I’m watching LK on catch-up. Cleverly is talking about national service teens being on-call firefighters or police community support officers. That is ludicrous, impossible. PSCOs need 8 weeks of training. National service teens will be around for 5 weeks. They’ll get 62.5% of the training and then leave.
So, his argument is that the first year is compulsory, but it will trigger a lifelong commitment to volunteering. In my experience, the best way to put people, particularly teenagers, off something is to make it compulsory.
Duke of Edinburgh award already includes some volunteering.
But you're not forced to do DofE.
Also, not being funny but DofE amongst my peers has been one of the most pointless things we ever had to do.
Horses (or in my experience, pointy gorses) for courses I guess.
Along with cooking, DoE was probably the most useful thing I did at school.
Fair enough, I am glad somebody enjoyed it. But the point was that nobody was forced to do it.
Reading through the thread there is widespread ridicule about Sunak's National Service proposals and I genuinely do not know whether it will be popular amongst voters but it certainly has grabbed the headlines
On volunteering work I can do no more than refer to my son's commitment to the RNLI and his determination to save lives at sea. The time he devotes to it is extraordinary and involves intense training and hopefully he will soon qualify as a helm being his first command position.
He does this entirely free as do all RNLI volunteers but also he holds down a full time senior management role in IT and devotes a lot of time to his family including 3 young children
It is a calling but giving to your community without expecting payment is something that should be encouraged and welcomed
I would just say that @Casino_Royale has his views and he is entitled to make his case and the pile on him is rather disappointing
The kids on this scheme are not going to be doing anything meaningful with the RNLI.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
Just to give an example, I had a job on my gap year when I turned 18, I worked in sales for a year. I didn't lounge around, I made a positive contribution to the economy and I paid taxes.
So with the Tory plan I've have had to quit my job and stop paying tax, or get a fine or something else for continuing to work.
This policy is insane, can nobody see it?
Are you for real ? Most people on here and on the twitter links from Scott n Paste are people condemning it.
Reading through the thread there is widespread ridicule about Sunak's National Service proposals and I genuinely do not know whether it will be popular amongst voters but it certainly has grabbed the headlines
On volunteering work I can do no more than refer to my son's commitment to the RNLI and his determination to save lives at sea. The time he devotes to it is extraordinary and involves intense training and hopefully he will soon qualify as a helm being his first command position.
He does this entirely free as do all RNLI volunteers but also he holds down a full time senior management role in IT and devotes a lot of time to his family including 3 young children
It is a calling but giving to your community without expecting payment is something that should be encouraged and welcomed
I would just say that @Casino_Royale has his views and he is entitled to make his case and the pile on him is rather disappointing
Your son is highly trained and embarked on this voluntarily . He’s an immense credit to your family. However lumbering the emergency services with an 18 year old for 12 weekends a year is really not sensible given the huge pressures they are already under.
Rishi's apparently genuine National Service announcement has finally given me a reason to vote Labour. Keeping Labour out is now less important to me than stopping the Tories.
Thing is, I am pretty receptive to the idea that our military is far less than it needs to be. But this doesn't strike me as a massively helpful solution to the problem.
It's like the maths to 18 policy. I'm receptive to the argument that as a nation we are insufficiently numerate. I'm a maths fan. But what we need is a) better basic maths education to 16, and b) encouragement for those so inclined to take it further than 18.
Like this, the national service policy is a bafflingly stupid solution to a valid problem. But at least the maths to 18 argument isn't going to needlessly ruin long periods of my kids' childhoods.
Before you do, perhaps remind yourself of what that might mean:
I'm quite aware that Labour are a bunch of dangerous and spiteful left wing nutters who will make everything worse in countless ways. But what are the Tories doing to stop any of this? State spending up, immigration up, woke up, growth down. And now they propose to deprive my kids of their liberty.
Have you read all the detail properly? That's not at all how I see it.
There are quite a few flakey Tories on here and I sometimes wonder if it's just me, @MarqueeMark and @HYUFD fighting to back our own team. I get that morale is low but, goodness, we need to pull ourselves together.
I don't think you've enjoy a Labour government with a massive majority - and a huge phalanx of left-wing MPs on its backbenches - one iota. It'd be far worse on all the things you describe and you'd have to deal with the knowledge (and the guilt) that you helped enable it.
It no longer strikes me as rational to vote Con to keep state spending or immigration or woke down, because they transparently can't.
And this is being trumpeted as 'national service'. We all know what that means because it existed in the 1950s. If it actually isn't this but giving all 18 and 19 year olds a lovely slice of cake, why don't they say that? It's because implausibly, they think there is yet more mileage in shafting the young, of extracting a bit more from they young to give to the old.
I'm not a flakey Tory. I'm not a Tory at all. I'm just a voter for whom up until now the Conservative Party has been the best way of keeping the lunacy of the left at bay. But the Conservative Party is a) clearly not keeping the left at bay (i.e. state spending, immigration and wokery are rising anf rising) and b) introducing all sorts of unnecessary bloody awful of their own. I also felt this way over the cancellation of HS2, but then Labour confirmed they'd do it too.
The model for NS proposed is very similar to the model in all of the Northern European/Scandinavian social democracies. There are arguments against, arguments for. The hyperventilation and 'bonkers' stuff from journos and social media is, as usual, completely overdone. As I said, on a personal level I don't care much either way for the policy but in electoral terms I'll be interested in how it goes.
It’s not very similar to those models. Consider the Finnish system. That’s for men only, unlike the Tories’ plan. It’s for 9-12 months military service, with civilian service available as an alternative of 12 months, so the same or longer than the military option. The UK system offers a year with the military or 25 days civilian service. 80% of Finnish men do military service. The vast majority of UK teens won’t. If you dodge service in Finland, you go to jail for the equivalent time. There will be no jail sentences for avoiding service in the UK. Those on civilian service get paid in Finland; not in the UK plan.
The shorter civilian service / no penalties aspects are soothing, temporary balms to make this seem less odious. You know, if you think about for a minute, that it'll be VERY easy to change the thresholds once the principle is established in law. What you describe is a stepping stone, not the intended destination.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
In those countries, alternative service is a long commitment. It’s not 25 days in total.
Oh absolutely. As I said in my OP I don't agree at all with what is being proposed by Sunak. But the general tone here of Alternative Service being a wildly stupid idea is not, in my opinion, a valid one. It was only dropped in Norway in 2012 and even then it still had pretty widespread support. Done properly as a civilian alternative to military service it can work well and it is depressing that so many posters on here seem to think it is a non starter because British youth are lazy, feckless thieves.
It's a massive red flag that the NFU have jumped in and called for it to be used as agricultural slave labour.
You can't blame young people for being deeply suspicious of anything the Conservatives propose. It's a shame really - I think it's over for any form of youth volunteering scheme, whatever party proposes it.
Its an interesting point with the farmers. Their complaint has been a lack of available labour at almost any sustainable price. So the question is whether the scheme would work better if it was national service but paid by the farmers at the rates being paid to farm workers now?
I am not suggesting this would necessarily work, just asking the question.
But also we have already had posters down thread saying it woudln't work because the youths would steal from old people in care homes. Not exactly a balanced opinion.
On the national service thing, what are the implications on inflation of taking several percent of the workforce out of employment and reassigning them to government-mandated busywork?
What’s the implication of delaying all students going to university for a year
Just to give an example, I had a job on my gap year when I turned 18, I worked in sales for a year. I didn't lounge around, I made a positive contribution to the economy and I paid taxes.
So with the Tory plan I've have had to quit my job and stop paying tax, or get a fine or something else for continuing to work.
This policy is insane, can nobody see it?
Are you for real ? Most people on here and on the twitter links from Scott n Paste are people condemning it.
I think people here are condemning it - but I think sadly it will go over well with the public.
I think I am happy to have Casino and others articulate the case for this election on this policy - but surely long term making even more younger voters turn off the Tories is not a sensible idea? One day they presumably want some of these people to vote for them.
Young voters have already gone past 18 though, they don't have to do it. Sane with 16/17 votes - anyone voting now gets no benefit
Hence both are only relevant on absolute feeling of right/wrong
Reading through the thread there is widespread ridicule about Sunak's National Service proposals and I genuinely do not know whether it will be popular amongst voters but it certainly has grabbed the headlines
On volunteering work I can do no more than refer to my son's commitment to the RNLI and his determination to save lives at sea. The time he devotes to it is extraordinary and involves intense training and hopefully he will soon qualify as a helm being his first command position.
He does this entirely free as do all RNLI volunteers but also he holds down a full time senior management role in IT and devotes a lot of time to his family including 3 young children
It is a calling but giving to your community without expecting payment is something that should be encouraged and welcomed
I would just say that @Casino_Royale has his views and he is entitled to make his case and the pile on him is rather disappointing
The kids on this scheme are not going to be doing anything meaningful with the RNLI.
I think you miss my wider point that volunteering in the community is something to be encouraged
Incentivising volunteering and military service sounds great - we probably need more of both. Strongly encouraging it sounds great. Even making it opt out or something.
Forcing? Come on.
Cleverly was probably a good choice to sacrifice to defend this plan - he's confidently defended nonsense before, which is a key ministerial skill, and he has a bit of personality and even some charm.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
It's very un-British, Richard.
Not sure how you can say that given it was very British only a few decades ago.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by twenty-two points in our poll for the Mail on Sunday. Con 23% (-) Lab 45% (-) Lib Dem 9% (-1) Reform 10% (-2) SNP 3% (-) Green 6% (+1) Other 3% (-) Fieldwork: 23rd-25th May 2024 Sample: 1,517 GB adults (Changes from 17th-20th May 2024)
Reading through the thread there is widespread ridicule about Sunak's National Service proposals and I genuinely do not know whether it will be popular amongst voters but it certainly has grabbed the headlines
On volunteering work I can do no more than refer to my son's commitment to the RNLI and his determination to save lives at sea. The time he devotes to it is extraordinary and involves intense training and hopefully he will soon qualify as a helm being his first command position.
He does this entirely free as do all RNLI volunteers but also he holds down a full time senior management role in IT and devotes a lot of time to his family including 3 young children
It is a calling but giving to your community without expecting payment is something that should be encouraged and welcomed
I would just say that @Casino_Royale has his views and he is entitled to make his case and the pile on him is rather disappointing
The kids on this scheme are not going to be doing anything meaningful with the RNLI.
I think you miss my wider point that volunteering in the community is something to be encouraged
Incidentally, I read that "lets ban computers" is part of Sunak's Bold Action strategy.
Apparently, The Plan includes dropping in things from very left field with zero notice. That just happen to dogwhistle the remaining 12 people who will vote Tory.
Lets consider what other Bold Action policies we can look forward to over the next few weeks:
Chain-gangs for the so-called disabled The Birch in our schools and a ban on sex education Solve the prison crisis by walling off places like Middlesbrough and turning them into a gulag. A flat tax Raise the voting threshold to Additional Rate taxpayers only
I log on and wtf!? I have to go straight to the Graun to find out.
One thing *anyone* knows from the history of National Service - there almost certainly aren't enough service people to actually do the training of a significant fraction of the young population as well as their other jobs. Incredibly inefficient in terms of producing squaddie-hours on the ground, too, and as for matelots and Raff types, forget it - they need too much training now (even in the 1950s with simpler tech it was getting pretty obvious).
At least we have the prospect of the mines being reopened to provide the materiel for conscripts to be occupied with painting it white. May be trouble ahead with Wokesters over this valuable life lesson mind..
Rishi's apparently genuine National Service announcement has finally given me a reason to vote Labour. Keeping Labour out is now less important to me than stopping the Tories.
Thing is, I am pretty receptive to the idea that our military is far less than it needs to be. But this doesn't strike me as a massively helpful solution to the problem.
It's like the maths to 18 policy. I'm receptive to the argument that as a nation we are insufficiently numerate. I'm a maths fan. But what we need is a) better basic maths education to 16, and b) encouragement for those so inclined to take it further than 18.
Like this, the national service policy is a bafflingly stupid solution to a valid problem. But at least the maths to 18 argument isn't going to needlessly ruin long periods of my kids' childhoods.
Before you do, perhaps remind yourself of what that might mean:
I'm quite aware that Labour are a bunch of dangerous and spiteful left wing nutters who will make everything worse in countless ways. But what are the Tories doing to stop any of this? State spending up, immigration up, woke up, growth down. And now they propose to deprive my kids of their liberty.
Have you read all the detail properly? That's not at all how I see it.
There are quite a few flakey Tories on here and I sometimes wonder if it's just me, @MarqueeMark and @HYUFD fighting to back our own team. I get that morale is low but, goodness, we need to pull ourselves together.
I don't think you've enjoy a Labour government with a massive majority - and a huge phalanx of left-wing MPs on its backbenches - one iota. It'd be far worse on all the things you describe and you'd have to deal with the knowledge (and the guilt) that you helped enable it.
Nobody is going to enjoy it, but the person most responsible for it is Rishi Sunak - a person who came in claiming he'd avert a GE defeat, but in the event, has not even had the courtesy to keep Tory MPs in their jobs for the next few months, nor let any of the policies he claimed were so vital bear any fruit. You and the two people you mention have been the biggest supporters of this waste of space and his dismal illiberal, incompetent, profligate, weak Government, and I've not seen a scrap of remorse about your poor judgement from any of you. Now you have the gall to complain about other people not manning the barricades. Enjoy knocking on doors defending this shite - perhaps you'll think more carefully about who you back for leader next time.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
In those countries, alternative service is a long commitment. It’s not 25 days in total.
Oh absolutely. As I said in my OP I don't agree at all with what is being proposed by Sunak. But the general tone here of Alternative Service being a wildly stupid idea is not, in my opinion, a valid one. It was only dropped in Norway in 2012 and even then it still had pretty widespread support. Done properly as a civilian alternative to military service it can work well and it is depressing that so many posters on here seem to think it is a non starter because British youth are lazy, feckless thieves.
What's embarrassing about the policy and with likely bad consequences is the compulsory bit - Cameron already had his 'National Citizenship Service' - is this an admission that was a waste of money? Because I hear it's actually one of the better received Tory initiatives. You could have beefed that up and announce a big "Serve First" scheme to aid recruitment into the army among those who might really benefit.
The compulsory bit is embarrassing because it does promote the idea that British youth are feckless and need to be forced to spend some weekends freezing on Dartmoor being drilled or cleaning up dog mess to be taught what's right.
It's pandering to the subsection of pensioners who having been one of the luckiest generations in history partake in selfish sneering and pursuing policies to actively make their grandkids' generation's lives harder.
And it's the compulsory bit that creates the problems. If the sanction for not joining up is a fine, then that's basically a charter for rich kids to get out of it while those for whom it is actually an inconvenience have to. What about 18-year-olds who work full-time to support the household? Or who are carers - either to older relatives or kids? Can they opt out - who will pay for those hours of care if they can't?
We're a much larger, more disparate country than the Scandinavian ones with a much inferior social safety net - so it's just far more difficult to design a one-size fits all form of compulsory service, rather than providing incentives for volunteering.
How are we policing both participation and behaviour? The majority will behave in exemplary fashion but just like in school there will be those who act up.
Anyway, the idea of promoting civic service - fine. The problem with the policy is it seems to be back of a fag packet stuff aimed at Reform-voting pensioners rather than designed for those who'll actually participate.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
In those countries, alternative service is a long commitment. It’s not 25 days in total.
Oh absolutely. As I said in my OP I don't agree at all with what is being proposed by Sunak. But the general tone here of Alternative Service being a wildly stupid idea is not, in my opinion, a valid one. It was only dropped in Norway in 2012 and even then it still had pretty widespread support. Done properly as a civilian alternative to military service it can work well and it is depressing that so many posters on here seem to think it is a non starter because British youth are lazy, feckless thieves.
It's a massive red flag that the NFU have jumped in and called for it to be used as agricultural slave labour.
You can't blame young people for being deeply suspicious of anything the Conservatives propose. It's a shame really - I think it's over for any form of youth volunteering scheme, whatever party proposes it.
I wonder if they've looked at any of the plans for autarchy that were drawn up as a potential alternative to accepting the Anglo-American Loan in 1946?
Close the universities and sixth forms, send the young people to work in the fields and mines!
She’s certainly improved over the last few years .
She hasn't. She dresses like absolute toilet.
She's only 3 yrs older than me and manages to look like a 62 year old spinster in the WI.
Who on earth is advising her on her style?
Oh what a shame, intelligent woman gets judged on dress sense not on what intelligent woman said...
On the other hand, Rishi Sunak? Who chose those half mast trousers? The man dresses like an intern at an accounting office, even if the suits cost thousands, they might as well have come from George at Asda.
Admittedly, its not (just) his dress sense that renders him unfit for office. He also spouts gimmicks and futile cliches and thinks they are policies. I don´t always agree with Reeves, but in one interview she nailed the Tories pretty thoroughly.
I’m watching LK on catch-up. Cleverly is talking about national service teens being on-call firefighters or police community support officers. That is ludicrous, impossible. PSCOs need 8 weeks of training. National service teens will be around for 5 weeks. They’ll get 62.5% of the training and then leave.
So, his argument is that the first year is compulsory, but it will trigger a lifelong commitment to volunteering. In my experience, the best way to put people, particularly teenagers, off something is to make it compulsory.
Duke of Edinburgh award already includes some volunteering.
But you're not forced to do DofE.
Also, not being funny but DofE amongst my peers has been one of the most pointless things we ever had to do.
Did you have to do it? They don't even offer it at my daughters' schools. My oldest, who wanted to do it, had to find a provider elsewhere (Altrincham FC, weirdly).
Rishi's apparently genuine National Service announcement has finally given me a reason to vote Labour. Keeping Labour out is now less important to me than stopping the Tories.
Thing is, I am pretty receptive to the idea that our military is far less than it needs to be. But this doesn't strike me as a massively helpful solution to the problem.
It's like the maths to 18 policy. I'm receptive to the argument that as a nation we are insufficiently numerate. I'm a maths fan. But what we need is a) better basic maths education to 16, and b) encouragement for those so inclined to take it further than 18.
Like this, the national service policy is a bafflingly stupid solution to a valid problem. But at least the maths to 18 argument isn't going to needlessly ruin long periods of my kids' childhoods.
Before you do, perhaps remind yourself of what that might mean:
I'm quite aware that Labour are a bunch of dangerous and spiteful left wing nutters who will make everything worse in countless ways. But what are the Tories doing to stop any of this? State spending up, immigration up, woke up, growth down. And now they propose to deprive my kids of their liberty.
Have you read all the detail properly? That's not at all how I see it.
There are quite a few flakey Tories on here and I sometimes wonder if it's just me, @MarqueeMark and @HYUFD fighting to back our own team. I get that morale is low but, goodness, we need to pull ourselves together.
I don't think you've enjoy a Labour government with a massive majority - and a huge phalanx of left-wing MPs on its backbenches - one iota. It'd be far worse on all the things you describe and you'd have to deal with the knowledge (and the guilt) that you helped enable it.
It no longer strikes me as rational to vote Con to keep state spending or immigration or woke down, because they transparently can't.
And this is being trumpeted as 'national service'. We all know what that means because it existed in the 1950s. If it actually isn't this but giving all 18 and 19 year olds a lovely slice of cake, why don't they say that? It's because implausibly, they think there is yet more mileage in shafting the young, of extracting a bit more from they young to give to the old.
I'm not a flakey Tory. I'm not a Tory at all. I'm just a voter for whom up until now the Conservative Party has been the best way of keeping the lunacy of the left at bay. But the Conservative Party is a) clearly not keeping the left at bay (i.e. state spending, immigration and wokery are rising anf rising) and b) introducing all sorts of unnecessary bloody awful of their own. I also felt this way over the cancellation of HS2, but then Labour confirmed they'd do it too.
I've this conversation with lifetime Tories, friends and family, a few times now. Most are strong Brexit supporters. Loved Johnson (and some still do). Yet they now say they will vote Lab, LD, Reform, or whatever - or not bother at all - hence helping to produce a result contrary to what they want .
It's very strange situation.
From a betting perspective, on turnout (in 2019 was 67%) I'm waiting for some appealing odds in the 52 - 58% range. Disillusionment levels are such that even that range may prove too high.
I’m watching LK on catch-up. Cleverly is talking about national service teens being on-call firefighters or police community support officers. That is ludicrous, impossible. PSCOs need 8 weeks of training. National service teens will be around for 5 weeks. They’ll get 62.5% of the training and then leave.
So, his argument is that the first year is compulsory, but it will trigger a lifelong commitment to volunteering. In my experience, the best way to put people, particularly teenagers, off something is to make it compulsory.
Duke of Edinburgh award already includes some volunteering.
But you're not forced to do DofE.
Also, not being funny but DofE amongst my peers has been one of the most pointless things we ever had to do.
Did you have to do it? They don't even offer it at my daughters' schools. My oldest, who wanted to do it, had to find a provider elsewhere (Altrincham FC, weirdly).
We had to do it, CCF or community volunteering. DofE was the "least pointless" of those options.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
In those countries, alternative service is a long commitment. It’s not 25 days in total.
Oh absolutely. As I said in my OP I don't agree at all with what is being proposed by Sunak. But the general tone here of Alternative Service being a wildly stupid idea is not, in my opinion, a valid one. It was only dropped in Norway in 2012 and even then it still had pretty widespread support. Done properly as a civilian alternative to military service it can work well and it is depressing that so many posters on here seem to think it is a non starter because British youth are lazy, feckless thieves.
It's a massive red flag that the NFU have jumped in and called for it to be used as agricultural slave labour.
You can't blame young people for being deeply suspicious of anything the Conservatives propose. It's a shame really - I think it's over for any form of youth volunteering scheme, whatever party proposes it.
I wonder if they've looked at any of the plans for autarchy that were drawn up as a potential alternative to accepting the Anglo-American Loan in 1946?
Close the universities and sixth forms, send the young people to work in the fields and mines!
Close the Universities and send the students and intellectuals to learn from the people as they gather in the harvest.
It all sounds a bit Maoist Cultural Revolution doesn't it?
@RobDotHutton Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.
It really is desperate stuff . Forcing 18 year olds to volunteer is investing in them .
My daughter has done two lots of volunteering that weren't entirely voluntary.
One as part of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards, and another as part of a university scholarship scheme. Both were a really positive experience for her, but I think she was a bit more diffident when she was younger and wouldn't have done the volunteering without the impetus from the schemes.
Something along those lines, but reaching larger numbers of people, could be a positive thing.
But people are so reflexively anti-Tory that they're now attacking the very idea of encouraging teenagers to volunteer.
Labour should have come up with a policy like this. Something to tap into the desire to help out and to be part of something that was shown when so many people volunteered to help the NHS at the start of the pandemic.
I know people are ridiculing this policy at the moment, but I think it's a good example of the Tories still being better at campaigning than Labour.
Encouraging youngsters (or indeed anyone) to volunteer is a good thing. Giving young people a chance to learn new skills while also benefitting the community is a good thing. Conscription introduced without any actual plan is not the same thing.
It's not conscription, though. You're reacting entirely to the name of the thing, and not what they've said about the thing itself.
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
How about making it an offer instead? Sounds quite nice - community links are getting poorer and we probably need a shot in the arm to restore it. Yes the Big Society stuff didnt really work but it was well intended and could be worth revamping and trying again.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by twenty-two points in our poll for the Mail on Sunday. Con 23% (-) Lab 45% (-) Lib Dem 9% (-1) Reform 10% (-2) SNP 3% (-) Green 6% (+1) Other 3% (-) Fieldwork: 23rd-25th May 2024 Sample: 1,517 GB adults (Changes from 17th-20th May 2024)
Basically confirms what I said yesterday, there's not yet been any change in the polls.
Reading through the thread there is widespread ridicule about Sunak's National Service proposals and I genuinely do not know whether it will be popular amongst voters but it certainly has grabbed the headlines
On volunteering work I can do no more than refer to my son's commitment to the RNLI and his determination to save lives at sea. The time he devotes to it is extraordinary and involves intense training and hopefully he will soon qualify as a helm being his first command position.
He does this entirely free as do all RNLI volunteers but also he holds down a full time senior management role in IT and devotes a lot of time to his family including 3 young children
It is a calling but giving to your community without expecting payment is something that should be encouraged and welcomed
I would just say that @Casino_Royale has his views and he is entitled to make his case and the pile on him is rather disappointing
The kids on this scheme are not going to be doing anything meaningful with the RNLI.
I think you miss my wider point that volunteering in the community is something to be encouraged
Yes, it should be encouraged. The Tories’ proposal is not encouragement: it’s compulsory. Making things compulsory frequently makes them less liked. Meanwhile, services will be overwhelmed with large numbers of new starters whose hearts aren’t in it and whose service will end before they’ve learnt to do much.
Nothing annoys me more than pensioners moaning about the youth of today . Lecturing them on saving for a mortgage when the reality is even if they try and save house prices increase by more each year and then can never see light at the end of the tunnel.
Younger people lose hope and just live for today . Who can blame them .
Those who had free tuition , maintenance grants , affordable housing , to be blunt need to stfu .
This group also seem to be the happiest in approving of Sunaks NS policy . So that just adds to my annoyance .
I’m watching LK on catch-up. Cleverly is talking about national service teens being on-call firefighters or police community support officers. That is ludicrous, impossible. PSCOs need 8 weeks of training. National service teens will be around for 5 weeks. They’ll get 62.5% of the training and then leave.
So, his argument is that the first year is compulsory, but it will trigger a lifelong commitment to volunteering. In my experience, the best way to put people, particularly teenagers, off something is to make it compulsory.
Duke of Edinburgh award already includes some volunteering.
But you're not forced to do DofE.
Also, not being funny but DofE amongst my peers has been one of the most pointless things we ever had to do.
Most kids only do it so that they can stick it on their CV when they apply to university.
If they all made a pact not to bother, they'd save on all the hassle.
@RobDotHutton Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.
It really is desperate stuff . Forcing 18 year olds to volunteer is investing in them .
My daughter has done two lots of volunteering that weren't entirely voluntary.
One as part of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards, and another as part of a university scholarship scheme. Both were a really positive experience for her, but I think she was a bit more diffident when she was younger and wouldn't have done the volunteering without the impetus from the schemes.
Something along those lines, but reaching larger numbers of people, could be a positive thing.
But people are so reflexively anti-Tory that they're now attacking the very idea of encouraging teenagers to volunteer.
Labour should have come up with a policy like this. Something to tap into the desire to help out and to be part of something that was shown when so many people volunteered to help the NHS at the start of the pandemic.
I know people are ridiculing this policy at the moment, but I think it's a good example of the Tories still being better at campaigning than Labour.
Encouraging youngsters (or indeed anyone) to volunteer is a good thing. Giving young people a chance to learn new skills while also benefitting the community is a good thing. Conscription introduced without any actual plan is not the same thing.
It's not conscription, though. You're reacting entirely to the name of the thing, and not what they've said about the thing itself.
Good thing casual voters won't do that then.
Expect many a 'Want to avoid being conscripted?' messages on TikTok this election.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
It's very un-British, Richard.
Not sure how you can say that given it was very British only a few decades ago.
Conscription here ended 64 years ago. Six and a half is “several”, not “a few”.
Rishi's apparently genuine National Service announcement has finally given me a reason to vote Labour. Keeping Labour out is now less important to me than stopping the Tories.
Thing is, I am pretty receptive to the idea that our military is far less than it needs to be. But this doesn't strike me as a massively helpful solution to the problem.
It's like the maths to 18 policy. I'm receptive to the argument that as a nation we are insufficiently numerate. I'm a maths fan. But what we need is a) better basic maths education to 16, and b) encouragement for those so inclined to take it further than 18.
Like this, the national service policy is a bafflingly stupid solution to a valid problem. But at least the maths to 18 argument isn't going to needlessly ruin long periods of my kids' childhoods.
Before you do, perhaps remind yourself of what that might mean:
I'm quite aware that Labour are a bunch of dangerous and spiteful left wing nutters who will make everything worse in countless ways. But what are the Tories doing to stop any of this? State spending up, immigration up, woke up, growth down. And now they propose to deprive my kids of their liberty.
Have you read all the detail properly? That's not at all how I see it.
There are quite a few flakey Tories on here and I sometimes wonder if it's just me, @MarqueeMark and @HYUFD fighting to back our own team. I get that morale is low but, goodness, we need to pull ourselves together.
I don't think you've enjoy a Labour government with a massive majority - and a huge phalanx of left-wing MPs on its backbenches - one iota. It'd be far worse on all the things you describe and you'd have to deal with the knowledge (and the guilt) that you helped enable it.
Nobody is going to enjoy it, but the person most responsible for it is Rishi Sunak - a person who came in claiming he'd avert a GE defeat, but in the event, has not even had the courtesy to keep Tory MPs in their jobs for the next few months, nor let any of the policies he claimed were so vital bear any fruit. You and the two people you mention have been the biggest supporters of this waste of space and his dismal illiberal, incompetent, profligate, weak Government, and I've not seen a scrap of remorse about your poor judgement from any of you. Now you have the gall to complain about other people not manning the barricades. Enjoy knocking on doors defending this shite - perhaps you'll think more carefully about who you back for leader next time.
OK but don't you agree that Johnson was even more "illiberal, incompetent, profligate, weak"?
Rishi's apparently genuine National Service announcement has finally given me a reason to vote Labour. Keeping Labour out is now less important to me than stopping the Tories.
Thing is, I am pretty receptive to the idea that our military is far less than it needs to be. But this doesn't strike me as a massively helpful solution to the problem.
It's like the maths to 18 policy. I'm receptive to the argument that as a nation we are insufficiently numerate. I'm a maths fan. But what we need is a) better basic maths education to 16, and b) encouragement for those so inclined to take it further than 18.
Like this, the national service policy is a bafflingly stupid solution to a valid problem. But at least the maths to 18 argument isn't going to needlessly ruin long periods of my kids' childhoods.
Before you do, perhaps remind yourself of what that might mean:
I'm quite aware that Labour are a bunch of dangerous and spiteful left wing nutters who will make everything worse in countless ways. But what are the Tories doing to stop any of this? State spending up, immigration up, woke up, growth down. And now they propose to deprive my kids of their liberty.
Have you read all the detail properly? That's not at all how I see it.
There are quite a few flakey Tories on here and I sometimes wonder if it's just me, @MarqueeMark and @HYUFD fighting to back our own team. I get that morale is low but, goodness, we need to pull ourselves together.
I don't think you've enjoy a Labour government with a massive majority - and a huge phalanx of left-wing MPs on its backbenches - one iota. It'd be far worse on all the things you describe and you'd have to deal with the knowledge (and the guilt) that you helped enable it.
It no longer strikes me as rational to vote Con to keep state spending or immigration or woke down, because they transparently can't.
And this is being trumpeted as 'national service'. We all know what that means because it existed in the 1950s. If it actually isn't this but giving all 18 and 19 year olds a lovely slice of cake, why don't they say that? It's because implausibly, they think there is yet more mileage in shafting the young, of extracting a bit more from they young to give to the old.
I'm not a flakey Tory. I'm not a Tory at all. I'm just a voter for whom up until now the Conservative Party has been the best way of keeping the lunacy of the left at bay. But the Conservative Party is a) clearly not keeping the left at bay (i.e. state spending, immigration and wokery are rising anf rising) and b) introducing all sorts of unnecessary bloody awful of their own. I also felt this way over the cancellation of HS2, but then Labour confirmed they'd do it too.
I've this conversation with lifetime Tories, friends and family, a few times now. Most are strong Brexit supporters. Loved Johnson (and some still do). Yet they now say they will vote, Lab, LD, Reform, whatever - or not bother at all - hence helping to produce a result contrary to what they want .
It's very strange situation.
From a betting perspective, on turnout (in 2019 was 67%) I'm waiting for some appealing odds in the 52 - 58% range. Disillusionment levels are such that even that range may prove too high.
I wonder if the threat of national service will do what few have ever achieved and actually GOTV among the under 25s? And thus balance the understandable apathy among the group you discuss.
This site basically break down into rich old school Tories who want a super business friendly government, privatised services, and don’t care about the poor; and varying amounts of Labour/Liberal folk. What it has never had is any real sense of the Boris “light nationalist” approach. A complete blind spot.
The Tories won’t win this election, but Starmer will end up introducing this Scandi style national service anyway, because all of Europe will. So that sort of debate is a red herring.
However, when the Tories (or their replacements) come back, it’ll be Boris style Tories on steroids.
The problem is that the groups I describe in paragraph one still haven’t come to terms with what the Brexit vote was really about, and 5-10 years of Starmer in tight economic conditions won’t make it go away.
I fear for this country, because in the end those voters will get what they want. We could have given them a light touch version now, but instead it’ll be full-fat later.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
It's very un-British, Richard.
Not sure how you can say that given it was very British only a few decades ago.
Conscription here ended 64 years ago. Six and a half is “several”, not “a few”.
@RobDotHutton Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.
It really is desperate stuff . Forcing 18 year olds to volunteer is investing in them .
My daughter has done two lots of volunteering that weren't entirely voluntary.
One as part of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards, and another as part of a university scholarship scheme. Both were a really positive experience for her, but I think she was a bit more diffident when she was younger and wouldn't have done the volunteering without the impetus from the schemes.
Something along those lines, but reaching larger numbers of people, could be a positive thing.
But people are so reflexively anti-Tory that they're now attacking the very idea of encouraging teenagers to volunteer.
Labour should have come up with a policy like this. Something to tap into the desire to help out and to be part of something that was shown when so many people volunteered to help the NHS at the start of the pandemic.
I know people are ridiculing this policy at the moment, but I think it's a good example of the Tories still being better at campaigning than Labour.
Encouraging youngsters (or indeed anyone) to volunteer is a good thing. Giving young people a chance to learn new skills while also benefitting the community is a good thing. Conscription introduced without any actual plan is not the same thing.
It's not conscription, though. You're reacting entirely to the name of the thing, and not what they've said about the thing itself.
Good thing casual voters won't do that then.
Expect many a 'Want to avoid being conscripted?' messages on TikTok this election.
The policy of course will not apply to anybody with a vote at this election
@RobDotHutton Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.
It really is desperate stuff . Forcing 18 year olds to volunteer is investing in them .
My daughter has done two lots of volunteering that weren't entirely voluntary.
One as part of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards, and another as part of a university scholarship scheme. Both were a really positive experience for her, but I think she was a bit more diffident when she was younger and wouldn't have done the volunteering without the impetus from the schemes.
Something along those lines, but reaching larger numbers of people, could be a positive thing.
But people are so reflexively anti-Tory that they're now attacking the very idea of encouraging teenagers to volunteer.
Labour should have come up with a policy like this. Something to tap into the desire to help out and to be part of something that was shown when so many people volunteered to help the NHS at the start of the pandemic.
I know people are ridiculing this policy at the moment, but I think it's a good example of the Tories still being better at campaigning than Labour.
Encouraging youngsters (or indeed anyone) to volunteer is a good thing. Giving young people a chance to learn new skills while also benefitting the community is a good thing. Conscription introduced without any actual plan is not the same thing.
It's not conscription, though. You're reacting entirely to the name of the thing, and not what they've said about the thing itself.
Good thing casual voters won't do that then.
Expect many a 'Want to avoid being conscripted?' messages on TikTok this election.
The policy of course will not apply to anybody with a vote at this election
Nobody who will actually do the thing, can vote for it. So let's have votes for 16 and 17 year olds.
Just noticed that along with PCSO's and fire crews, Cleverly has suggested "emergency health responders" as a role which could be filled.
Even Physician Associates have to do a 2 years course before they are let loose on the Great British public.
One things that stands out in these proposals is that the proposers have no understanding of front line services whether armed forces or Social Care and the skills and training, not to mention vetting and DRB required. They haven't a clue about what real working class people need to do.
Has Reform commented on the national service idea? Given their supporters are the target it'd be interesting if it is hitting the mark there.
I'd suspect its one of those things a targeted focus group might like until they know who proposed it.
Nigel Fucking Farage doesn't like it
But that is the same interview where he says
"We have a growing number of young people in this country who do not subscribe to British values... We see them on the streets of London every Saturday" - @Nigel_Farage
Sky's @TrevorPTweets asks @Nigel_Farage if "the Reform platform for this election is every problem you face is down to immigrants and, in particular, to Muslims".
@Nigel_Farage rejects official data showing migration from certain non-EU countries has soared since Brexit, saying it's not a consequence of Brexit.
It’s pretty noticeable that a significant number of posters on here who lean right of centre are attacking this idea, sometimes scathingly.
It does make you wonder who they thought this would actually appeal to? It must be a very small core.
The elderly (either without grandchildren or those that think it'd do their grandchildren the world of good). Hard core nationalists. Those who like the firm smack of authoritarianism.
It WILL appeal to some. Whether it'll swing many votes, I seriously doubt.
My view is you feel the country needs a better defence, then national service COMBINED with compulsory 'Dad's Army' is the better way. Are we at war with Russia or aren't we?
@RobDotHutton Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.
It really is desperate stuff . Forcing 18 year olds to volunteer is investing in them .
My daughter has done two lots of volunteering that weren't entirely voluntary.
One as part of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards, and another as part of a university scholarship scheme. Both were a really positive experience for her, but I think she was a bit more diffident when she was younger and wouldn't have done the volunteering without the impetus from the schemes.
Something along those lines, but reaching larger numbers of people, could be a positive thing.
But people are so reflexively anti-Tory that they're now attacking the very idea of encouraging teenagers to volunteer.
Labour should have come up with a policy like this. Something to tap into the desire to help out and to be part of something that was shown when so many people volunteered to help the NHS at the start of the pandemic.
I know people are ridiculing this policy at the moment, but I think it's a good example of the Tories still being better at campaigning than Labour.
Encouraging youngsters (or indeed anyone) to volunteer is a good thing. Giving young people a chance to learn new skills while also benefitting the community is a good thing. Conscription introduced without any actual plan is not the same thing.
It's not conscription, though. You're reacting entirely to the name of the thing, and not what they've said about the thing itself.
Good thing casual voters won't do that then.
Expect many a 'Want to avoid being conscripted?' messages on TikTok this election.
The policy of course will not apply to anybody with a vote at this election
Indeed, but are people going to focus on that this is planned for years down the line? As they want it to sound bold the Tories aren't going to be emphasising the review part of it either. So to the extent it will be talked about at all it will be on the basis of them wanting to do X, and X actually being, say, 2029, probably won't factor in to how people react to the idea.
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
His two examples of civilian service are delivering things to old people or search and rescue. OK, the former is doable on minimal training, although you are taking work away from people who are currently paid to do this, increasing youth unemployment.
The latter… what on earth is an 18-year old on a weekend a month going to do in search and rescue?
Just noticed that along with PCSO's and fire crews, Cleverly has suggested "emergency health responders" as a role which could be filled.
Even Physician Associates have to do a 2 years course before they are let loose on the Great British public.
One things that stands out in these proposals is that the proposers have no understanding of front line services whether armed forces or Social Care and the skills and training, not to mention vetting and DRB required. They haven't a clue about what real working class people need to do.
Even agriculture requires training. Lots of chemicals, heavy equipment. It's taken Clarkson 3 years.
Reading through the thread there is widespread ridicule about Sunak's National Service proposals and I genuinely do not know whether it will be popular amongst voters but it certainly has grabbed the headlines
On volunteering work I can do no more than refer to my son's commitment to the RNLI and his determination to save lives at sea. The time he devotes to it is extraordinary and involves intense training and hopefully he will soon qualify as a helm being his first command position.
He does this entirely free as do all RNLI volunteers but also he holds down a full time senior management role in IT and devotes a lot of time to his family including 3 young children
It is a calling but giving to your community without expecting payment is something that should be encouraged and welcomed
I would just say that @Casino_Royale has his views and he is entitled to make his case and the pile on him is rather disappointing
The kids on this scheme are not going to be doing anything meaningful with the RNLI.
12 weekends of making tea, sweeping the floor and, in some cases, being perved over.
How many Senior Tories have actually done a day's work at the coalface in the Emergency sector? Because they appear to think it's summat for the completely untrained and unskilled. And that's precisely the message it conveys to millions already struggling to do those jobs. Maybe 25 weekends on the frontline for Tory MP's would be better for community cohesion?
Lots of issues based polling is like asking "do you like ice cream?" "Do you like sausages?" "Do you like tea?", getting positive answers for them all, then serving them all on the same pizza
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
How about making it an offer instead? Sounds quite nice - community links are getting poorer and we probably need a shot in the arm to restore it. Yes the Big Society stuff didnt really work but it was well intended and could be worth revamping and trying again.
The Big Society didn’t work because people saw it for what it was - getting people to do stuff for free that they ought to be paid for.
A policy that could have been thought up by people coming from money, who have no clue what it’s like to live precariously from month to month or week to week.
Even if they do get elected, I boldly predict that this bold new model has about as much chance of getting off the ground as a flight to Rwanda.
How many Senior Tories have actually done a day's work in the Public sector? Because they appear to think it's summat for the completely untrained and unskilled. And that's precisely the message it conveys to millions already struggling to do those jobs. Maybe 25 weekends on the frontline for Tory MP's would be better for community cohesion?
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
His two examples of civilian service are delivering things to old people or search and rescue. OK, the former is doable on minimal training, although you are taking work away from people who are currently paid to do this, increasing youth unemployment.
The latter… what on earth is an 18-year old on a weekend a month going to do in search and rescue?
Prsesumably females only? Women's Land Army aka Land Girls.
Exactly and if Mrs Thatcher was so patriotic, why did she go straight to Oxford rather than joining the Women's Land Army? Sorry, I've come over all 1980s Ben Elton, little bit of politics. (The answers presumably being she was not stupid and chemistry was of national importance during the war: analysis of German aviation fuel in downed aircraft and so on.)
Medics, chemists, and so on were very much kept in training as far as poss. And it's not as if Miss Roberts was being missed from the frontline.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
It's very un-British, Richard.
Not sure how you can say that given it was very British only a few decades ago.
Conscription here ended 64 years ago. Six and a half is “several”, not “a few”.
So ignoring the semanatics, is it your proposal that somehow we were 'not British' 70 years ago? That would be an interesting assertion.
@RobDotHutton Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.
It really is desperate stuff . Forcing 18 year olds to volunteer is investing in them .
My daughter has done two lots of volunteering that weren't entirely voluntary.
One as part of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards, and another as part of a university scholarship scheme. Both were a really positive experience for her, but I think she was a bit more diffident when she was younger and wouldn't have done the volunteering without the impetus from the schemes.
Something along those lines, but reaching larger numbers of people, could be a positive thing.
But people are so reflexively anti-Tory that they're now attacking the very idea of encouraging teenagers to volunteer.
Labour should have come up with a policy like this. Something to tap into the desire to help out and to be part of something that was shown when so many people volunteered to help the NHS at the start of the pandemic.
I know people are ridiculing this policy at the moment, but I think it's a good example of the Tories still being better at campaigning than Labour.
Encouraging youngsters (or indeed anyone) to volunteer is a good thing. Giving young people a chance to learn new skills while also benefitting the community is a good thing. Conscription introduced without any actual plan is not the same thing.
It's not conscription, though. You're reacting entirely to the name of the thing, and not what they've said about the thing itself.
Good thing casual voters won't do that then.
Expect many a 'Want to avoid being conscripted?' messages on TikTok this election.
The policy of course will not apply to anybody with a vote at this election
Indeed, but are people going to focus on that this is planned for years down the line? As they want it to sound bold the Tories aren't going to be emphasising the review part of it either. So to the extent it will be talked about at all it will be on the basis of them wanting to do X, and X actually being, say, 2029, probably won't factor in to how people react to the idea.
Well, yes, but even if it were being implemented on July 5th almost nobody with a vote would be part of it. My point is nobody getting 'avoid conscription' tiktoks is affected. Same argument with votes for 16/17 being a vote winner with the youth. Why? They already wouldn't benefit. Any vote on either is strictly on right/wrong. Indeed, 18 to 25 less likely to be anti than young ish mums and dads 25 to 40
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
In those countries, alternative service is a long commitment. It’s not 25 days in total.
Oh absolutely. As I said in my OP I don't agree at all with what is being proposed by Sunak. But the general tone here of Alternative Service being a wildly stupid idea is not, in my opinion, a valid one. It was only dropped in Norway in 2012 and even then it still had pretty widespread support. Done properly as a civilian alternative to military service it can work well and it is depressing that so many posters on here seem to think it is a non starter because British youth are lazy, feckless thieves.
It's a massive red flag that the NFU have jumped in and called for it to be used as agricultural slave labour.
You can't blame young people for being deeply suspicious of anything the Conservatives propose. It's a shame really - I think it's over for any form of youth volunteering scheme, whatever party proposes it.
Its an interesting point with the farmers. Their complaint has been a lack of available labour at almost any sustainable price. So the question is whether the scheme would work better if it was national service but paid by the farmers at the rates being paid to farm workers now?
I am not suggesting this would necessarily work, just asking the question.
But also we have already had posters down thread saying it woudln't work because the youths would steal from old people in care homes. Not exactly a balanced opinion.
Are all those being sent to care homes/domestic care support going to be vetted, DRB'd and supervised?
If not, would you want your granny have them help her get dressed in the morning?
And what are you going to do with all the 18 year olds who do have a criminal record?
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
His two examples of civilian service are delivering things to old people or search and rescue. OK, the former is doable on minimal training, although you are taking work away from people who are currently paid to do this, increasing youth unemployment.
The latter… what on earth is an 18-year old on a weekend a month going to do in search and rescue?
There are plenty of instances where search and rescue volunteers end up getting/lost injured themselves. That's probably what they will get up to.
This site basically break down into rich old school Tories who want a super business friendly government, privatised services, and don’t care about the poor; and varying amounts of Labour/Liberal folk. What it has never had is any real sense of the Boris “light nationalist” approach. A complete blind spot.
The Tories won’t win this election, but Starmer will end up introducing this Scandi style national service anyway, because all of Europe will. So that sort of debate is a red herring.
However, when the Tories (or their replacements) come back, it’ll be Boris style Tories on steroids.
The problem is that the groups I describe in paragraph one still haven’t come to terms with what the Brexit vote was really about, and 5-10 years of Starmer in tight economic conditions won’t make it go away.
I fear for this country, because in the end those voters will get what they want. We could have given them a light touch version now, but instead it’ll be full-fat later.
Yes, I have made this point on here before. I think a number of us are hoping that in time we’ll get a nice, sensible, centre-right option back. But in all honesty the realignment that happened in 2016-2019 hasn’t gone away and I do think will cause a challenge for Starmer. How much Labour are able to keep it at bay will depend on how successful they are in government.
How many Senior Tories have actually done a day's work at the coalface in the Emergency sector? Because they appear to think it's summat for the completely untrained and unskilled. And that's precisely the message it conveys to millions already struggling to do those jobs. Maybe 25 weekends on the frontline for Tory MP's would be better for community cohesion?
Not sure you can level this one at James Cleverly…
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
His two examples of civilian service are delivering things to old people or search and rescue. OK, the former is doable on minimal training, although you are taking work away from people who are currently paid to do this, increasing youth unemployment.
The latter… what on earth is an 18-year old on a weekend a month going to do in search and rescue?
Make the tea and coffee at basecamp.
In all honesty I do get the appeal of trying to force things a bit with National Community Service. I didn't do it and we do rely on volunteers for lots of things, and quite possibly many people would actually enjoy what they'd do and the idea of community volunteering would become more ingrained in society again. It could be the type of thing a government should be trying, to change a stubborn part of our culture which is letting us all down a bit, a truly positive change. So I get the appeal and that in practice it might be one of those things that once it happens people get used to and stop making a fuss about.
But getting the ball rolling, and tying it together with an alternative of military service when its been so long since we had such a thing, on top of the reactive backlash at being forced to do things, and it is certainly bold, and far riskier an option than I think they credited, when considering how many might switch their vote away in response as well as those who might switch their vote towards.
This is to be clear it's not merely that opponents have some snobbery towards the goal here.
Incentivising volunteering and military service sounds great - we probably need more of both. Strongly encouraging it sounds great. Even making it opt out or something.
Forcing? Come on.
Cleverly was probably a good choice to sacrifice to defend this plan - he's confidently defended nonsense before, which is a key ministerial skill, and he has a bit of personality and even some charm.
Cleverly's passing resemblance to Lenny Henry may also get viewers thinking that they are watching a comedy routine.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
In those countries, alternative service is a long commitment. It’s not 25 days in total.
Oh absolutely. As I said in my OP I don't agree at all with what is being proposed by Sunak. But the general tone here of Alternative Service being a wildly stupid idea is not, in my opinion, a valid one. It was only dropped in Norway in 2012 and even then it still had pretty widespread support. Done properly as a civilian alternative to military service it can work well and it is depressing that so many posters on here seem to think it is a non starter because British youth are lazy, feckless thieves.
It's a massive red flag that the NFU have jumped in and called for it to be used as agricultural slave labour.
You can't blame young people for being deeply suspicious of anything the Conservatives propose. It's a shame really - I think it's over for any form of youth volunteering scheme, whatever party proposes it.
Its an interesting point with the farmers. Their complaint has been a lack of available labour at almost any sustainable price. So the question is whether the scheme would work better if it was national service but paid by the farmers at the rates being paid to farm workers now?
I am not suggesting this would necessarily work, just asking the question.
But also we have already had posters down thread saying it woudln't work because the youths would steal from old people in care homes. Not exactly a balanced opinion.
If farmers can't get labour at affordable prices when we have record migration, then they can either invest in technology that would improve productivity or they can go out business.
Both of those are preferable to the use of forced labour at below market prices.
It’s pretty noticeable that a significant number of posters on here who lean right of centre are attacking this idea, sometimes scathingly.
It does make you wonder who they thought this would actually appeal to? It must be a very small core.
The elderly (either without grandchildren or those that think it'd do their grandchildren the world of good). Hard core nationalists. Those who like the firm smack of authoritarianism.
It WILL appeal to some. Whether it'll swing many votes, I seriously doubt.
My view is you feel the country needs a better defence, then national service COMBINED with compulsory 'Dad's Army' is the better way. Are we at war with Russia or aren't we?
The way climate change is going, a civil defence system isn't a bad idea - but it does need to be grownups.
@RobDotHutton Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.
It really is desperate stuff . Forcing 18 year olds to volunteer is investing in them .
My daughter has done two lots of volunteering that weren't entirely voluntary.
One as part of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards, and another as part of a university scholarship scheme. Both were a really positive experience for her, but I think she was a bit more diffident when she was younger and wouldn't have done the volunteering without the impetus from the schemes.
Something along those lines, but reaching larger numbers of people, could be a positive thing.
But people are so reflexively anti-Tory that they're now attacking the very idea of encouraging teenagers to volunteer.
Labour should have come up with a policy like this. Something to tap into the desire to help out and to be part of something that was shown when so many people volunteered to help the NHS at the start of the pandemic.
I know people are ridiculing this policy at the moment, but I think it's a good example of the Tories still being better at campaigning than Labour.
Encouraging youngsters (or indeed anyone) to volunteer is a good thing. Giving young people a chance to learn new skills while also benefitting the community is a good thing. Conscription introduced without any actual plan is not the same thing.
It's not conscription, though. You're reacting entirely to the name of the thing, and not what they've said about the thing itself.
Good thing casual voters won't do that then.
Expect many a 'Want to avoid being conscripted?' messages on TikTok this election.
The policy of course will not apply to anybody with a vote at this election
Indeed, but are people going to focus on that this is planned for years down the line? As they want it to sound bold the Tories aren't going to be emphasising the review part of it either. So to the extent it will be talked about at all it will be on the basis of them wanting to do X, and X actually being, say, 2029, probably won't factor in to how people react to the idea.
Well, yes, but even if it were being implemented on July 5th almost nobody with a vote would be part of it. My point is nobody getting 'avoid conscription' tiktoks is affected.
And my point was that that doesn't really matter if they get the impression they might be, or their age bracket will be.
People react to gut feeling and what they remember about proposals, not what actually is proposed. The idea it could be an imminent policy would be sufficient.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
In those countries, alternative service is a long commitment. It’s not 25 days in total.
Oh absolutely. As I said in my OP I don't agree at all with what is being proposed by Sunak. But the general tone here of Alternative Service being a wildly stupid idea is not, in my opinion, a valid one. It was only dropped in Norway in 2012 and even then it still had pretty widespread support. Done properly as a civilian alternative to military service it can work well and it is depressing that so many posters on here seem to think it is a non starter because British youth are lazy, feckless thieves.
It's a massive red flag that the NFU have jumped in and called for it to be used as agricultural slave labour.
You can't blame young people for being deeply suspicious of anything the Conservatives propose. It's a shame really - I think it's over for any form of youth volunteering scheme, whatever party proposes it.
Its an interesting point with the farmers. Their complaint has been a lack of available labour at almost any sustainable price. So the question is whether the scheme would work better if it was national service but paid by the farmers at the rates being paid to farm workers now?
I am not suggesting this would necessarily work, just asking the question.
But also we have already had posters down thread saying it woudln't work because the youths would steal from old people in care homes. Not exactly a balanced opinion.
Are all those being sent to care homes/domestic care support going to be vetted, DRB'd and supervised?
If not, would you want your granny have them help her get dressed in the morning?
And what are you going to do with all the 18 year olds who do have a criminal record?
Do what they do in other European countries that run have successfully run such schemes for many years. Again. This is not in support of the half arsed proposals from Sunak but the assertion that somehow Alternative Service is a non starter and some of the shameful reasons being advanced to support that assertion are pretty offensive.
If you are starting from a position that the youth of today are dishonest and not to be trusted looking after the elderly (as in your example) then it is no surprise they feel alienated.
However, ministers who have watched Sunak’s short-tempered frustration that nothing he has done since last summer has seemed to work see a man who has had enough. A close aide told friends that Sunak had been hit hard by the Tories’ dire polling numbers and was “emotionally finding it hard to struggle with being unpopular”. Those monitoring things in the major polling companies say the Tory position has eroded further in the four days since Sunak’s election announcement....
...All this dissent led to false rumours on Friday night that veterans such as Sir Lynton Crosby, Andy Coulson, Cameron’s communications director, and George Osborne, were set to return to revive the campaign. Crosby is in Australia, while a friend of Osborne said the suggestion was not only untrue but impossible:
“George thinks Rishi is hopeless. He’s always thought he doesn’t have a big political brain and that Rishi has made two big calls in his career — backing Brexit and backing Boris — and that those are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last decade.”
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
His two examples of civilian service are delivering things to old people or search and rescue. OK, the former is doable on minimal training, although you are taking work away from people who are currently paid to do this, increasing youth unemployment.
The latter… what on earth is an 18-year old on a weekend a month going to do in search and rescue?
Basic Fire and Rescue training is a 6 weeks course, with assessments and exams before you can sit on a pump and do a few basic tasks operationally. Then it's a 2 or 3 year probationary period (depending on how keen you are to get the modules signed off). Search and Rescue is a different discipline and not available to all firefighters. It's expensive, time consuming and physically demanding. I did S&R for a 4 year stint and it was great. What Sunak really means is getting 18 year olds to put up a few smoke detectors at weekends.
However, ministers who have watched Sunak’s short-tempered frustration that nothing he has done since last summer has seemed to work see a man who has had enough. A close aide told friends that Sunak had been hit hard by the Tories’ dire polling numbers and was “emotionally finding it hard to struggle with being unpopular”. Those monitoring things in the major polling companies say the Tory position has eroded further in the four days since Sunak’s election announcement....
...All this dissent led to false rumours on Friday night that veterans such as Sir Lynton Crosby, Andy Coulson, Cameron’s communications director, and George Osborne, were set to return to revive the campaign. Crosby is in Australia, while a friend of Osborne said the suggestion was not only untrue but impossible:
“George thinks Rishi is hopeless. He’s always thought he doesn’t have a big political brain and that Rishi has made two big calls in his career — backing Brexit and backing Boris — and that those are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last decade.”
Reading through the thread there is widespread ridicule about Sunak's National Service proposals and I genuinely do not know whether it will be popular amongst voters but it certainly has grabbed the headlines
On volunteering work I can do no more than refer to my son's commitment to the RNLI and his determination to save lives at sea. The time he devotes to it is extraordinary and involves intense training and hopefully he will soon qualify as a helm being his first command position.
He does this entirely free as do all RNLI volunteers but also he holds down a full time senior management role in IT and devotes a lot of time to his family including 3 young children
It is a calling but giving to your community without expecting payment is something that should be encouraged and welcomed
I would just say that @Casino_Royale has his views and he is entitled to make his case and the pile on him is rather disappointing
I appreciate your son's voluntary service with the RNLI, as someone who's lived near the sea for most of my life I understand how important that it. However this National Service idea will not help the RNLI one bit, in fact it will hamper them.
First of all, would your son and the rest of the RNLI like having a teenager dumped on them who does not want to be there? Second, a trainee crew member does six months of weekly training before they even get to go to RNLI college. 1 year of weekend per month would just about get a teenager to that stage, and then just on the verge of being actually useful, their year will be up and all that training has been wasted.
Isn't it better to just recruit teenagers that are interested in the role and able to commit to making this a regular voluntary role that lasts many years?
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
His two examples of civilian service are delivering things to old people or search and rescue. OK, the former is doable on minimal training, although you are taking work away from people who are currently paid to do this, increasing youth unemployment.
The latter… what on earth is an 18-year old on a weekend a month going to do in search and rescue?
Make the tea and coffee at basecamp.
In all honesty I do get the appeal of trying to force things a bit with National Community Service. I didn't do it and we do rely on volunteers for lots of things, and quite possibly many people would actually enjoy what they'd do and the idea of community volunteering would become more ingrained in society again. It could be the type of thing a government should be trying, to change a stubborn part of our culture which is letting us all down a bit, a truly positive change. So I get the appeal and that in practice it might be one of those things that once it happens people get used to and stop making a fuss about.
But getting the ball rolling, and tying it together with an alternative of military service when its been so long since we had such a thing, on top of the reactive backlash at being forced to do things, and it is certainly bold, and far riskier an option than I think they credited, when considering how many might switch their vote away in response as well as those who might switch their vote towards.
Working with volunteers is very rewarding but also very challenging. Working with 'volunteers' would be hell on earth. I've worked with people on probation and on a case-by-case basis they were sometimes good but when they were not good they just ate up time and effort to little or no advantage.
However, ministers who have watched Sunak’s short-tempered frustration that nothing he has done since last summer has seemed to work see a man who has had enough. A close aide told friends that Sunak had been hit hard by the Tories’ dire polling numbers and was “emotionally finding it hard to struggle with being unpopular”. Those monitoring things in the major polling companies say the Tory position has eroded further in the four days since Sunak’s election announcement....
...All this dissent led to false rumours on Friday night that veterans such as Sir Lynton Crosby, Andy Coulson, Cameron’s communications director, and George Osborne, were set to return to revive the campaign. Crosby is in Australia, while a friend of Osborne said the suggestion was not only untrue but impossible:
“George thinks Rishi is hopeless. He’s always thought he doesn’t have a big political brain and that Rishi has made two big calls in his career — backing Brexit and backing Boris — and that those are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last decade.”
However, ministers who have watched Sunak’s short-tempered frustration that nothing he has done since last summer has seemed to work see a man who has had enough. A close aide told friends that Sunak had been hit hard by the Tories’ dire polling numbers and was “emotionally finding it hard to struggle with being unpopular”. Those monitoring things in the major polling companies say the Tory position has eroded further in the four days since Sunak’s election announcement....
...All this dissent led to false rumours on Friday night that veterans such as Sir Lynton Crosby, Andy Coulson, Cameron’s communications director, and George Osborne, were set to return to revive the campaign. Crosby is in Australia, while a friend of Osborne said the suggestion was not only untrue but impossible:
“George thinks Rishi is hopeless. He’s always thought he doesn’t have a big political brain and that Rishi has made two big calls in his career — backing Brexit and backing Boris — and that those are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last decade.”
If I was a Tory who wanted to win the election, I might look more closely at the platform that won a majority of 80 than the Cameron/Osborne/Crosby one that got the slimmest majority in 2015, threw one away in 2010, and lost a Brexit referendum they should have won.
How many Senior Tories have actually done a day's work at the coalface in the Emergency sector? Because they appear to think it's summat for the completely untrained and unskilled. And that's precisely the message it conveys to millions already struggling to do those jobs. Maybe 25 weekends on the frontline for Tory MP's would be better for community cohesion?
Many 'unskilled' jobs are far from unskilled in practice.
Similarly, I was doing a recruitment last year for an admin role, and given the subject areas it was the kind of sensitive situation where you really would need someone with clear administrative experience, not something for newbies. Whereas a higher grade role paid quite a bit more in the same general area we'd be much more comfortable taking a chance on someone who seemed decent but lacked experience.
However, ministers who have watched Sunak’s short-tempered frustration that nothing he has done since last summer has seemed to work see a man who has had enough. A close aide told friends that Sunak had been hit hard by the Tories’ dire polling numbers and was “emotionally finding it hard to struggle with being unpopular”. Those monitoring things in the major polling companies say the Tory position has eroded further in the four days since Sunak’s election announcement....
...All this dissent led to false rumours on Friday night that veterans such as Sir Lynton Crosby, Andy Coulson, Cameron’s communications director, and George Osborne, were set to return to revive the campaign. Crosby is in Australia, while a friend of Osborne said the suggestion was not only untrue but impossible:
“George thinks Rishi is hopeless. He’s always thought he doesn’t have a big political brain and that Rishi has made two big calls in his career — backing Brexit and backing Boris — and that those are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last decade.”
I disagree with George, 'backing Brexit and backing Boris — and that those are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last decade.”.
Brexit and Boris are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last 70 years,
She’s certainly improved over the last few years .
She hasn't. She dresses like absolute toilet.
She's only 3 yrs older than me and manages to look like a 62 year old spinster in the WI.
Who on earth is advising her on her style?
Oh what a shame, intelligent woman gets judged on dress sense not on what intelligent woman said...
On the other hand, Rishi Sunak? Who chose those half mast trousers? The man dresses like an intern at an accounting office, even if the suits cost thousands, they might as well have come from George at Asda.
Admittedly, its not (just) his dress sense that renders him unfit for office. He also spouts gimmicks and futile cliches and thinks they are policies. I don´t always agree with Reeves, but in one interview she nailed the Tories pretty thoroughly.
I've seen (and participated in) a lot more pisstaking about Sunak's sartorial approach than Rachel Reeves'.
Once every 5 years you can get off your arse . Allow a none of the above option and hold it over the weekend.
Children from a young age should have voting drilled into them .
Isn't it still used in Australia? Seems like quite a good idea to me but I've never given it a lot of thought.
I hate the idea myself, just feels inherently wrong to force people to cast a ballot when they don't want to.
I do agree low turnout is a problem - and I think we could hit a record this time, after a period of recovery since 2001 - but we have to work harder to encourage voting and make our political culture such people want to vote.
The problem is that is just slogans of course. But turnout would have to drop a lot more before I could contemplate making it compulsory.
No teenager in their right mind is going to sign up for the armed forces for a year, so that leaves 700k bored, bundles of energy and hormones all volunteering for the sectors of public service that are on their arse. The "glamorous" bits, like maybe the Fire Service, RNLI, NHS and Police all don't have enough staff to do the jobs they're supposed to do, let alone keep unpaid volunteers meaningfully busy. They'll just get in the way. If it was full on National Service in the armed forces, then it's still a wank idea, but would make more sense than this half arsed civic duty bollocks. The Tories have spent 14 years destroying the country and now want the kids to fix it for free. How can anyone sane vote Tory? You want this lot back in again?
I don't agree with this scheme, with its implementation or its timing. But it is worth pointing out that the system of Alternative Service has been successfully used in many European Countries for many years. Seven Countries still use it and it was only dropped in France and Norway in the last couple of decades. It can be a very successful system if handled properly. But of course with the current Tory administration, that is where the problem lies. No one trusts them to actually do it properly.
It's very un-British, Richard.
Not sure how you can say that given it was very British only a few decades ago.
Conscription here ended 64 years ago. Six and a half is “several”, not “a few”.
So ignoring the semanatics, is it your proposal that somehow we were 'not British' 70 years ago? That would be an interesting assertion.
Comments
Interesting projection. Reform get into Westminster via their TUV tie in!
And this is being trumpeted as 'national service'. We all know what that means because it existed in the 1950s. If it actually isn't this but giving all 18 and 19 year olds a lovely slice of cake, why don't they say that? It's because implausibly, they think there is yet more mileage in shafting the young, of extracting a bit more from they young to give to the old.
I'm not a flakey Tory. I'm not a Tory at all. I'm just a voter for whom up until now the Conservative Party has been the best way of keeping the lunacy of the left at bay. But the Conservative Party is a) clearly not keeping the left at bay (i.e. state spending, immigration and wokery are rising anf rising) and b) introducing all sorts of unnecessary bloody awful of their own.
I also felt this way over the cancellation of HS2, but then Labour confirmed they'd do it too.
What you describe is a stepping stone, not the intended destination.
I am not suggesting this would necessarily work, just asking the question.
But also we have already had posters down thread saying it woudln't work because the youths would steal from old people in care homes. Not exactly a balanced opinion.
Sane with 16/17 votes - anyone voting now gets no benefit
Hence both are only relevant on absolute feeling of right/wrong
Forcing? Come on.
Cleverly was probably a good choice to sacrifice to defend this plan - he's confidently defended nonsense before, which is a key ministerial skill, and he has a bit of personality and even some charm.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨
Labour lead by twenty-two points in our poll for the Mail on Sunday.
Con 23% (-)
Lab 45% (-)
Lib Dem 9% (-1)
Reform 10% (-2)
SNP 3% (-)
Green 6% (+1)
Other 3% (-)
Fieldwork: 23rd-25th May 2024
Sample: 1,517 GB adults
(Changes from 17th-20th May 2024)
May be trouble ahead with Wokesters over this valuable life lesson mind..
The compulsory bit is embarrassing because it does promote the idea that British youth are feckless and need to be forced to spend some weekends freezing on Dartmoor being drilled or cleaning up dog mess to be taught what's right.
It's pandering to the subsection of pensioners who having been one of the luckiest generations in history partake in selfish sneering and pursuing policies to actively make their grandkids' generation's lives harder.
And it's the compulsory bit that creates the problems. If the sanction for not joining up is a fine, then that's basically a charter for rich kids to get out of it while those for whom it is actually an inconvenience have to. What about 18-year-olds who work full-time to support the household? Or who are carers - either to older relatives or kids? Can they opt out - who will pay for those hours of care if they can't?
We're a much larger, more disparate country than the Scandinavian ones with a much inferior social safety net - so it's just far more difficult to design a one-size fits all form of compulsory service, rather than providing incentives for volunteering.
How are we policing both participation and behaviour? The majority will behave in exemplary fashion but just like in school there will be those who act up.
Anyway, the idea of promoting civic service - fine. The problem with the policy is it seems to be back of a fag packet stuff aimed at Reform-voting pensioners rather than designed for those who'll actually participate.
Opportunity. Community. Security.
This is why I would introduce a bold new model of National Service 👇
Close the universities and sixth forms, send the young people to work in the fields and mines!
On the other hand, Rishi Sunak? Who chose those half mast trousers? The man dresses like an intern at an accounting office, even if the suits cost thousands, they might as well have come from George at Asda.
Admittedly, its not (just) his dress sense that renders him unfit for office. He also spouts gimmicks and futile cliches and thinks they are policies. I don´t always agree with Reeves, but in one interview she nailed the Tories pretty thoroughly.
I'd suspect its one of those things a targeted focus group might like until they know who proposed it.
It's very strange situation.
From a betting perspective, on turnout (in 2019 was 67%) I'm waiting for some appealing odds in the 52 - 58% range. Disillusionment levels are such that even that range may prove too high.
It all sounds a bit Maoist Cultural Revolution doesn't it?
Younger people lose hope and just live for today . Who can blame them .
Those who had free tuition , maintenance grants , affordable housing , to be blunt need to stfu .
This group also seem to be the happiest in approving of Sunaks NS policy . So that just adds to my annoyance .
If they all made a pact not to bother, they'd save on all the hassle.
Expect many a 'Want to avoid being conscripted?' messages on TikTok this election.
The Tories won’t win this election, but Starmer will end up introducing this Scandi style national service anyway, because all of Europe will. So that sort of debate is a red herring.
However, when the Tories (or their replacements) come back, it’ll be Boris style Tories on steroids.
The problem is that the groups I describe in paragraph one still haven’t come to terms with what the Brexit vote was really about, and 5-10 years of Starmer in tight economic conditions won’t make it go away.
I fear for this country, because in the end those voters will get what they want. We could have given them a light touch version now, but instead it’ll be full-fat later.
I always had you down as a fine upsteading Conservative, so am a bit surprised.
Do you send you daughters there as well?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahgjEjJkZks
One things that stands out in these proposals is that the proposers have no understanding of front line services whether armed forces or Social Care and the skills and training, not to mention vetting and DRB required. They haven't a clue about what real working class people need to do.
But that is the same interview where he says
"We have a growing number of young people in this country who do not subscribe to British values... We see them on the streets of London every Saturday" -
@Nigel_Farage
"Are we talking about Muslims here?" -
@TrevorPTweets
"We are" -
@Nigel_Farage
Sky's
@TrevorPTweets asks @Nigel_Farage
if "the Reform platform for this election is every problem you face is down to immigrants and, in particular, to Muslims".
@Nigel_Farage
rejects official data showing migration from certain non-EU countries has soared since Brexit, saying it's not a consequence of Brexit.
I know he is controversial but his comments on Muslims was totally unacceptable
It WILL appeal to some. Whether it'll swing many votes, I seriously doubt.
My view is you feel the country needs a better defence, then national service COMBINED with compulsory 'Dad's Army' is the better way. Are we at war with Russia or aren't we?
I presume someone is working very hard to update the Downfall meme. I'll let Taz know when it's up - they love that kind of political banter.
The latter… what on earth is an 18-year old on a weekend a month going to do in search and rescue?
Once every 5 years you can get off your arse . Allow a none of the above option and hold it over the weekend.
Children from a young age should have voting drilled into them .
Because they appear to think it's summat for the completely untrained and unskilled.
And that's precisely the message it conveys to millions already struggling to do those jobs.
Maybe 25 weekends on the frontline for Tory MP's would be better for community cohesion?
@J_D_89
Lots of issues based polling is like asking "do you like ice cream?" "Do you like sausages?" "Do you like tea?", getting positive answers for them all, then serving them all on the same pizza
A policy that could have been thought up by people coming from money, who have no clue what it’s like to live precariously from month to month or week to week.
Even if they do get elected, I boldly predict that this bold new model has about as much chance of getting off the ground as a flight to Rwanda.
But ... insurance, security, supervision ... Medics, chemists, and so on were very much kept in training as far as poss. And it's not as if Miss Roberts was being missed from the frontline.
Same argument with votes for 16/17 being a vote winner with the youth. Why? They already wouldn't benefit.
Any vote on either is strictly on right/wrong. Indeed, 18 to 25 less likely to be anti than young ish mums and dads 25 to 40
If not, would you want your granny have them help her get dressed in the morning?
And what are you going to do with all the 18 year olds who do have a criminal record?
Sad example, involving someone with huge experience: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cumbria-66762308
(...and would Rishi not have had time to iron his collar?)
In all honesty I do get the appeal of trying to force things a bit with National Community Service. I didn't do it and we do rely on volunteers for lots of things, and quite possibly many people would actually enjoy what they'd do and the idea of community volunteering would become more ingrained in society again. It could be the type of thing a government should be trying, to change a stubborn part of our culture which is letting us all down a bit, a truly positive change. So I get the appeal and that in practice it might be one of those things that once it happens people get used to and stop making a fuss about.
But getting the ball rolling, and tying it together with an alternative of military service when its been so long since we had such a thing, on top of the reactive backlash at being forced to do things, and it is certainly bold, and far riskier an option than I think they credited, when considering how many might switch their vote away in response as well as those who might switch their vote towards.
This is to be clear it's not merely that opponents have some snobbery towards the goal here.
Both of those are preferable to the use of forced labour at below market prices.
People react to gut feeling and what they remember about proposals, not what actually is proposed. The idea it could be an imminent policy would be sufficient.
If you are starting from a position that the youth of today are dishonest and not to be trusted looking after the elderly (as in your example) then it is no surprise they feel alienated.
However, ministers who have watched Sunak’s short-tempered frustration that nothing he has done since last summer has seemed to work see a man who has had enough. A close aide told friends that Sunak had been hit hard by the Tories’ dire polling numbers and was “emotionally finding it hard to struggle with being unpopular”. Those monitoring things in the major polling companies say the Tory position has eroded further in the four days since Sunak’s election announcement....
...All this dissent led to false rumours on Friday night that veterans such as Sir Lynton Crosby, Andy Coulson, Cameron’s communications director, and George Osborne, were set to return to revive the campaign. Crosby is in Australia, while a friend of Osborne said the suggestion was not only untrue but impossible:
“George thinks Rishi is hopeless. He’s always thought he doesn’t have a big political brain and that Rishi has made two big calls in his career — backing Brexit and backing Boris — and that those are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last decade.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/why-sergeant-major-sunak-went-over-the-top-against-his-teams-advice-lzgqfkgxt
Search and Rescue is a different discipline and not available to all firefighters. It's expensive, time consuming and physically demanding. I did S&R for a 4 year stint and it was great.
What Sunak really means is getting 18 year olds to put up a few smoke detectors at weekends.
First of all, would your son and the rest of the RNLI like having a teenager dumped on them who does not want to be there? Second, a trainee crew member does six months of weekly training before they even get to go to RNLI college. 1 year of weekend per month would just about get a teenager to that stage, and then just on the verge of being actually useful, their year will be up and all that training has been wasted.
Isn't it better to just recruit teenagers that are interested in the role and able to commit to making this a regular voluntary role that lasts many years?
Similarly, I was doing a recruitment last year for an admin role, and given the subject areas it was the kind of sensitive situation where you really would need someone with clear administrative experience, not something for newbies. Whereas a higher grade role paid quite a bit more in the same general area we'd be much more comfortable taking a chance on someone who seemed decent but lacked experience.
Brexit and Boris are the two most catastrophic things to happen to this country in the last 70 years,
I do agree low turnout is a problem - and I think we could hit a record this time, after a period of recovery since 2001 - but we have to work harder to encourage voting and make our political culture such people want to vote.
The problem is that is just slogans of course. But turnout would have to drop a lot more before I could contemplate making it compulsory.