Parents may be fined if their adult children fail to do their National Service when they turn 18, a minister suggested today.
In response to Rishi Sunak’s election plan to force teenagers to serve a year in the military or perform unpaid weekend community labour, Anne-Marie Trevelyan declined to rule out financial penalties.
The proposition was made public and has since sparked the first significant controversy of the upcoming general election campaign.
The Foreign Office Minister, Ms Trevelyan, stated that a Royal Commission would outline many of the scheme’s specifics and declined to rule out penalising parents whose adult offspring declined to participate.
She also suggested that carers and young members of the Royal family would be expected to take part.
However, criticism of the scheme has increased. Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer branded it a ‘teenage Dad’s Army’ in a speech today.
Perhaps the most startling critique came from a second senior minister,ister who said they had been taken by surprise by the plan.
Writing on social media, Steve Baker, the Northern Ireland Minister, suggested had it been a government policy, he would have had a say because of the particular sensitives around Northern Ireland.
He said: ‘Government policy would have been developed by ministers on the advice of officials and collectively agreed. I would have had a say on behalf of NI.
‘But this proposal was developed by a political adviser or advisers and sprung on candidates, some of whom are relevant ministers.’
According to the manifesto, all 18-year-olds would serve one year in the armed forces in a paid position or dedicate one weekend a month to volunteer work in the community.
Writing for MailOnline today Ms Trevelyan said that those volunteering for the military would not be sent to fight, and that the scheme would teach practical and soft skills ‘which cannot be taught in the classroom or the lecture theatre’.
However, opponents from both political parties have written off the proposals as nonsensical, and prominent military personnel have voiced doubts about their viability and recommended that the funds would be better used for investments in the armed forces.
Asked about whether young royals would be made to take part, or teenagers with caring responsibilities, Ms Trevelyan told Sky News it would be down to a Royal Commission to decide the scope.
The return of National Service is a good idea since it helps young people mature into men and women and instils in them values of discipline and respect. However, it should not be implemented carelessly, as many politicians—Sir Keir Starmer in particular—do.
There are so many young people out of work and not looking for work, this will help address that, with youngsters getting new experiences, a career and new friendships.
This should be a compulsory measure by our government, not a fine measure that parents have to fork out for. Eighteen-year-olds are neither kids nor adults, they are the inbetweeners, and if they feel they don’t want to do National Service, then they should remain in education until they’re twenty-five. There would be less unemployment for start.
There should be no provisions stating that your child would be immediately disqualified if they attend private school or if they have a parent or parents named Portia or Xander. This should apply to everyone!
The problem that is, this has not been thought out well. National Service, is great! However, there aren’t enough housing, weaponry or training facilities available for our present soldiers, let alone new ones.
THE MONTHLY MOSQUITO 