|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background - Arguments For - Arguments Against - Coalition Members - Quotes - Statement of Aims
The last time the voting age was
lowered was under the Representation of the People Act 1969,
which came into effect in 1970. It allowed 18 to 20 year olds to
vote. 81 members of the current House of Commons had the
opportunity to vote in that year because of the change in the
voting act. These include Simon Hughes MP, who insisted in using
his vote, with his father driving him from Hereford, where they
moved to, to north Wales to make his vote count. He was 19 years
old. John Redwood, Estelle Morris (secretary of state for
Education and Skills) and the Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon
Brown could not have voted if the age had not been lowered the
previous year. How many more Ministers and Prime Ministers will
be encouraged if we foster young people’s interest in
politics early on?
A recent poll following the election for Charter 88 and the YMCA
revealed that 62% of young people believe voting is an important
to way defend public interest. The research also revealed that 47%
of 16 and 17 year olds said that voting could have a lot of
influence, by the time they reached their early twenties that
figure dropped to 35%.
Many people argue that there is an
air of voter apathy at the minute, and they are particularly
worried about young people seemingly not taking an interest in
politics. Yet the young people we have spoken to are very clear
on the issues that affect them and will affect them in the future.
Moreover, with the government wanting to develop citizenship, (something
the Lib Dem Youth and Students have developed) there is a greater
push to get younger people to be aware of wider issues, discuss
them and respond to them. Part of this is considering the role of
government.
Allowing young people to vote could prevent voter apathy. It will
get them interested at a younger age and it means that
governments will have to listen to them and make things like
policy digestible. We would argue that our educators can instil a
sense of justice into young people and this is what is needed
when looking at democracy.
If we consider the 2001 general election, we can say that there
have been injustices towards our younger citizens. A government
was elected by over 18s only and then sent young people off to
fight a war against terrorism, people who were as young as 17 and
had no say in electing a government and, through that election,
influencing foreign policy. Their opinions on defence and foreign
policy did not count.
Perhaps this is the reason that government does not want 16 and
17 year olds to have the vote: because they are fearful that the
young person’s voice is so powerful. Votes at 16 might, for
example, have prevented any government from ever abolishing
student grants and introducing tuition fees.
Many people argue that those of us
under 18 should not have a voice because we have not had enough
experience and are not mature enough to form our own opinions. We
do not understand certain economic necessities, and that as we
are not allowed to be trusted with things like alcohol, then why
should we be trusted with things like the vote.
Some argue that many 16 year olds are too young to become
emotionally neutral, and that psychologically they will be far
too susceptible to the influence of biased media. It can be
countered by saying that if this is accepted, then we would have
accept the age of adulthood as higher by default - and therefore
should move age of first working, tax, army etc up to 18 as well.
This would be rightly seen by most as a step in the wrong
direction.
The same argument was used against women gaining the vote at the
beginning of the century: Men should be allowed to maintain their
monopoly because they knew what was in a woman's best interest,
because she couldn't make the decision herself. Whilst we
appreciate that this argument may have some support, it is not by
any means a strong argument. Who should be paying tax without
being represented? After all the 17th century was awash with
cries of "no taxation without representation". Why
should it be any different now?
Furthermore, if emotional neutrality is to be the measure of
suitability to have the vote it could be argued that a large
amount of the population is not emotionally neutral - many
people, no matter what their age can be influenced on some issues
by appeals to emotion. Moreover, there is no way of judging who
is ‘emotional’ and who is not; there are many people of
all ages who will have experienced traumatic situations in the
months running up to an election. Is it therefore fair not to
allow them the vote? Or could we be left with un-elected
candidates calling for a re-vote because some of the people who
voted for the opposition on the basis that the voters acted
irrationally? Clearly this would be ridiculous.
16 year olds can be, and often are "emotionally neutral",
on a wide range of issues. In school, for example, subjects are
taught without bias. It is up to the student to read the
arguments and draw reasoned conclusions; rather like one would
approach deciding whom to vote for. Moreover, many younger people
are entitled to join a political party from an early age. Surely
no political party would argue that its younger members have an
emotional imbalance.
There are a large amount of people who continually point to the
low voter turnout amongst 18-25 year olds, and argue that
allowing 16 year olds the vote will not change this. However,
this argument makes no judgement about whether 16 and 17 year
olds may be even more apathetic, or slightly less apathetic, than
the 18, 19 and 20 year olds. Moreover, just because people might
not vote is no reason not to give them that opportunity. What if
many of them do want to vote? It is a person’s right if they
go to the ballot box or not; a government cannot deny them that
right just because they might not exercise it; it is undemocratic
to believe otherwise.
Several groups of reformers and
groups representing young people, agree that young people have
the maturity to vote wisely. The have formed a coalition, of
which the Liberal Democrat Youth and Students (LDYS) only forms a
small part. The coalition is basically made up of the following
groups, put on an equal platform, to work together to achieve
votes for 16 year olds, and try to get a bit more democracy in
Britain.
The coalition is made up of:
The Electoral Commission also sends an observer to the coalition.
Links to the webpages of
the above organisations can be found here.
The official coalition statement of aims and reasons can
be found here.
What some of our younger members say / What Lib Dem MPs and MEPs have to say on the issue
What some of our younger members say... |
| "It is
appalling that we in the 21st century have such appalling
inequalities down to age, where we have 16 year olds that
pay full taxes and have most of the same rights and
responsibilities of other adults yet they are still
denied the fundamental democratic right of deciding who
should spend their taxes, educate their children and make
decisions that directly affect them. 16 year olds are
treated like adults on almost every other issue; what
gives misguided politicians the right to treat them like
little children on this fundamental issue?" Chris Nelson, 16 “At 16 you may have up to 5 years of education to go and you cannot vote on who decides what that education should be” Lyn-Su Floodgate, 19, Vice Chair (Membership Development), LDYS* "The church allows children of 11 to get confirmed, making the most solemn of promises. If they are able to do this then surely 16 year olds should be able to vote." Jade Farrington, 16 “In what world is it right that you can create a new voice whilst you are still forbidden from using your own?" Alison Goldsworthy, 20, Vice Chair Communications (Job Share) and Chair Elect of LDYS* *LDYS = The Liberal Democrat Youth & Students |
What Lib Dem MPs and MEPs have to say on the issue... |
| “Marriage, a full
time job or having children (can be seen as) no lesser
responsibilities than voting, yet that is what Successive
governments have effectively told us by failing to tackle
the voting rights of 16 to 18 year olds. We treat them
like adults one minute and children the next. Let us be
consistent Giving young people the chance to vote can only benefit society. It will empower young people and give them a greater sense of responsibility in society. We will make politics more relevant to the young and encourage personal responsibility by giving them a stake in the future. We cannot deny someone their rights simply because they choose not to use it. If we played that game, we would have to forfeit the rights of almost half the population in the UK, given the results of the last general election, some democracy we would have if we did that” Matthew Green, MP for Ludlow Lib Dem Spokesperson on Youth Affairs "At 16, it is legal for young people to pay taxes and join the armed forces.Yet they are not allowed to vote until they are 18. Our democracy imposes important responsibilities on young people, but fails to represent them when decisions are made." David Rendel, MP for Newbury Lib Dem Spokesperson on Higher Education "I have always believed if you can vote, work, pay taxes, marry, let alone fight for the country, you should also be able to vote. Even more passionately, I believe you should also be able to stand for election as soon as you are able to vote - the electorate can decide if you are old enough and capable enough!" Matthew Taylor, MP for Truro and St Austell Lib Dem Shadow Chancellor "I believe in the principles of 'no taxation without representation' and 'equality under the law'. The current situation is nonsense. You can work and pay tax, join the forces and have sex at 16 and yet you can't vote. Not very logical or fair!" Baroness Walmsley Member of the Lib Dem Education Team in the House of Lords "Young people can have sex at 16, join the armed forces, pay tax at 16 and get married at 16 and yet they cannot vote. The Americans fought their war of independence on the slogan of 'no taxation without representation', the same should apply to young people." Peter Black, AM for South Wales West Deputy Minister for Local Government and Housing, Wales "Young people between the ages of 16-18 are frequently passed over as active members of society, excluded from the minimum wage, unemployment benefit, credit facilities, and of course, the right to vote. As such, they would be fully justified in feeling like second class citizens, disenfranchised and disengaged from the mechanics of society. Lowering the legal voting age to 16 will help to alleviate this. Those expected to pay taxes should participate in electing the government that sets them" Michael German OBE, AM for South Wales East Deputy First Minister of Wales, Minister for Economic Development and Leader of the Liberal Democrats in the National Assembly for Wales “A Motion was submitted by West Aberdeenshire Local Party for the Scottish Conference in Greenock in 1962 urging the Government to lower the voting age to 16. Had the Motion been accepted, I would have been proposing it. I was sixteen at the time. I was strongly in favour of this then, and I am now. How can we perpetuate a situation where young people can be contributing to the Exchequer, members of the Armed Forces, considered adult enough to marry, yet not have the vote? It is absurd and unacceptable. I hope today's sixteen-year-olds succeed where my generation failed. They have my total support.” Nora Radcliffe MSP for Gordon Lib Dem spokesperson on Transport and the Environment in the Scottish Parliament “It is plainly unjust that at sixteen you are entitled by law to create a human life, and to fight and die for your country, yet you have no say in the democratic election of a Government. For sure, some people will argue that voter apathy amongst young people is high, but this does not mean that they should not be given the right to vote. Giving young people a greater say in the democratic process is probably the best antidote to apathy. Whether or not they use their voice is their choice.” Nick Clegg, MEP for the East Midlands Lib Dem Spokesperson on Trade in the European Parliament "I am delighted to support the LDYS* campaign for votes at 16. It is enormously important that young people have belief in the democratic system and its potential to fight injustice. Youth is a time for hope and ambition for a better world, and young people should be empowered to play their part in this. (With suitable deference to us older people of course!)" Robert Brown, MSP for Glasgow Lib Dem Spokesperson on Communities and Housing in the Scottish Parliament *LDYS = The Liberal Democrat Youth & Students |
The Votes @ 16 campaign is a
coalition of organisations who believe that the voting age for
public elections in the UK should be lowered to 16.
Among its campaign targets will be the Government and Parliament,
the devolved institutions, the Electoral Commission, the media,
academics and the general public. The campaign believes that the
most effective case for change is to be made by young
people themselves and young people led organisations will be at
the heart of the campaign.
Different organisations within the campaign have different
reasons for supporting such a move, but these reasons include:
See also: Members of the Votes @ 16 Coalition
