Opt-out Option for NS

While reading about Ike See, the music talent who failed to get deferment from NS and hence gotta pass his chance of getting into the most prestigious music school on this damned planet, a sudden thought crossed my mind: why not make NS an option? Or more precisely, have an opt-out option for NS and flexible service period. Allow me to explain.

Every male (and maybe female, if this opt-out option might cause some personnel shortages) who is a Singaporean (and maybe PR for the same reason) are to serve National Service upon reaching the age of 18. The period of service is two years. However, for those who want to complete their education first, or have other plans, may choose to serve at a later date. This is what I mean by flexible service period, which is similar to deferment. The difference between this and deferment is that you don't need an "official" reason to delay your service. You don't even need a reason.

(By "official" I mean that there is no need to fall into the narrow range of reasons that MINDEF has set as valid reasons for deferment. Currently, the reason that is accepted for deferment is PSC and some other scholarships. Music talent used to be accepted until the Melvyn Tan incident. These are "official" reasons, and if you have a superb talent for, say, belly-dancing, these are usually not accepted.)

As for opt-out option, this means that for those who really hate National Service, they can choose not to serve in their lifetime. Yes, you heard me correctly: there is no need to serve if you don't want to. But this doesn't come without penalties. These penalties will be disadvantages in society, such as a higher income tax (maybe an additional 30%), lowered priority in certain services such as application for flats, less chances for promotion for a civil servant and disqualification for certain privileges/entitlements (such as the Progress Package, a maid licence and rebate for property taxes).

Now, you might be able to see that the opt-out option and flexible service period option are actually the same thing. The former is just the latter that is delayed indefinitely. In another words, until one services his/her National Service, he/she is subjected to the same penalties as those who opt-out. But this allows for more choices and flexibility in one's life. And for most who go on to University, there aren't many disadvantages to serve NS later, so it is a matter of choice if one wants to clear away two years of hell first, or complete his/her education first.

And also, to discourage one from serving at an age too late (and therefore is less physically fit), the length of service can also varying according to age. For example, those who start serving before the age of 25 will only need to serve for two years. Then the next range of 25 to before 30 will serve for three years. And then for the next 10 years, four years of service. For 40 and above, one has to serve five years. And perhaps the NS allowance is scaled (inversely) according to age.

There is one disadvantage that I can immediately see. The first one is that the penalties might be too light for people who take a low paying job (and hence pay little on taxes) but inherits lots of money. For such people, the penalties for not serving is not as strong. A solution to this is to impose penalties that have a heavier emphasis on social disadvantage. But still, this is a problem that is not easy to tackle.

Another disadvantage is on how to fit people who become a citizen (or PR) at a later age, say, maybe 25 or 30. It will not be fair if they are exempted from NS now, considering that it is reasonable (in view of this flexible service period policy) to serve at a later age. So should they serve the full term? Should the penalties apply in full? These are sensitive details that has to be ironed out, and no matter what the outcome is, there will be people who are not satisfied with it.

Of course, another problem is the very implementation of it. It will be a major change, very much like when NS was first introduced. Many factors has to be taken into consideration, such as a dip in manpower in the first few years of implementation. For many years after that, the personnel for each force will fluctuate quite an amount before averaging out (which I'd say will take about ten years). Also, there is the question of those who are currently serving - how should their service be affected? Can they choose to opt-out halfway through? But this is a short-term problem.

This is just some thoughts of mine. So what are your opinions of it? And assuming if you had a choice, would you choose to opt-out/delay your service?

ADDENDUM (added 210506 at 2110)