Conservatives plan to bring back mandatory national service

[muriel_volestrangler]

Fuck me, I didn't see this coming.

It said 18-year-olds would have a choice of either joining the military full-time, or volunteering one weekend every month carrying out a community service.
...
The cost is expected to be around £2.5bn per year.

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

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

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpddxy9r4mdo

I think they just said "up to 30,000" in the armed forces on TV news, which would be about 1 in 20. So basically this would be enforced volunteering.

[Emrys]

1. I was just looking at posting about this,

then in the end shrugged my shoulders because I was pretty speechless.

I checked out the Mail (where Sunak's - almost certainly ghostwritten - op ed about it appeared). There were all of four comments responding to it when I started writing this reply - two thinking it was bonkers, and two (who looked suspiciously robotic) giving it the "Yay!" - and now there's forty and climbing. I wouldn't say it's being greeted with boundless enthusiasm, responses ranging from "but Rishi's kids will be in the USA won't they? He is allegedly moving there straight after the election." to "I’m convinced they’re trying their hardest to lose the election. The WEF must have decided it’s Labour’s turn to pretend to run the country for a while." with a few contributions from Colonel Blimp types thrown in.

The Telegraph wrote a predictably stuffy low-key puff piece about it. In the context of what's happened since Sunak named the date, I suppose it's not the craziest idea as an election-winner.

The Spectator was fairly even-handed, not seeing it as necessarily a bad idea in itself, but also as a tactic to try to put Labour on the back foot in a debate about its newfound enthusiasm for national pride/jingoism and the Union Flag. I'd have read more, but then I realized the article was by Katy Balls, and we all have our limits.

Sky News was the only outlet I checked that bothered to get a quote from Labour, which made its article's grand finale: "Responding, a Labour Party spokesperson said the announcement was 'desperate' adding: 'This is not a plan - it's a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.'"

I have an inkling that this may be an electoral "dead cat" - something that will probably never happen (unless Starmer suddenly thinks it's a great idea and proposes to double Sunak's proposed length of service, which is depressingly less unlikely than it should be), but will keep tongues wagging and feathers ruffled, and maybe distract briefly from what a disaster the Tories have been in office and how unparodiably atrocious their campaign launch has been.

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. Bit of backtracking on how compulsory it would be already

Sunak's Mail article seemed pretty clear:

All 18-year-olds will do this new National Service, whatever their background and wherever they live in the UK. It will not, though, be a one-size-fits-all programme. Young people will be able to choose between 25 days of volunteering – equivalent to one weekend every month – serving as a lifeguard for the RNLI, becoming a first aider or many other options.

Those who choose to do military service, and pass the test, will be able to take a 12-month, full-time placement in our Armed Forces.
...
To those who complain that making it mandatory is unreasonable, I say: citizenship brings with it obligations as well as rights. Being British is about more than just the queue you join at passport control.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13460055/prime-minister-rishi-sunak-plan-happy-daughters-national-service.html

But what if they just don't do it?

Talking to Sky News's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, Home Secretary James Cleverly said: "There's going to be no criminal sanctions, nobody's going to jail over this."

https://news.sky.com/story/refusing-mandatory-national-service-wont-lead-to-prison-home-secretary-says-after-tory-policy-launch-13143272

[Emrys]

3. I guess they might use the stick of restricting access to benefits

"citizenship brings with it obligations as well as rights" - Jesus, these people have no sense of seeing themselves as others see them.

Sunak and his cronies have systematically raided the national coffers, until recently were hobnobbing gleefully with the Russians to the national detriment, not to mention sabotaging all these young people's options in life by withdrawing from the EU in the most destructive way possible. If this election goes as badly for Sunak as it looks like it might, he'll just hotfoot it to the US to enjoy his and his wife's millions, augmented by his prime minister's pension.

Obligations for thee, not for me, apparently.