I have to disagree with Individual regarding national service.
Here and in the US, when national service was tried, it turned out to be an incredibly socially divisive policy.
Any party that suggested it in Australia would become defined by that particular policy and any other policy idea, no matter how sensible it might be, would be drowned out in the noise.
I spent 20 years in the RAAF, so if anything I love the military life, so I'm certainly not against that part of it, but you can't force people to put on a uniform.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

lol talking about trains
looks like clive palmer is going to buy q'rail
when the nats win..

[heck hope they price ..driver savings..into the sale price
the savings of drivers wages..as extra bonus
[worth billions]..on the price*

not like when anna blight sold off state forrest
worth 60 billion as real-estate

but..as state forrest
to a mate..for a measly 800 million

lest we forget the new power and water berorockrats
soon..who knows..[the state odious debt..blows out to 75 billion]

put the lot of em into jail
by the by..how can the qld upper house
vote itself out of the qld constitution..without a peoples say?

who our leaders not talking about
restoring qld govt to that constituted..in its foundation documents

crimanals the lot of em

Yes driver savings, the miners have already got 150 mill; worth of driverless trucks. On the national debt no doubt.

Put public servants on the unemployment list,
579,
Stop being such a moron. Cutting excessive pay is not putting people into unemployment. I really wish you'd stop coming back with such nonsensical quips.
Antonyve,
I have never advocated Military Service. I'm talking national service. You know the one that no-one's tried yet, the one without uniforms. The one where the unemployed get some otherwise unavailable practical training & exposure to responsibility. All at far less cost to the rest of us.
Throw into this a flat tax & improvement will be evident in a very short time.
Don't say it won't work just because our economic experts say so. Of course they have to talk it down because they'd have to show some competence which would stump them from day 1.

Let them have their job, just pay peanuts. That is something butch would say. And what would this cost cutting achieve.
Besides forcing people out of houses they can not afford.
Where are you going to find these unemployed for your national service.
Aha the public servants again.
Leave those sorts of thoughts for someone else.

579,
Do you really approve of Public servants in charge of a 7000 strong community to get paid $6000 p/fn plus a tonne of other benefits ?
Do you think that cutting them back to $3000 p/fn would be paying peanuts ?