5 billion National Service scheme will see school leavers apply for a year-long placement in the Armed Forces or the UK’s cyber defences where they will gain experience in logistics, cyber security, procurement and civil response operations such as flood defences.

The placements, which are open to 30,000 youngsters, will involve residential stays at army barracks or other military facilities around the country.

The volunteering route will see 18-year-olds spend one weekend each month working in the fire services, police, the NHS as well as local charities tackling loneliness and supporting older, isolated people.

Telegraph

FrancisUrquhart said:

Come back Tessie May, your GE campaign wasn't that bad after all....

Who the f##k is advising Sunak?

https://x.com/hannahrosewoods/status/1794283760021893599

https://x.com/hannahrosewoods/status/1794477442268004387

Farooq said:

kle4 said:

Farooq said:

kle4 said:

National Service inclusive of non military options is one of those things that can be made to sound ok - give opportunities, provide direction etc - but dictating what people should be doing seems likely to be hugely unpopular.

It does highlight that we have a big problem down the road with lack of volunteers, but conscripting people to do the things volunteers do does not strike me as a workable solution.

It's obviously a stupid idea. The state has no business telling adults what to do with their time.

If we need volunteers then conscript older people into this thing, they have the time for it.

"conscript volunteers"

Just thinking like a minister.

FrancisUrquhart said:

rottenborough said:

The £2.5 billion National Service scheme will see school leavers apply for a year-long placement in the Armed Forces or the UK’s cyber defences where they will gain experience in logistics, cyber security, procurement and civil response operations such as flood defences.

The placements, which are open to 30,000 youngsters, will involve residential stays at army barracks or other military facilities around the country.

The volunteering route will see 18-year-olds spend one weekend each month working in the fire services, police, the NHS as well as local charities tackling loneliness and supporting older, isolated people.

Telegraph

Its not even cheap...

We can add it to the £46b NI scrappage fiscal blackhole.

People mocking the idea of national service have no concept of the strategic position we find ourselves in, so they? There’s a reason most of Europe is considering versions of this.

We’ve got fat and lazy, and lost the courage of our convictions, and the understanding that they sometimes must be fought for.

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

The volunteering route will see 18-year-olds spend one weekend each month working in the fire services, police, the NHS as well as local charities tackling loneliness and supporting older, isolated people.

Telegraph

That doesn't sound so bad? That's the kind of thing Cameron tried to get off the ground in 2010.

The end goal doesn't sound so bad. People doing it might even end up liking it, and it provides very valuable service.

But proposing to force people to do will be massively toxic to a lot of people.

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Rishi clearly hates young people

An ugly, deeply authoritarian idea. There was a time the Conservative party was a broad church where libertarians and traditional conservatives were able to co-exist.

The Conservatives deserve zero seats in July. Zero. Complete wipeout. Obliteration. Let something - anything - else take their place.

Can we also discuss the discrepancy between:

- 12 month placement in armed forces
- 12 weekends of community service

Why would anyone choose the former unless they want to be in the army? And what stops people from sacking off the latter if they don't feel like it or have an actual weekend job alongside university education, or a full time job that includes weekends, like many people do in the real world?

Possibly the most stupid policy I've heard in this electoral cycle so far.

rottenborough said:

The £2.5 billion National Service scheme will see school leavers apply for a year-long placement in the Armed Forces or the UK’s cyber defences where they will gain experience in logistics, cyber security, procurement and civil response operations such as flood defences.

The placements, which are open to 30,000 youngsters, will involve residential stays at army barracks or other military facilities around the country.

The volunteering route will see 18-year-olds spend one weekend each month working in the fire services, police, the NHS as well as local charities tackling loneliness and supporting older, isolated people.

Telegraph

The details here don't match the tweet, which said it would be compulsory.

kle4 said:

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

The volunteering route will see 18-year-olds spend one weekend each month working in the fire services, police, the NHS as well as local charities tackling loneliness and supporting older, isolated people.

Telegraph

That doesn't sound so bad? That's the kind of thing Cameron tried to get off the ground in 2010.

The end goal doesn't sound so bad. People doing it might even end up liking it, and it provides very valuable service.

But proposing to force people to do will be massively toxic to a lot of people.

I mean that's it. If you said you wanted to expand opportunities for young people. We will offer these schemes and reward people if they want to take part. We think its good for them and society. But making it compulsory, is just toxic.

GIN1138 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Rishi clearly hates young people

The feeling is probably quite mutual...

At least they will be able to have a fag break between square bashing on national service as his 'ban fags for 18 year olds' Bill fell at end of this week.

biggles said:

People mocking the idea of national service have no concept of the strategic position we find ourselves in, so they? There’s a reason most of Europe is considering versions of this.

We’ve got fat and lazy, and lost the courage of our convictions, and the understanding that they sometimes must be fought for.

I think you missunderstand part of the reason for the mockery.

Assume what you say is true about the worthiness of this as a goal or need for it - I'd even agree that might be true. Do you think the electorate is likely to respond positively to the idea they should be required to do this?

Maybe a more popular PM could propose something like this, but when Rishi is already so unpopular will he really get a neutral assessment of the idea from most people?

RobD said:

rottenborough said:

The £2.5 billion National Service scheme will see school leavers apply for a year-long placement in the Armed Forces or the UK’s cyber defences where they will gain experience in logistics, cyber security, procurement and civil response operations such as flood defences.

The placements, which are open to 30,000 youngsters, will involve residential stays at army barracks or other military facilities around the country.

The volunteering route will see 18-year-olds spend one weekend each month working in the fire services, police, the NHS as well as local charities tackling loneliness and supporting older, isolated people.

Telegraph

The details here don't match the tweet, which said it would be compulsory.

Under the mandatory scheme, school leavers will have to either enrol on a 12-month military placement or spend one weekend each month volunteering in their community.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/05/25/rishi-sunak-bring-back-national-service-policy/

TheScreamingEagles said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

BartholomewRoberts said:

viewcode said:

Fairliered said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Fairliered said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Opinium Scottish subsample klaxon.

Labour 33%

SNP 27%

Cons 16%

Lib Dems 12%

Did you not get @JamesKelly cancelled for posting stuff like that?

No.

Stuart Dickson had a pattern of passing off subsamples as full blown Scottish polls then post post betting odds which was actively misleading for punters which annoyed OGH.

It's remarkable how enduring this misunderstanding has been.

Indeed.

So, for the benefit of the ignorant (me), why was he kicked out?

https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/65030#Comment_65030

It looks amusing how many banned people there are on that one page alone. JamesKelly, TGOHF, surbiton, richardDodd and Ishmael. Quite a flashback.

Why was Surbiton cancelled?

Kept on posting defamatory content.

Can't argue with that.

Scott_xP said:

@DPJHodges

Rishi Sunak’s plan for compulsory national service is the most insane policy proposal ever launched in an election campaign by a major political party.

There is also the option of community service, rather like my public school had the option of CCF in the army, navy or RAF or conservation or visiting the elderly

Rishi’s latest national service wheeze suggests we’re due some Tory boomer greatest hits in the manifesto. This is so classically Widdecombesque. It’s bloke down the pub stuff. Keep a look out for:

- abolishing IHT
- reintroducing corporal punishment in schools
- a referendum on the death penalty
- ECHR withdrawal, of course
- Imperial weights and measures

I don’t actually think national service is a bad idea in principle. Quite a useful way of building citizenship and social skills. But that’s not why Rishi’s suggesting it. It’s because he’s desperately flailing around for boomer facebook meme talking points.

biggles said:

People mocking the idea of national service have no concept of the strategic position we find ourselves in, so they? There’s a reason most of Europe is considering versions of this.

We’ve got fat and lazy, and lost the courage of our convictions, and the understanding that they sometimes must be fought for.

That's probably true, but it's not going to be solved by a spur-of-the-moment, uncosted, desperate announcement during a general election campaign by the party that's 25 points behind and popular mostly with voters that will never have to serve.

In fact, it'll probably have the opposite effect, making the idea toxic for a decade at least.

HYUFD said:

Scott_xP said:

@DPJHodges

Rishi Sunak’s plan for compulsory national service is the most insane policy proposal ever launched in an election campaign by a major political party.

There is also the option of community service, rather like my public school had the option of CCF in the army, navy or RAF or conservation or visiting the elderly

Shit.

No? You don’t think this is…this is their solution to social care?