Dubstepforum.com

Original Gangster Garethom Getting Guap wrote: Dear Mr Hollobone,

I was recently introduced to the bill you are putting before Parliament suggesting that the government “Provide a system of national service for young persons; and for connected purposes.” “Young persons” seems to be defined as 18-26.

As a 23 year old, this is something that I would be affected by, so I have a few questions. I note that there will be residential elements to the scheme, and that participants will be paid the national adult minimum wage. Do you have any idea how I am supposed to successfully make my mortgage repayments, which was offered to us based on my current salary of £xxxxx per year, coupled with my girlfriend’s salary of £xxxxx per year? Based on a 37.5 hour week, my “salary” during my year of national service would be approximately £12,300. I suppose that I should full well expect to have my house repossessed on the basis of “national service”.

With further regards to work, I currently work for a large IT company in a managerial role. This is something I have worked long and hard since I joined the company five years ago, and have risen through the ranks on the back of this. How do you see my employer reacting when I am suddenly forced to leave work for a year? Are you seriously of the belief that nothing will have changed upon my completion of national service, and that they would welcome back into the job they have kept open purely for me?

As a representative of the party that claims to be for working people, I can’t make this add up. This national service is meant to be to the benefit of society (and, by extension, to me), yet it would see my lose my house and my job, all for the pleasure of a year on adult minimum wage. Yes, an extra 10% tax allowance would be nice, unfortunately, I wouldn’t have a job to go back to.

I haven’t yet got onto any association with the military.

Coming from a family that had two grandfathers involved in World War II as marines, a father that served for many years in the Navy and a brother who is currently serving in the Navy, having recently returned from service in Afghanistan, I can appreciate the hard work and values of the military. However, I also recognise that they all entered into the military voluntarily, as I believe any job should be entered into.

It is not unheard of in the modern age for people to morally object to military action, which is fully understandable when you see the impact that war has, largely on innocent civilian populations. To force people into not only compliance, but active participation in the military is frankly abhorrent. The work of the paid, professional members of the armed forces, as well as those in social work, elderly and disabled care, overseas development or the National Health Service would be massively undervalued by an influx of cheap, unskilled workers, that may have a larger negative impact than you may believe.

On the whole, I think the idea is ludicrous, and you severely underestimate the contribution 18-26 year olds are already making to society. The sceptic in me might believe that you are pandering to the misguided public perception that the youth of Britain are an unruly, ill-disciplined bunch of miscreants, in the hope of some extra votes and attention, but I’m sure an experienced politician of your stature would not need to sink to those depths to maintain his public image.

I look forward to a generic, non-committal response from an assistant, secretary or auto-reply, but hope that you can appreciate my concerns and offer a more detailed response with at least some answers to my questions from you, Mr. Hollobone.

Sincerely,
Gareth Thomas

Phillip Hollobone MP wrote:Thank you Gareth for your e-mail.

The details of the Bill can be found here:

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/201 ... rvice.html

The Bill may well not even be debated tomorrow, due to lack of Parliamentary time and for the same reason it certainly won’t become law.

I have included responses below.

I hope this is helpful.

Best wishes,

Philip


Philip Hollobone MP
Member of Parliament for the Kettering Constituency
House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA
Tels: 01536 414715 / 020 7219 8373 / 07979 850126
E-mail: philip.hollobone.mp@parliament.uk

Phillip Hollobone MP wrote:If this scheme were introduced then it would not involve all 18-26 year olds from day one for the reasons you state. You would therefore be not included. It would start for 18 year olds, then 18-19s, then 18-20s etc.

Phillip Hollobone MP wrote:The Bill involves no compulsory military service and provides for a wide range of non-military alternatives.

John Hemming MP wrote:I wouldn't take notice of Phillip Hollobone's bills. They won't go anywhere.

m8son wrote:lol did you really think they would lift you out of work and put you in the army?

m8son wrote:lol did you really think they would lift you out of work and put you in the army? I think it's good they debate this kind of thing in parliament, through looking at bad ideas good ideas may surface, would you rather they never consider any other options?

They do a similar thing in Norway i believe, iirc if my old housemate had stayed in Norway he would of had to do a year in the army or similar (harkat?), doesn't seem too much of a problem for them.

I mean we are 'conscripted' into school with no pay

i don't see how a year performing some menial job for at least some pay which would also be a form or education is much worse tbh.

m8son wrote:Do you really think whoever thought it up did not think of the problem with dragging people out of work to do it? I know the guy doesn't share your views but give him some credit he didn't just magically become an MP.

m8son wrote:Yeah of course i wouldn't want to come out of a chemistry degree into minimum wage menial work which is why if the law was passed i would, like everyone, have done my year of service before going to uni.

m8son wrote:Would you still have a problem with it if it said people will have to carry out a year in service immediately after compulsory education?

m8son wrote:What about if a law was passed that said everyone has to stay in education until 19? Would you have a problem with that?

m8son wrote:he didn't just magically become an MP.

Aspects of Iain Duncan Smith's CV, relating to his education, are inaccurate and misleading, an investigation by BBC Newsnight reveals.

The investigation into the Conservative Party leader's education and early career - broadcast at 10.30pm on BBC TWO last night (Wednesday 18 December 2002) - was presented by Michael Crick, author of the best-selling biography of Jeffrey Archer.

If any of the following material is used BBC Newsnight must be credited.

The University of Perugia

Iain Duncan Smith's biography on the Conservative Party website, his entry in Who's Who, and various other places, state that he went to the Universita di Perugia in Italy.

This is not true: his office now admit that he went to the Universita per Stranieri, which is also in Perugia.

The Universita per Stranieri - or University for Foreigners - was founded in 1921 and is a totally separate institution to the medieval Universita di Perugia, founded by the Pope in 1308.

Although the Universita per Stranieri is a respected language school, it did not grant degrees when he studied there in 1973, although some students attained diplomas.

Mr Duncan Smith's office has now admitted to Newsnight that he didn't get any qualifications in Perugia or even finish his exams.