We were talking the other day about university funding and making degrees cheaper. One proposal there is an accelerated 2-year degree. And Sunak wants to squeeze in 25 days' "volunteering" on top of that?
How about this as a policy proposal: free university education for those who do national service first.
There is opportunity to do some radical things with university education e.g. work for x years in NHS, every year we pay of y of your student loan...do STEM and stay in the UK, same. Basically work it so that if you stay they are paying off the fees over 5-10 years. You still have to pay off loan for living costs, but basically free fees.
Bridget Phillipson basically implied that was what Labour would do on Question Time a few days ago.
I never understood when they first changed the student fees why they didn't have such a scheme for doctors, dentists, etc. Its a no brainer, you then give a massive nudge for a dentist not to bugger off into private sector after a couple of years in practice.
I bet it wouldn't even cost that much when you look at the fact these loans never get fully repaid anyway and the fact you paid £100k+ to train a dentist.
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.
What are they going to do when people don't turn up?
He’s already forcing them to do maths till they’re 18, and now proposing they got to spend 12 weekends a year wiping the shitty arses of boomers at the end of it.
The young have done it, we shut our lives down for two years to protect the elderly.
That's not really true. It wasn't two years, and it wasn't just to protect the elderly. Many younger people died from COVID and many more could have done without the first lockdown. A collapse to healthcare was definitely on the cards in march 2020. There is an awful lot of revisionism around now. A poster with a similar name to you spent ages posting 'lockdown now!'
I am shocked to see you supporting this stupid idea. A policy which you'll never have to do and the people who have to do it in years to come, won't be able to vote for it.
We absolutely did lock down to protect the elderly and society - we did our bit. In return we've been shafted. So Rishi can sod off with his stupid ideas, I am genuinely really angry about this idea.
Huh? I'm not supporting the idea? I'm posting about your comments on lockdown.
Then if you're not supporting it, say it's a stupid idea.
There are lots of discussion of money wasted COVID, huge wastage in use of levelling up funds. I found out the other week where a not insignificant amount went and I was shocked. I can't tell you what exactly it was used for, but lets put it this way it wasn't bringing life back to Stoke town centre.
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 last people to experience compulsory National Service in the UK are now 85, so most of those over-65s with whome this is allegedly popular avoided it themselves.
I can guarantee, death penalty and leaving the ECHR will be next.
What a depressing state of affairs.
I don't know, here's a few more that Sunak might trot out...
- Banning working from home, force workers back into the office to increase productivity (Will be popular with those who retired years ago).
- Nationwide curfew from 9pm, everyone to be tucked up in bed by 10pm. Won't do much for the pub industry but remember all the curtain twitchers during lockdown who wanted nightclubs shuttered permanently? That's the core vote now.
- School uniforms work for kids, so why not adults? Government approved uniforms to be worn from Monday to Friday.
- Government directed meal plans to tackle obesity. Fatties denied the right to buy ready meals at supermarkets, with everyone having to present their ID with their weight on it, the same way under 25s present ID before buying drinks.
- A law requiring all citizens to donate 10% of their incomes to approved charities. Because the average age of the Conservative voter is now so old, they're probably in favour of tithing.
- Ban use of all foreign language on buses, especially in London. Proper English to be spoken only.
We've got another six weeks of campaigning and none of the above ideas are significantly more barking than reintroducing national service.
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.
What are they going to do when people don't turn up?
We were talking the other day about university funding and making degrees cheaper. One proposal there is an accelerated 2-year degree. And Sunak wants to squeeze in 25 days' "volunteering" on top of that?
I thought they already tried those and people didn't take them up, where people do 4 terms / 3 semesters a year, by studying through the summer holidays.
The young have done it, we shut our lives down for two years to protect the elderly.
That's not really true. It wasn't two years, and it wasn't just to protect the elderly. Many younger people died from COVID and many more could have done without the first lockdown. A collapse to healthcare was definitely on the cards in march 2020. There is an awful lot of revisionism around now. A poster with a similar name to you spent ages posting 'lockdown now!'
I am shocked to see you supporting this stupid idea. A policy which you'll never have to do and the people who have to do it in years to come, won't be able to vote for it.
We absolutely did lock down to protect the elderly and society - we did our bit. In return we've been shafted. So Rishi can sod off with his stupid ideas, I am genuinely really angry about this idea.
Huh? I'm not supporting the idea? I'm posting about your comments on lockdown.
Then if you're not supporting it, say it's a stupid idea.
It is a stupid idea. I posted above 'how would you even enforce it. I was responding to your moans about lockdown. My you changed your tune from dec 2021.
The young have done it, we shut our lives down for two years to protect the elderly.
That's not really true. It wasn't two years, and it wasn't just to protect the elderly. Many younger people died from COVID and many more could have done without the first lockdown. A collapse to healthcare was definitely on the cards in march 2020. There is an awful lot of revisionism around now. A poster with a similar name to you spent ages posting 'lockdown now!'
I am shocked to see you supporting this stupid idea. A policy which you'll never have to do and the people who have to do it in years to come, won't be able to vote for it.
We absolutely did lock down to protect the elderly and society - we did our bit. In return we've been shafted. So Rishi can sod off with his stupid ideas, I am genuinely really angry about this idea.
Huh? I'm not supporting the idea? I'm posting about your comments on lockdown.
Then if you're not supporting it, say it's a stupid idea.
Are you compelling turbo to volunteer his view?
No, Turbo can say whatever they want. I think it's a stupid idea - and it's made me really angry.
The young have done it, we shut our lives down for two years to protect the elderly.
That's not really true. It wasn't two years, and it wasn't just to protect the elderly. Many younger people died from COVID and many more could have done without the first lockdown. A collapse to healthcare was definitely on the cards in march 2020. There is an awful lot of revisionism around now. A poster with a similar name to you spent ages posting 'lockdown now!'
I am shocked to see you supporting this stupid idea. A policy which you'll never have to do and the people who have to do it in years to come, won't be able to vote for it.
We absolutely did lock down to protect the elderly and society - we did our bit. In return we've been shafted. So Rishi can sod off with his stupid ideas, I am genuinely really angry about this idea.
Huh? I'm not supporting the idea? I'm posting about your comments on lockdown.
Then if you're not supporting it, say it's a stupid idea.
It is a stupid idea. I posted above 'how would you even enforce it. I was responding to your moans about lockdown. My you changed your tune from dec 2021.
How about this as a policy proposal: free university education for those who do national service first.
So, you have to find the money to pay all these kids to do a year of national service (during which time they are a drain on the armed forces, not a benefit), and also the money to put them through university. That feels a little... uncosted.
On this National Service comedy announcement, think about the Bigger Picture.
Our armed forces aren’t resourced to cope with conscripted squaddies. So a bonanza of contracts to be won for Tory companies providing military-“style” service.
And community volunteering? As it’s mandatory it will need managing. Again, a bonanza for Tory companies who once again will benefit from vast contracts handed out with no competition to pub landlords and councillors and anyone else with the right connection.
They may as well just announce a “your money is our money” policy where they just openly take money from the treasury.
Colin Murray @CRGMurray · 11m Theresa May was a genius campaigner next to this. Someone ask Sunak how this will apply in NI...
Oh fecking jaysus I didn't even consider that angle. This maniac party need to be out of power forever
One specific maniac, anyway.
Suggestion: someone gives Rishi a simply enormous pile of Vote Conservative leaflets and tells him to spend the next six weeks delivering them. If they're feeling kind, give him a spoon to deal with snappy letterboxes.
FFS, I actively want the Tories to lose this election and even I can see that what’s unfolding here is a classic Twitter blind spot. This will help them. They aren’t idiots you know. They do do this for a living.
It also happens to be a sensible policy, happening all over Europe, and one Starmer will be implementing a version of in due course.
The young have done it, we shut our lives down for two years to protect the elderly.
That's not really true. It wasn't two years, and it wasn't just to protect the elderly. Many younger people died from COVID and many more could have done without the first lockdown. A collapse to healthcare was definitely on the cards in march 2020. There is an awful lot of revisionism around now. A poster with a similar name to you spent ages posting 'lockdown now!'
I am shocked to see you supporting this stupid idea. A policy which you'll never have to do and the people who have to do it in years to come, won't be able to vote for it.
We absolutely did lock down to protect the elderly and society - we did our bit. In return we've been shafted. So Rishi can sod off with his stupid ideas, I am genuinely really angry about this idea.
Huh? I'm not supporting the idea? I'm posting about your comments on lockdown.
Then if you're not supporting it, say it's a stupid idea.
Are you compelling turbo to volunteer his view?
No, Turbo can say whatever they want. I think it's a stupid idea - and it's made me really angry.
Of course it's a stupid idea; brace yourself for more of the same from the Tories over the next 6 weeks.
Trying to be objective on the political implications of the policy or a moment:
- On one hand, it will be popular with the Boomer Tory/Reform voting contingent. I can imagine an uptick in Tory support from this contingent, which is their core vote now.
- On the other hand, young people (including Millennials in their 30s and 40s with kids under 18) will hate this policy. It is stupid and the compulsory nature could drive higher turnout against the Tories in a tactical voting kind of way: hold your nose and vote for who is the best opposition in your area.
I'm not sure which effect will be greater. But it comes across as desperate in any case.
The majority of people would take the civic option, has there been polling done on that? As far as I can see it's all on military service which isn't really what most people would be doing.
He’s already forcing them to do maths till they’re 18, and now proposing they got to spend 12 weekends a year wiping the shitty arses of boomers at the end of it.
The one act of National Service that most us would actually like to see from these Conservatives would be them leaving Government on July 4th….so the work of recovery can get started.
FFS, I actively want the Tories to lose this election and even I can see that what’s unfolding here is a classic Twitter blind spot. This will help them. They aren’t idiots you know. They do do this for a living.
It also happens to be a sensible policy, happening all over Europe, and one Starmer will be implementing a version of in due course.
To be honest, even if this is does help them, I maintain it's a stupid policy and actively shafts the young. Long term it dooms the Tories even more, so whilst it might help in the short term, long term it will turn even more voters away.
I see the Front page of the Times has an item about a private school in Hampshire closing because of "Labour's VAT raid" (although it mentions that The school has suffered from dwindling pupil numbers in recent years).
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 23m It doesn't matter if individual policies poll well if you look like you're flailing around all over the place making up random things.
Almost every policy Corbyn announced in 2019 polled well individually. Collectively it looked extremely incoherent.
The policy isn't even, if you are a naughty boy, we will send you to do national service...at least we that you can do the tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime.
Is this simply a ruse to boost turnout among the young? If you don't vote to stop the Tories then the future is providing slave labour to serve the old.
FFS, I actively want the Tories to lose this election and even I can see that what’s unfolding here is a classic Twitter blind spot. This will help them. They aren’t idiots you know. They do do this for a living.
It also happens to be a sensible policy, happening all over Europe, and one Starmer will be implementing a version of in due course.
Maybe. Not sure how quickly the likes of Starmer would implement this policy.
I see the Front page of the Times has an item about a private school in Hampshire closing because of "Labour's VAT raid" (although it mentions that The school has suffered from dwindling pupil numbers in recent years).
Casino said 86 years, which checks out for this one, so yes.
I feel sorry for Casino's children having to find another school but it sounds like this school has had declining numbers for a while and in common with many others was becoming unviable. Blaming Labour is just a bit stupid imo.
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.
What are they going to do when people don't turn up?
Court martial followed by immediate suspension of chocolate rations?
People say the most important issues are cost of living and the NHS.
So I can see the logic of this policy despite how much I hate it - but I am a bit baffled that this is the policy they choose to introduce? It feels very Labour 2019 throw everything at the wall.
Recall, Labour's 2019 policies all polled well - but together they were seen as stupid. I fell into the trap of thinking that this didn't matter when it clearly did.
Colin Murray @CRGMurray · 11m Theresa May was a genius campaigner next to this. Someone ask Sunak how this will apply in NI...
The Ballymurphy Battalion of the Parachute Regiment has a good ring to it, right enough. Where does Soldier F live, again? Perhaps they can be deployed to patrol his street...
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 23m It doesn't matter if individual policies poll well if you look like you're flailing around all over the place making up random things.
Almost every policy Corbyn announced in 2019 polled well individually. Collectively it looked extremely incoherent.
That isn't completely true. Remember free internet for all, initially yes, woohooo, free shit....then people realised that meant no choice of ISP, you had to have the Corbyn Cable Company, with a nationally set bandwidth speed (which was a lot lower than normal current offerings) and the government able to check your browsing history, and within 2 weeks it didn't poll well at all.
Colin Murray @CRGMurray · 11m Theresa May was a genius campaigner next to this. Someone ask Sunak how this will apply in NI...
Oh fecking jaysus I didn't even consider that angle. This maniac party need to be out of power forever
One specific maniac, anyway.
Suggestion: someone gives Rishi a simply enormous pile of Vote Conservative leaflets and tells him to spend the next six weeks delivering them. If they're feeling kind, give him a spoon to deal with snappy letterboxes.
You can have that one for free, CCHQ.
I suggest a theoretical pile of leaflets represented by an Excel sheet. With an especially tricksy pivot table to link them to the potential four tory voters left in Hunstanton. Should keep him occupied and out of harms way for weeks.
FFS, I actively want the Tories to lose this election and even I can see that what’s unfolding here is a classic Twitter blind spot. This will help them. They aren’t idiots you know. They do do this for a living.
It also happens to be a sensible policy, happening all over Europe, and one Starmer will be implementing a version of in due course.
Most of the public are entirely unaware that many European countries are asking exactly the same questions. We are way behind in realising what sort of world we are going back to. Forget 2.5% on defence, we'll be spending a lot more than that and quite possibly very soon if Trump is re-elected. And we will have to figure out how to increase the numbers one way of another.
Nick Macpherson @nickmacpherson2 · 11m Until this announcement, I was unpersuaded 16-17 year olds should get the vote. Now, I regard it as essential. #strangetimes
BBC News - Conservatives plan to bring back mandatory national service
People say the most important issues are cost of living and the NHS.
So I can see the logic of this policy despite how much I hate it - but I am a bit baffled that this is the policy they choose to introduce? It feels very Labour 2019 throw everything at the wall.
Recall, Labour's 2019 policies all polled well - but together they were seen as stupid. I fell into the trap of thinking that this didn't matter when it clearly did.
Maybe we need to see the full manifestos? This does seem, on the face of it, ridiculous. I can imagine the courts filling up with scrotes not turning up for there 'volunteering'.
Nick Macpherson @nickmacpherson2 · 11m Until this announcement, I was unpersuaded 16-17 year olds should get the vote. Now, I regard it as essential. #strangetimes
BBC News - Conservatives plan to bring back mandatory national service
How about this as a policy proposal: free university education for those who do national service first.
There is opportunity to do some radical things with university education e.g. work for x years in NHS, every year we pay of y of your student loan...do STEM and stay in the UK, same. Basically work it so that if you stay they are paying off the fees over 5-10 years. You still have to pay off loan for living costs, but basically free fees.
Bridget Phillipson basically implied that was what Labour would do on Question Time a few days ago.
I never understood when they first changed the student fees why they didn't have such a scheme for doctors, dentists, etc. Its a no brainer, you then give a massive nudge for a dentist not to bugger off into private sector after a couple of years in practice.
I bet it wouldn't even cost that much when you look at the fact these loans never get fully repaid anyway and the fact you paid £100k+ to train a dentist.
This happened for a few years for teachers, when Blair was in power, was called RTL. It was successful and teacher recruitment numbers rose, so it got scrapped.
I see the Front page of the Times has an item about a private school in Hampshire closing because of "Labour's VAT raid" (although it mentions that The school has suffered from dwindling pupil numbers in recent years).
Casino said 86 years, which checks out for this one, so yes.
I feel sorry for Casino's children having to find another school but it sounds like this school has had declining numbers for a while and in common with many others was becoming unviable. Blaming Labour is just a bit stupid imo.
Honestly, IDGAF. I'd happily close all religious schools. That shit is harmful.
I see the Front page of the Times has an item about a private school in Hampshire closing because of "Labour's VAT raid" (although it mentions that The school has suffered from dwindling pupil numbers in recent years).
Casino said 86 years, which checks out for this one, so yes.
I feel sorry for Casino's children having to find another school but it sounds like this school has had declining numbers for a while and in common with many others was becoming unviable. Blaming Labour is just a bit stupid imo.
Honestly, IDGAF. I'd happily close all religious schools. That shit is harmful.
People say the most important issues are cost of living and the NHS.
So I can see the logic of this policy despite how much I hate it - but I am a bit baffled that this is the policy they choose to introduce? It feels very Labour 2019 throw everything at the wall.
Recall, Labour's 2019 policies all polled well - but together they were seen as stupid. I fell into the trap of thinking that this didn't matter when it clearly did.
Maybe we need to see the full manifestos? This does seem, on the face of it, ridiculous. I can imagine the courts filling up with scrotes not turning up for there 'volunteering'.
Voluntary National Service to earn university tuition credits might be a good idea, though.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 23m It doesn't matter if individual policies poll well if you look like you're flailing around all over the place making up random things.
Almost every policy Corbyn announced in 2019 polled well individually. Collectively it looked extremely incoherent.
A very good point. Surely this could have waited to be part of some manifesto context?
@Peston If you wondered where Rishi Sunak got the idea for compulsory national service, it was proposed last August by the right think tank Onward. Sunak’s deputy chief of staff Will Tanner was a founder and initial director of Onward
I see the Front page of the Times has an item about a private school in Hampshire closing because of "Labour's VAT raid" (although it mentions that The school has suffered from dwindling pupil numbers in recent years).
Casino said 86 years, which checks out for this one, so yes.
I feel sorry for Casino's children having to find another school but it sounds like this school has had declining numbers for a while and in common with many others was becoming unviable. Blaming Labour is just a bit stupid imo.
Honestly, IDGAF. I'd happily close all religious schools. That shit is harmful.
Friend of mine moved from Scotland down to the S.Coast of England because they had heard the eduction was likely better. First few days of term their kid came back from school with a bundle of homework explaining that evolution was 'a theory' and 2x more information on how an 'alternative theory' was 'creationism'. She's since moved back again.
People say the most important issues are cost of living and the NHS.
So I can see the logic of this policy despite how much I hate it - but I am a bit baffled that this is the policy they choose to introduce? It feels very Labour 2019 throw everything at the wall.
Recall, Labour's 2019 policies all polled well - but together they were seen as stupid. I fell into the trap of thinking that this didn't matter when it clearly did.
Maybe we need to see the full manifestos? This does seem, on the face of it, ridiculous. I can imagine the courts filling up with scrotes not turning up for there 'volunteering'.
Voluntary National Service to earn university tuition credits might be a good idea, though.
FFS, I actively want the Tories to lose this election and even I can see that what’s unfolding here is a classic Twitter blind spot. This will help them. They aren’t idiots you know. They do do this for a living.
It also happens to be a sensible policy, happening all over Europe, and one Starmer will be implementing a version of in due course.
Most of the public are entirely unaware that many European countries are asking exactly the same questions. We are way behind in realising what sort of world we are going back to. Forget 2.5% on defence, we'll be spending a lot more than that and quite possibly very soon if Trump is re-elected. And we will have to figure out how to increase the numbers one way of another.
If we are lucky we are facing another "cold war".
We will certainly have to spend more than 2.5% if Trump gets in.
Possibly. There will always be people who ask “what’s the point? It will inconvenience me.”
People about to start FE or uni don't necessarily have free time. Most 68 year olds do.
So does this mean that HMG/MoD will be issuing ammunition boots with the flap over Velcro to save bending down and tying shoelaces before presenting for 7.00am drill practice?
Trying to be objective on the political implications of the policy or a moment:
- On one hand, it will be popular with the Boomer Tory/Reform voting contingent. I can imagine an uptick in Tory support from this contingent, which is their core vote now.
- On the other hand, young people (including Millennials in their 30s and 40s with kids under 18) will hate this policy. It is stupid and the compulsory nature could drive higher turnout against the Tories in a tactical voting kind of way: hold your nose and vote for who is the best opposition in your area.
I'm not sure which effect will be greater. But it comes across as desperate in any case.
There are many more boomers. It's a net positive I'd guess.
Tbh I think its smart from sunak. He needs a few game changers, this might be one.
Are we sure Team Sunak isn't using Google LLM to come up with these policies? The same one that advises pregnant women to smoke, that everybody should eat a pebble a day and that to aid passing kidney stones drink your own piss.
Trying to be objective on the political implications of the policy or a moment:
- On one hand, it will be popular with the Boomer Tory/Reform voting contingent. I can imagine an uptick in Tory support from this contingent, which is their core vote now.
- On the other hand, young people (including Millennials in their 30s and 40s with kids under 18) will hate this policy. It is stupid and the compulsory nature could drive higher turnout against the Tories in a tactical voting kind of way: hold your nose and vote for who is the best opposition in your area.
I'm not sure which effect will be greater. But it comes across as desperate in any case.
There are many more boomers. It's a net positive I'd guess.
Tbh I think its smart from sunak. He needs a few game changers, this might be one.
I see the Front page of the Times has an item about a private school in Hampshire closing because of "Labour's VAT raid" (although it mentions that The school has suffered from dwindling pupil numbers in recent years).
Casino said 86 years, which checks out for this one, so yes.
I feel sorry for Casino's children having to find another school but it sounds like this school has had declining numbers for a while and in common with many others was becoming unviable. Blaming Labour is just a bit stupid imo.
Honestly, IDGAF. I'd happily close all religious schools. That shit is harmful.
Friend of mine moved from Scotland down to the S.Coast of England because they had heard the eduction was likely better. First few days of term their kid came back from school with a bundle of homework explaining that evolution was 'a theory' and 2x more information on how an 'alternative theory' was 'creationism'. She's since moved back again.
Ugh. Fucking gross. There you go @BatteryCorrectHorse. That's the kind of thing that religious schools can bring us.
My school has 35 teaching assistants. 4 of them are 18. More than 10% of the workforce. We'd rather not do that, but we just can't recruit on the sub Aldi wages the government are super anxious must be strenuously enforced. They are already "serving the community", in an incredibly stressful role working full time for £8.60 an hour with SENDMH kids. So now they have to work 25 weekends for free too? Fuck that. Fuck the Tories. In the sea with the lot of you!!
The imv very signif bit: its funded by closing the Shared Prosperity Fund, which was the UK replacement for EU structural funds, in 2028 after only six years. UKSPF is a "central pillar" of "levelling up" (source: HMG).
FFS, I actively want the Tories to lose this election and even I can see that what’s unfolding here is a classic Twitter blind spot. This will help them. They aren’t idiots you know. They do do this for a living.
It also happens to be a sensible policy, happening all over Europe, and one Starmer will be implementing a version of in due course.
Several countries have long had conscription. Italy, who only abolished it in 2004, is considering re-introducing it. There is some debate on the matter in Germany. Most countries in Europe don't have it. The trend has been to get rid of it: e.g. Spain abolished in 2001, Slovakia in 2006, Serbia in 2011, Romania in 2007, Albania in 2010.
Most current conscription is for men only. (I think Sweden is the exception?) Most countries have alternative service options, often at a penalty: you have to do them for longer than military service.
I'm not aware of any conscription service were the alternative is so much less: 25 days compared to a year's service.
People about to start FE or uni don't necessarily have free time. Most 68 year olds do.
So does this mean that HMG/MoD will be issuing ammunition boots with the flap over Velcro to save bending down and tying shoelaces before presenting for 7.00am drill practice?
Trying to be objective on the political implications of the policy or a moment:
- On one hand, it will be popular with the Boomer Tory/Reform voting contingent. I can imagine an uptick in Tory support from this contingent, which is their core vote now.
- On the other hand, young people (including Millennials in their 30s and 40s with kids under 18) will hate this policy. It is stupid and the compulsory nature could drive higher turnout against the Tories in a tactical voting kind of way: hold your nose and vote for who is the best opposition in your area.
I'm not sure which effect will be greater. But it comes across as desperate in any case.
There are many more boomers. It's a net positive I'd guess.
Tbh I think its smart from sunak. He needs a few game changers, this might be one.
This is my worry despite it being stupid.
Nah, Boomers don't like Sunak, so they might like the sound of this but won't trust him to deliver it. Reform people will stay put, thinking they can try to get the next Tory leader to do it.
I'm truly stunned by this announcement.
I don't even disagree with the perceived need for something along these lines (or at least perceived argument for something like it), but to drop it like a bombshell? Insanity. If you're going to do something like this you surely need to do it as part of a set piece policy speech, where you can set some real context for why it is necessary and appropriate, provide more than a few boilerplate phrases for friendly media to make use of, hammer home how it is being thought of in several areas of Europe, something nearly everyone will have no clue about.
For the first time I would put the Tory party dying off as more likely than not.
Edit: Just look at how the Reform keen crowd like Guido are reacting.
The National Service was abolished in the UK in 1960, though now Rishi Sunak has decided that taking away the freedoms of 18-year-olds, both male and female, and making it compulsory for them to ‘serve’ the country is somehow a vote winner. Even the Labour Party are appalled at the “desperate”, “unfunded” idea, which they estimate would cost £12.5 billion over the course of the parliament. Asking 18-year-olds to fix your problems is not a good look…
People say the most important issues are cost of living and the NHS.
So I can see the logic of this policy despite how much I hate it - but I am a bit baffled that this is the policy they choose to introduce? It feels very Labour 2019 throw everything at the wall.
Recall, Labour's 2019 policies all polled well - but together they were seen as stupid. I fell into the trap of thinking that this didn't matter when it clearly did.
Maybe we need to see the full manifestos? This does seem, on the face of it, ridiculous. I can imagine the courts filling up with scrotes not turning up for there 'volunteering'.
Voluntary National Service to earn university tuition credits might be a good idea, though.
You seem to have mistakenly given this more than one seconds thought after meeting some squaddies in a cafe while chatting about this thing called 'the football'.
FFS, I actively want the Tories to lose this election and even I can see that what’s unfolding here is a classic Twitter blind spot. This will help them. They aren’t idiots you know. They do do this for a living.
It also happens to be a sensible policy, happening all over Europe, and one Starmer will be implementing a version of in due course.
Several countries have long had conscription. Italy, who only abolished it in 2004, is considering re-introducing it. There is some debate on the matter in Germany. Most countries in Europe don't have it. The trend has been to get rid of it: e.g. Spain abolished in 2001, Slovakia in 2006, Serbia in 2011, Romania in 2007, Albania in 2010.
Most current conscription is for men only. (I think Sweden is the exception?) Most countries have alternative service options, often at a penalty: you have to do them for longer than military service.
I'm not aware of any conscription service were the alternative is so much less: 25 days compared to a year's service.
The lower community option is the foot-in-the-door option to make the whole thing seem less unpalatable. If introduced, they would quickly ramp it up. This policy needs setting on fire. This government need to be burned to ashes and all its ministers and MPs sent back out into society to try to regain their humanity, somehow.
The national service nonsense does give me the opportunity to tweet one of my favourite recent bits of polling when Ipsos actually ran the famous "Yes Minister" questions as a randomised experiment, and showed that it worked.
My school has 35 teaching assistants. 4 of them are 18. More than 10% of the workforce. We'd rather not do that, but we just can't recruit on the sub Aldi wages the government are super anxious must be strenuously enforced. They are already "serving the community", in an incredibly stressful role working full time for £8.60 an hour with SENDMH kids. So now they have to work 25 weekends for free too? Fuck that. Fuck the Tories. In the sea with the lot of you!!
My new IT director is currently aiming to hire some people to work on 'AI' projects for less P/A than a LIDL till assistant earns. And is completely at a loss as to why there are no applicants.
Trying to be objective on the political implications of the policy or a moment:
- On one hand, it will be popular with the Boomer Tory/Reform voting contingent. I can imagine an uptick in Tory support from this contingent, which is their core vote now.
- On the other hand, young people (including Millennials in their 30s and 40s with kids under 18) will hate this policy. It is stupid and the compulsory nature could drive higher turnout against the Tories in a tactical voting kind of way: hold your nose and vote for who is the best opposition in your area.
I'm not sure which effect will be greater. But it comes across as desperate in any case.
There are many more boomers. It's a net positive I'd guess.
Tbh I think its smart from sunak. He needs a few game changers, this might be one.
This is my worry despite it being stupid.
Nah, Boomers don't like Sunak, so they might like the sound of this but won't trust him to deliver it. Reform people will stay put, thinking they can try to get the next Tory leader to do it.
I'm truly stunned by this announcement.
I don't even disagree with the perceived need for something along these lines (or at least perceived argument for something like it), but to drop it like a bombshell? Insanity. If you're going to do something like this you surely need to do it as part of a set piece policy speech, where you can set some real context for why it is necessary and appropriate, provide more than a few boilerplate phrases for friendly media to make use of, hammer home how it is being thought of in several areas of Europe, something nearly everyone will have no clue about.
For the first time I would put the Tory party dying off as more likely than not.
Edit: Just look at how the Reform keen crowd like Guido are reacting.
The National Service was abolished in the UK in 1960, though now Rishi Sunak has decided that taking away the freedoms of 18-year-olds, both male and female, and making it compulsory for them to ‘serve’ the country is somehow a vote winner. Even the Labour Party are appalled at the “desperate”, “unfunded” idea, which they estimate would cost £12.5 billion over the course of the parliament. Asking 18-year-olds to fix your problems is not a good look…
Trying to be objective on the political implications of the policy or a moment:
- On one hand, it will be popular with the Boomer Tory/Reform voting contingent. I can imagine an uptick in Tory support from this contingent, which is their core vote now.
- On the other hand, young people (including Millennials in their 30s and 40s with kids under 18) will hate this policy. It is stupid and the compulsory nature could drive higher turnout against the Tories in a tactical voting kind of way: hold your nose and vote for who is the best opposition in your area.
I'm not sure which effect will be greater. But it comes across as desperate in any case.
There are many more boomers. It's a net positive I'd guess.
Tbh I think its smart from sunak. He needs a few game changers, this might be one.
This is my worry despite it being stupid.
This 60 something old bastard thinks it's a silly stunt.
Should the Ukraine situation get substantially worse we might need to mobilise the population between 18 and 55, perhaps as reservists, and then watch how the dial moves to see if we need to look at anything more dramatic. But a 1950s model National Service achieves nothing.
Comments
"And would you be more likely to vote for us if you thought we might kill your grandchildren?"
- Banning working from home, force workers back into the office to increase productivity (Will be popular with those who retired years ago).
- Nationwide curfew from 9pm, everyone to be tucked up in bed by 10pm. Won't do much for the pub industry but remember all the curtain twitchers during lockdown who wanted nightclubs shuttered permanently? That's the core vote now.
- School uniforms work for kids, so why not adults? Government approved uniforms to be worn from Monday to Friday.
- Government directed meal plans to tackle obesity. Fatties denied the right to buy ready meals at supermarkets, with everyone having to present their ID with their weight on it, the same way under 25s present ID before buying drinks.
- A law requiring all citizens to donate 10% of their incomes to approved charities. Because the average age of the Conservative voter is now so old, they're probably in favour of tithing.
- Ban use of all foreign language on buses, especially in London. Proper English to be spoken only.
We've got another six weeks of campaigning and none of the above ideas are significantly more barking than reintroducing national service.
Anne Widdecombe is probably dancing around the room at this 1950s reenactment policy.
Our armed forces aren’t resourced to cope with conscripted squaddies. So a bonanza of contracts to be won for Tory companies providing military-“style” service.
And community volunteering? As it’s mandatory it will need managing. Again, a bonanza for Tory companies who once again will benefit from vast contracts handed out with no competition to pub landlords and councillors and anyone else with the right connection.
They may as well just announce a “your money is our money” policy where they just openly take money from the treasury.
Suggestion: someone gives Rishi a simply enormous pile of Vote Conservative leaflets and tells him to spend the next six weeks delivering them. If they're feeling kind, give him a spoon to deal with snappy letterboxes.
You can have that one for free, CCHQ.
It also happens to be a sensible policy, happening all over Europe, and one Starmer will be implementing a version of in due course.
- On one hand, it will be popular with the Boomer Tory/Reform voting contingent. I can imagine an uptick in Tory support from this contingent, which is their core vote now.
- On the other hand, young people (including Millennials in their 30s and 40s with kids under 18) will hate this policy. It is stupid and the compulsory nature could drive higher turnout against the Tories in a tactical voting kind of way: hold your nose and vote for who is the best opposition in your area.
I'm not sure which effect will be greater. But it comes across as desperate in any case.
The one act of National Service that most us would actually like to see from these Conservatives would be them leaving Government on July 4th….so the work of recovery can get started.
Sam Freedman
@Samfr
·
23m
It doesn't matter if individual policies poll well if you look like you're flailing around all over the place making up random things.
Almost every policy Corbyn announced in 2019 polled well individually. Collectively it looked extremely incoherent.
Asking for a friend.
So I can see the logic of this policy despite how much I hate it - but I am a bit baffled that this is the policy they choose to introduce? It feels very Labour 2019 throw everything at the wall.
Recall, Labour's 2019 policies all polled well - but together they were seen as stupid. I fell into the trap of thinking that this didn't matter when it clearly did.
At least the conscripted squaddies will still be able to buy ciggies
If we are lucky we are facing another "cold war".
Nick Macpherson
@nickmacpherson2
·
11m
Until this announcement, I was unpersuaded 16-17 year olds should get the vote. Now, I regard it as essential. #strangetimes
BBC News - Conservatives plan to bring back mandatory national service
https://x.com/nickmacpherson2/status/1794484141062308104
Christopher Snowdon 🇺🇦
@cjsnowdon
·
22m
What’s wrong with him? Why hasn’t someone staged an intervention?
https://x.com/cjsnowdon/status/1794482219982962800
As it is, it's just stupid.
The national service policy is policy as pure kitsch. If this is the best the Conservative Party can come up with it deserves to be ground into dust.
LOL
If you wondered where Rishi Sunak got the idea for compulsory national service, it was proposed last August by the right think tank Onward. Sunak’s deputy chief of staff Will Tanner was a founder and initial director of Onward
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thích_Quảng_Đức#/media/File:Self-immolation_of_Thich_Quang_Duc.jpg
https://x.com/JonTonge/status/1794477776789008817
Possibly. There will always be people who ask “what’s the point? It will inconvenience me.”
Tbh I think its smart from sunak. He needs a few game changers, this might be one.
There you go @BatteryCorrectHorse. That's the kind of thing that religious schools can bring us.
4 of them are 18.
More than 10% of the workforce.
We'd rather not do that, but we just can't recruit on the sub Aldi wages the government are super anxious must be strenuously enforced.
They are already "serving the community", in an incredibly stressful role working full time for £8.60 an hour with SENDMH kids.
So now they have to work 25 weekends for free too?
Fuck that. Fuck the Tories. In the sea with the lot of you!!
Imagine the panic in there at the moment as everything turns to shit.
https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794476436629205328
Most current conscription is for men only. (I think Sweden is the exception?) Most countries have alternative service options, often at a penalty: you have to do them for longer than military service.
I'm not aware of any conscription service were the alternative is so much less: 25 days compared to a year's service.
I'm truly stunned by this announcement.
I don't even disagree with the perceived need for something along these lines (or at least perceived argument for something like it), but to drop it like a bombshell? Insanity. If you're going to do something like this you surely need to do it as part of a set piece policy speech, where you can set some real context for why it is necessary and appropriate, provide more than a few boilerplate phrases for friendly media to make use of, hammer home how it is being thought of in several areas of Europe, something nearly everyone will have no clue about.
For the first time I would put the Tory party dying off as more likely than not.
Edit: Just look at how the Reform keen crowd like Guido are reacting.
The National Service was abolished in the UK in 1960, though now Rishi Sunak has decided that taking away the freedoms of 18-year-olds, both male and female, and making it compulsory for them to ‘serve’ the country is somehow a vote winner. Even the Labour Party are appalled at the “desperate”, “unfunded” idea, which they estimate would cost £12.5 billion over the course of the parliament. Asking 18-year-olds to fix your problems is not a good look…
So long gap years, internships and work experience. Instead of getting ahead in the private sector and contributing toward the economy, late teens will be forced into public service and ultimately the taxpayer with have to foot the bill.
https://order-order.com/2024/05/25/tories-pledge-to-bring-back-national-service-for-18-years-olds/
I think Sunak chose to announce in the rain to disguise the crying.
Under employed well to do layabouts in their fifties are the obvious available demographic.
The national service nonsense does give me the opportunity to tweet one of my favourite recent bits of polling when Ipsos actually ran the famous "Yes Minister" questions as a randomised experiment, and showed that it worked.
https://x.com/Samfr/status/1794484909689487486
Oddly, his salary is in the six-figure range.
It's a puzzle.
Expecting professional soldiers to run training courses for 18 year olds will reduce capacity, not increase it.
Will there be a budget to allow these conscripts to become reservists once they turn 19? If not, what's the point?
Should the Ukraine situation get substantially worse we might need to mobilise the population between 18 and 55, perhaps as reservists, and then watch how the dial moves to see if we need to look at anything more dramatic. But a 1950s model National Service achieves nothing.
Load of ballcocks.