Of course, many universities themselves have community services hours as graduation requirements.  Most I've seen one is one program that requires 200 hours of community service.

Really? Oh okay, I'm mistaken then. Sorry.

I have defo heard before though that all the taxes from cigarettes go into the NHS.

You would think they'd have learned about "taxation without representation" by now.

True but that's a personal choice to attend said university.   You're directly paying for that education which includes service with yoru consent.

Public school education is mandataory (unless opted out for home schooling) so you have no choice but to work this labor under the guise of community and civic relations.

It opens the doors for further conscriptions, civil service duty, etc...

Kids are really, really not going to enjoy this....

Yeah, they probably do, but cigarette taxes are far from enough to cover NHS costs.

If only more people smoked, aye.

To be honest, is it taking away more liberties than making kids go to school in the first place? no of course not.

Hell, if you set a two hour period each week where they had to do it and called it a lesson, then no-one would question it. I don't see what the problem is here.

Actually, it doesn't. You may or may not have noticed, but Gordon Brown won't do this without putting it in a manifesto and putting it through election first.

That's simply because Parliament will not let the Government get a bill through without a mandate. You can only have a mandate if there's an overwhelming public outcry (read: Dangerous Dogs Act, Hunting with Dogs Act, and whatever Act it was that put on scriter gun control), a referendum on the matter, or if it was in the party's manifesto leading up to election.

A good example of Parliament putting a stop to something that the Government wanted without mandate was the 42-Days Bill that they tried to push through last year.

Of course, this isn't a written rule, merely a convention - but conventions hold an amazing amount of power in the British constitution.

---

One other point: The Labour party, since its election in 1997, has sought to increase democracy in the UK, and Gordon Brown in particular has passed a few Acts to increase democracy in the UK, the Supreme Court Act, for example, abolished the Law Lords and has finally seperated the Judiciary and Legislature - something that the Americans have been doing since the birth of their constitution.

Isn’t making them go to school in the first place the same thing?

I mean if the purpose of this is a learning experience for the kids, then it’s education. Just not education learned in a classroom. If the purpose is to get free labor from a workforce, then it’s wrong.

Attending school is a choice by the parent or guardian.  In the case of the age group <19, their rights are decided by the parents or guardians.  The said parents or guardians can force these dependents to do whatever they see as being best for them.  It is (as I'm sure I've seen you put it before) not the governments place to tell people what to do with their children.

Also, I don't think children are forced to go to school (and if they are that is also wrong).

I had to do 40 hours to earn my high school diploma here in Ontario, no biggie