Conscription Motion – Epic Fail

Following stories in both The Age and The Australian saying the YL’s support Soviet-Era Conscripted Workers, you’d think that there’d be at least some support for this motion. You know, that before trashing the YL’s reputation in the media, and doing a lot to destroy the great work other Young Liberals and Liberal Students are doing in making us seem relevant to young people (alcopop taxes, VSU, net censorship etc) while not compromising our principles, you’d think that Noel would at least ensure there’d be some support for his motion by Young Liberals. At least some. Rather elementary politics you would think.

Anyway. The time comes for the motion to be debated. Noel asks for a mover…

*dead silence*


Not one. Every single  voting delegate from every single state delegation was against this ridiculously stupid motion.

The motion lapsed and went promptly into the dustbin of history where it belongs.

It’s good to know that the Young Liberal Movement believes in freedom.

UPDATE: I was just reading the Maiden Speech (to Americans: first parliamentary speech of an elected official where you set out your core beliefs and values) of Alistair Coe MLA, a member of the Australian Capital Territory Parliament.

I have always known that Alistair is one of the most talented elected officials the Libs have – indeed I can think of no other official under the age of 30 that even comes close to matching his intellect or passion for true Liberal values.  Considering Fed YL Council is being held in the ACT, and Alistair was the former Vice-President of the Federal Young Liberal Movement, this section – where he speaks of his own service experiences – very much stood out:

The tradition that these organisations represent is the active involvement of individuals to make their communities better. They do not do so by coercive legislation, physical force, or even expectation, but they volunteer their energies and resources out of their sense of duty.

Indeed. It’s only a pity we still have people on the Liberal Party who choose to ignore such wisdom.

UPDATE 2: You have to scroll down to page 24 to find Alistair’s speech. Sorry.

Update 3: Terje over at the Australian Libertarian Soceity Blog makes the acute observation that “ironically low cost work is illegal, a position supported by the grown up Liberals and the ALP.”



14 Responses to “Conscription Motion – Epic Fail”

  1. Leo Perkins Says:

    Tim, I much really agree. It’s a shame that some people in the YL body forget the moral ground that we stand on, and in an effort to grab a headline they have copied a Young Labor motion that they discarded themselves.

    While I have no problem with national service on voluntary basis, forcing people to do national service only negates the benefit that would be achieved by any service.

    If you want to build a nation with national service it should be done by making it easy for people to do, both after high-school and in the later grades of high-school.

  2. jakezanoni Says:

    I assume (and I know you can in the ALSF and ACT YL’s) that the Federal President can move a policy motion.

    I think if Noel was going to generate publicity over this motion (and I’m not sure who is to blame for the Australian article implying that it was already policy), then he could at least have had the guts and intellectual courage to get up there and speak to it.

    Will there be an article about how the motion was dead before it got to conference? I very much doubt it and the reputation of the YL’s is unneccesarily tarnished.

  3. Nolan Says:

    Jake, it doesn’t take much to tarnish the reputation of the Libs these days.

  4. anon Says:

    viva la freedom!

  5. JaketheMuss Says:

    I support the legality of low cost work.

  6. Beccy Says:

    Agree with Jake – it was really frustrating that he refused to back up his words in the media with actual defense of his position to the conference. The entire debate was stifled.

  7. Polac Says:

    Tim, seriously get a life.

    Noel, like others, proposed an idea. It’s called free speech … that thing you claim to believe in. Just because you didn’t like the policy proposal doesn’t mean that you can censor somebody else from proposing it!!

    And also, you seriously claim that your justification for your rant is that you care about the public reputation of the YLs – but then you use a public website to trash the YL President (just like you did the Liberal leader last weak).

    If you seriously cared about protecting (and not trashing) the public reputation of the Libs you’d shut the fuck up.

    As usual you are best at bitching and talking, but won’t get out there to help get pollies with Liberal views elected to Parliament. How about you stop being hypocritical, stop preaching to the converted, get a life and maybe doorknock some marginal seat voters.

  8. Tim Says:

    Tad difficult for me to doorknock, what, living on the other side of the world and all. In any event though, I was always of the opinion that we wanted the Libs to get elected to power you know, for a reason. Not just for its own sake. That we should engage in the battle of ideas etc. Pity it seems you no longer hold such a viewpoint.

    Although I should note at no point did I say Noel should be censored (which is what you’re doing to me now). He’s perfectly entitled to his viewpoint. He’s just wrong.

  9. Natalie Says:

    Polac, why do you hate freedom?

  10. James Says:

    I agree with Polac. Tim, your a tool.

  11. James Says:

    Ps. if Tim likes free speech so much where have the Oracle’s comments gone ??

  12. Tim Says:

    1)You’re not your.
    2)I discussed the matter in emails with him and it was agreed by both of us that discussing internal party matters in a public forum is inappropriate. Particularly when one party is cloaked in anonymity. And he agreed to taking them down.

  13. Will Church Says:


    You’re aware that Hayek considered neither taxation nor compulsory military service as examples of “coercion.” Quote:

    ” …are not supposed to be avoidable, they are at least predictable and are enforced irrespective of how the individual would otherwise employ his energies: this deprives them largely of the evil nature of coercion.” The Constitution of Liberty; p153.

    You seem to suggest that a law is coercive if it fails the test of voluntariness. I am sorry but that view seems inconsonant with The Rule of Law.

  14. tower 200 Says:

    Will it work on any sort of scar or just stretch marks?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: