Mike Ion argues that votes for 16-year-olds in Britain would be a progressive and inclusive move
The voting age in Britain was last reduced nearly 40 years ago. Since then, there have been major changes in our society’s expectations of young people and in their contribution to community. Currently, 16 and 17-year-olds can work, pay taxes, join the armed forces and get married. They can be invited to set up school councils and youth councils. They are encouraged to sit on local government and ministerial boards, and do voluntary work. We expect them to keep out of trouble and study hard at school. Many will have caring responsibilities, a lot will have a job, some will be parents and a minority will be leaving care or custody. And all these young people have one thing in common: they cannot elect those who govern them.
A few years ago, the Electoral Commission carried out a public consultation on the voting age. Seventy-two per cent of those asked were in favour of lowering it to 16. Significant numbers took part in this survey, including 8,000 young people. This suggests that, when issues are made relevant to them, young people are more likely to engage in matters of public importance.
If the Government is to keep its promise of helping to build more sustainable communities, it must ensure that everyone is fully engaged in shaping and delivering local services. Young people have a key role to play.
So we need to take their aspirations and desires rather more seriously. We don’t want them to be uninterested in politics, but the greater danger is that we have become uninterested in them. We want them to get involved, but we don’t want to include them. We now have what may be a once in a generation chance to change that.
Let’s dispense with old assumptions and acknowledge that we are dealing with a different generation. A first-time voter in the 2010 general election would have been leaving nursery school when Labour came to power in 1997. As far as they are concerned, the party is part of the establishment. Further, the divide between organised politics and young people is a symptom of a wider disenchantment. People who feel alienated have little trust in Britain’s institutions. This adds to the wider sense of disaffection and makes it more difficult for our politics to function effectively. Surely young people’s faith in the political system would be boosted if they had a direct influence in choosing who represents them in Parliament? In Austria – where they recently lowered the voting age to 16 – the turnout among 16 and 17-year-olds was close to 75 per cent for the last local and regional elections The most effective means of encouraging and widening participation in the political process in Britain would be to lower the voting age to 16. And the sooner we do so, the better.
Mike Ion is a former deputy head teacher and was a Labour candidate at the 2005 general election
About The Author
It’s those words again; ‘progressive’ and ‘inclusive’ What do they mean in this context? The answer is, not a lot. Mike Ion should be asking himself whether giving 16 year-old children the vote is a Right and Wise decision rather than the cliché ridden Progressive and Inclusive. All apple pie.
OK of course it’s right you can work join the army why not vote, but we will have to sober them up first and many will vote for smaller green parties.
As always brother, you have made a valid comment and one which cannot be ignored.
Of course 16 year old’s should be able to vote but what then do we say about the other anomalies regarding drinking, driving, car hire etc?
The problem we have to address is what age does Society/Nanny State recognise as an age of responsibility.
Best of luck but needless to say you will always have my support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Regards…..Bruv!!