Published on 12, July, 2020
I see this old chestnut has come to the fore again. I can see problems with it.
Does the military want all these people for a year or so and what will they do with them?
If people are made to volunteer for things like life boats, special constables and library assistants, will it mean that the training for such things will outlast the service time?
Will real jobs be at risk because people are volunteering?
If theres no sanctions how will they make people do it?
Will it mean that those currently on benefits will be sanctioned for not "doing their bit"?
Will this idea have mission creep? If not enough people volunteer, will some kind of sanction be imposed?
It all sounds desperate to me, like a political party flailing about to find vote winning policies that are ill thought out.
It won't come in until 2029 anyway, just in time for another election, hmmm?
In support of National Service, David Cameron said it would be good for people to put something back into their communities. I doubt he even understands what 'community' means. Rich people trying to convince poor people to vote against their own interests. The same old tale.
If people volunteer down the non military route, will there be enough places for them and won't the training and skills needed take longer than a year to acquire? It's being proposed that the RNLI and search and rescue teams should take these conscripts, oh, sorry volunteers, how many will live by the sea or the Thames? How many will live near mountains or moorland? How many will have the equipment such as decent boots, waterproofs etc to be able to even start on such tasks? How many will be casualties themselves and need rescuing?
I suggested the various options on the assumption that there would be opportunities in urban areas, and there would be individuals in coastal areas, remote hillsides etc. for whom other options would work. If it were compulsory, I assume that the necessary kit and uniforms, safety gear etc. would be provided by the agency ... we don't expect people joining the army to buy their own uniforms and kit (apart from officers' dress uniforms etc.)
Another alternative would be to actually enforce the current requirement that young people under 18 should either be employed and getting job-based training, or in education, either school or FE college, and actually learning useful skills. At present we have a cohort of under-educated, un-motivated and effectively unemployable individuals who are a burden on the welfare state. (Mind you, they do keep social workers and other public service workers in our jobs, so I shouldn't complain!)