Bring back National Service., We can still influence the World. Options

[On the edge]

Times of heightened international tension often bring calls to strengthen our defensive military capability, during the debate, the question of national service often crops up. That also ends up as a polarised discussion.

Nonetheless, inspire of the downside, national service did bring undoubted benefits to the individuals concerned and to society in general. That is, it quickly gave conscripts independence, the ability to live in a community and a sense of discipline. Clearly there are exceptions! For society, we lost the 'yob fringe' and we had almost self disciplined communities.

So, if we took away the military weapons bit, what's wrong with a compulsory pre further education national service scheme? We'd end up with a permanent resource that could immediately be sent to help in national emergencies, such as flooding, high winds etc. etc. Similarly, of course, we'd be able to send real practical aid overseas, where needed.

So, we'd have very real and lasting influence abroad and with the people. What influence that would be. 'The British only ever come to help'.

[spartacus]

A National Civil Projects Service yes, for anyone over 18 not in full time employment and apprenticeship, or further education.
But a Military National Service..............nope!!


The idea does have possibilities however so I'm not dismissing it completely..... For example people who may have gone to university to gain degrees in useless subjects (Modern History, American Studies, Economics and the like) often go on to earn a parasitic living in industry as "Analysts". Then they become Tory MPs.

They could be re-trained as road sweepers or verge weeders. Those who pass careful screening might be Crossing Patrol Lollipop persons. Those clearly dedicated to public service could be re-trained as soup kitchen cooks and food bank storepersons.

[Mr Brown]

A National Civil Projects Service yes, for anyone over 18 not in full time employment and apprenticeship, or further education.
But a Military National Service..............nope!!


The idea does have possibilities however so I'm not dismissing it completely..... For example people who may have gone to university to gain degrees in useless subjects (Modern History, American Studies, Economics and the like) often go on to earn a parasitic living in industry as "Analysts". Then they become Tory MPs.

They could be re-trained as road sweepers or verge weeders. Those who pass careful screening might be Crossing Patrol Lollipop persons. Those clearly dedicated to public service could be re-trained as soup kitchen cooks and food bank storepersons.

I don't think On The Edge was suggesting military national service! You've extended it and if we cut the humorous examples, it does have merit. Some might suggest directed labour but there is an American example introduced by FDR in his heyday.

[On the edge]

It also strikes me that whatever the rights and wrongs, there is a pool of labour migrating in to Europe. I wonder what would actually happen, if instead of us simply wringing our hands, couldn't shape them into a resource to do things. A military type management approach would work here. i.e. You are wanting to escape persecution and you want to earn your living, then fine, we'll take you places where they need your help and we'll help you do it.

[spartacus]

You mean help them to go back to where they came from?

[On the edge]

You mean help them to go back to where they came from?

In part, yes. Come back and make your country safe and able to provide you with a sustainable lifestyle.

[Andy Capp]

The problem is we already have people here who are back where they come from. Working for pay is fine but you then have the contentiousness issue of human rights abuse and you effectively devalue low skill tasks and quite possibly reduce the quality of the work too.

I see a requirement for national service as an admission the education system has failed.

[On the edge]

The problem is we already have people here who are back where they come from. Working for pay is fine but you then have the contentiousness issue of human rights abuse and you effectively devalue low skill tasks and quite possibly reduce the quality of the work too.

I see a requirement for national service as an admission the education system has failed.

In a response to Sparty, I mixed the two issues. The idea of leading the migrants back and settling them down is a short term expedient in an attempt to alleviate the present emergency. Nothing more.

However, in the UK, yes, I'd agree that the need is an admission our educational system has failed. It has without a doubt, demonstrable in our position in international comparators. That measures subject standards, but worse for us is the ongoing complaint from UK business management that our youngsters are not 'educated fit for employment'. Whilst I might rail against the loss of UK headquarters type strategic and design jobs where we have let foreign competition take over our business, I can have some sympathy because British managements clearly don't have access to the right prospective staff.

The idea that it is somehow a human rights abuse to expect people wanting resource to exist some sort of payback is an old one which doesn't really make sense. Arguably, it's a far worse human rights abuse to provide someone with a means of existence, without them doing anything at all in return. You might as well keep a dog, it's degrading and demeaning to do that. The quality and value of the work people do is really down to effective and good management.

The Mayor of a Surrey town back in the 1930s, on his own initiative started a self help scheme which paid local unemployed people roughly the same (in reality a shilling or do less) than the money they could be given 'by the parish'. They designed and built the Town's open air pool - which is still going today. All the money was collected locally, as they fund raised too.

I've known a fair number of people who had lost their jobs for one reason or another. Very few didn't want the dignity and self respect any type of work gave them.

[Andy Capp]

The idea that it is somehow a human rights abuse to expect people wanting resource to exist some sort of payback is an old one which doesn't really make sense. Arguably, it's a far worse human rights abuse to provide someone with a means of existence, without them doing anything at all in return.

Expecting people to work for their money is sound in principle, but in the implementation you will have moments where people will be compelled to work in situations that are unsuitable.

You might as well keep a dog, it's degrading and demeaning to do that. The quality and value of the work people do is really down to effective and good management.

I assume that the best managers are well paid in commercial environments, so I presume it is safe to say the management won't be the cream.

I've known a fair number of people who had lost their jobs for one reason or another. Very few didn't want the dignity and self respect any type of work gave them.

That is true, but it can hinder getting another decent job if you are committed in anyway to something else.

[motormad]

bring back national service...

and the survey saaaaaaaays....

No.

[Exhausted]

National Service as it was would not work at all today. Modern young people are, unlike the conscripts of the fifties, well aware of their rights and what discipline can be forced upon them. There would be little tolerance I suspect, of some bullying NCO shouting into their face. Some might enjoy it, especially those that were offered trade jobs for a couple of years in the modern technological fighting forces but I suspect the service chiefs would not want the training of their regulars diluted by short term persons with a fairly low interest in what they were doing.
What about the girls, do they get a share of a national service.
We don't need to defend our shores against an enemy invader so people would not see it as a priority joining a home guard.
Motormad is right. It's No from all directions.

[On the edge]

From the comments already made,which are illuminating I think linking it with the old 'get some in' National Service was a mistake. I've had opportunities to mention the basic concept to a few groups of year 11-13 students who generally thought it quite a good idea. In fact, they saw it as a mandatory gap year! Several thought that wiykd be great, because they came from backgrounds where their families wouldn't be able to support such a luxury. Yes, military disiplines, old style, wouldn't be appreciated, but most of those I spoke to had experience normal commercial disiplines in Saturday jobs and the like. Ironically, that is seen as acceptable, because they are treated as adult. So perhaps the elitist gap year for all?

[Exhausted]

I've had opportunities to mention the basic concept to a few groups of year 11-13 students who generally thought it quite a good idea. In fact, they saw it as a mandatory gap year!

I suspect that at the age of National Service, they might take a different view. We could perhaps apply some sort of community service at the age of seventeen for a year. That would be away from home team working and living in hostel accommodation. Cost a fortune to set that up though but could be financed by the group work undertaken. Youths from Birmingham in Newbury and Newbury youths in Leeds. Fed and clothed and paid a wage. You get the story.

[On the edge]

I suspect that at the age of National Service, they might take a different view. We could perhaps apply some sort of community service at the age of seventeen for a year. That would be away from home team working and living in hostel accommodation. Cost a fortune to set that up though but could be financed by the group work undertaken. Youths from Birmingham in Newbury and Newbury youths in Leeds. Fed and clothed and paid a wage. You get the story.

Or indeed overseas, financed via our aid budget....