Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Voting age to be lowered?

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
A report from the Electoral Commission to the Government calls for the minimum age for voting and standing for Member of Parliament, to be lowered from 18 to 16. The recommendation has come amidst concerns about voter apathy and disillusionment with national politics. Gordon Brown has signified he may support the Commision's idea.

Will young people benefit from participation at a lower age? the issue being at which stage of a person's intellectual and social development are they adult enough to be included in the democratic process of the nation. Whether Britain should include every youngster who reaches 16?
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well, I'm 17 now, 18 next week and I couldn't give a shit about voting. I'll probably get slated for this but only 16 year old geeks who know everything about politics will actually bother to go along and vote.

    I don't think it should be lowered at all. Even next year when I am 18 I won't bother to vote mostly because I have no idea about the groups and everything and I don't want to screw up proper votes with me voting for the youngest and fittest politiciany guy I can find.

    I don't think I am mature enough yet to vote, never mind at 16. It's a bit of a pointless change - perhaps they should concentrate on changing important issues.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    point is you have to go to school until 16 not 18 so at least if voting was at age 16 it would get discussed a lot more in class and people your age would know a lot more about the various parties and what they stand for.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    *Ashley* wrote: »
    Well, I'm 17 now, 18 next week and I couldn't give a shit about voting. I'll probably get slated for this but only 16 year old geeks who know everything about politics will actually bother to go along and vote.

    If the age were 16 then this sort of attitude could be diminished. Fair enough not to care about voting, but tarring people who do (or who could if the age were lowered) 'geeks' is the usual snotty nonsense.

    The National Lottery is 16, right? Then there's no question.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I can't immediately see any issues with sixteen year-olds voting. I know a few people under eighteen i'd be much more happy having involved in the voting process than some of the cretins who currently have the right to vote.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If we reduced the amount any organisation, person or group could give to any political party down to £25k they would be forced to actually attract members and do things for/with the public. This would do a lot more for public involvement in politics than just lowering the age of voters.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lower the voting age isn't going to get anyone to vote, is it?

    Ignorant as it may sound, but what's the difference between voting Tories and Labour nowadays? The lines are no blurred as far as I can see.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To me, it's simply a question of when you become an adult. If we decide that someone becomes an adult when they're 18, then it should apply to everything (including being in the armed forces), including voting. The Lib Dems are in favour of lowering the voting age, because they know they'll make the biggest gains by doing so. I agree with Budda's suggestion. But I reckon if you lower to voting age to 16, then you have to lower the age of what an adult is to 16 too, and all of the rights and responsibilities that go with that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think they should lower the voting age to 16. You can get a job and pay tax at 16, so why shouldn't you be able to vote? There probably are a lot of 16 year olds who wouldn't vote, but they should be given the option.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Out of interest: What can you do at eighteen these days that you can't do at sixteen, other than vote? I guess drinking and smoking spring to mind.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Out of interest: What can you do at eighteen these days that you can't do at sixteen, other than vote? I guess drinking and smoking spring to mind.

    Driving? (and I guess pilots licensces).

    Also as a member of the armed forces you can't be deployed on active service until you're eighteen (though you can join).

    On moving voting age to sixteen can't say I worry either way - it will be peripheral on increasing the voting numbers and there's not many people who are politically engaged at eighteen who weren't at sixteen.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To me, it's simply a question of when you become an adult. If we decide that someone becomes an adult when they're 18, then it should apply to everything (including being in the armed forces), including voting. The Lib Dems are in favour of lowering the voting age, because they know they'll make the biggest gains by doing so. I agree with Budda's suggestion. But I reckon if you lower to voting age to 16, then you have to lower the age of what an adult is to 16 too, and all of the rights and responsibilities that go with that.

    Didn't they just increase the age you can buy tobacco at to 18?
    I think they should pick an age (16, 17 or 18) to make everything legal, drinking, gambling, voting, driving, smoking and marrying.
    The current inconsistent laws are rather daft. 16 years olds can have babies and jobs, but aren't considered mature enough to drink, gamble or vote.

    If it was up to me it would be 18 for everything.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They have babies much younger than 16 in some cases, so that isn't a good example.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whilst I know there are quite a few 16 year olds out there who are intelligent enough to vote, and I am always happy to hear what they have to say, I think most of them are still quite naive when it comes to discussing real issues, ie rose tinted specs and all that.
    It takes a few years of work e.t.c. to get rid of them.
    In some cases I will be proven wrong, i accept that quite happily, but not always, and certainly not the majority.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah i think it would be a good idea as it could be part of your end year, to discuss politics (in particular the way policies of certain parties may effect people of that age group), resulting in young people taking an interest and voting.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My initial thought is if people who already have the vote do not vote, why should lowering the age change voter apathy? Won't 16 and 17 year olds become apathetic themselves in time? It isn't tackling why voters are apathetic in the first place.

    I also think 16 year olds are too young and immature :yuck:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    People used the immaturity and not able to deal with the responsibility thing to try to stop the voting age being lowered to 18. And and being given to women. And the working class. And the middle class.
    Voters are apathetic because it's a choice between the rich guy who likes wasting money and invading other and countries and hates people who need the government's help and the rich guy who likes wasting money and invading other countries and hates people who need the government's help. It really comes down to do you prefer red or blue? Red was my favourite colour as a kid so I might as well go with that one, although blue is supposed to be a good colour for the living room.....
    16 year olds will be affected by the decisions the government make as much as anyone, in some cases more than older people. Do you think the government would have introduced top up fees if 16 years olds were able to vote a few years ago? The chances are it wouldn't have been considered.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Do you think the government would have introduced top up fees if 16 years olds were able to vote a few years ago? The chances are it wouldn't have been considered.

    Of course they would, not only will 16 year olds not vote, but its the mums and dads who largely pay the top up fees and they vote now.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I know there will be a lot of 16 year olds who won't vote, but there will also be a lot of 16 year old who will. They need to be able to express their views on the things that will have more impact on their lives than anyones.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Does anyone have any statistics on this? I doubt you could find anything reliable, but I wonder whether 16 to 18 year olds would actually vote in any greater percentage than any other group. Not that that's particularly important to the issue, but it would be interesting to find out.

    But the other issue is that I think it's important for there to be a certain standard throughout Europe on this issue, since we could all be voting on the same issues.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    People used the immaturity and not able to deal with the responsibility thing to try to stop the voting age being lowered to 18. And and being given to women. And the working class. And the middle class.
    Voters are apathetic because it's a choice between the rich guy who likes wasting money and invading other and countries and hates people who need the government's help and the rich guy who likes wasting money and invading other countries and hates people who need the government's help. It really comes down to do you prefer red or blue? Red was my favourite colour as a kid so I might as well go with that one, although blue is supposed to be a good colour for the living room.....
    16 year olds will be affected by the decisions the government make as much as anyone, in some cases more than older people. Do you think the government would have introduced top up fees if 16 years olds were able to vote a few years ago? The chances are it wouldn't have been considered.

    The fact that the immaturity argument was used against women, the working class and 18 year-olds getting the vote doesn't mean it doesn't apply to 16 year-olds. Does the argument apply to anyone or should we allow children and toddlers(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/2275407/Germany-plans-to-give-vote-to-babies.html) to have the vote as well? The "16 year olds are affected by the decisions of the government" argument pretty much applies to everybody of every age living in the UK.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To be frank, if the British government considers you mature enough to pay tax and be a soldier then it should bloody well consider you mature enough to vote.

    http://www.armyjobs.mod.uk/howdoijoin/canijoin/Pages/EntryRequirements.aspx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Runnymede wrote: »
    The fact that the immaturity argument was used against women, the working class and 18 year-olds getting the vote doesn't mean it doesn't apply to 16 year-olds. Does the argument apply to anyone or should we allow children and toddlers(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/2275407/Germany-plans-to-give-vote-to-babies.html) to have the vote as well? The "16 year olds are affected by the decisions of the government" argument pretty much applies to everybody of every age living in the UK.

    But it doesn't apply to 16 year olds. Like Jim V said, you're allowed to pay tax and be a soldier at 16 so you should be able to vote.
    If we're discussing the idea of being able to vote when you're mature enough to I think it completely depends on the individulal. Some people would probably be mature enough to vote at 14, others are 40 and still not mature enough to vote.
    16 year olds are expected to contribute to society in many of the ways that an 18 year old contributes, so they should have a say in how society is governed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This is mostly laughable nonsense. I couldn't care less if the voting age is reduced to 16 or not. Chances are it most probably means a few thousand more people will vote Labour at the next elect... ah, now you see why Gordon's so keen on it! Stop deluding yourself Macavity, you're heading for annihilation, and no number of pointless stunts such as this will save your bacon. And besides, what do young people have to thank you for? Ah yes, the EMA, where you give them £30 a week to bribe them to stay in school. You then decide to lumber them with £3k a year fees at university, and start their careers with huge debts around their necks. Britain's young owe nothing to New Labour.

    Why not actually give people something to vote for in the first place? Currently, we're stuck with Fuhrer Brown, a control freak who tries to be Prime Minister and Chancellor at the same time, and fails miserably at both jobs. But what else have we got? We've got David Cameron, the man who views himself as the "heir to Blair", promising us more of the same. We've got Nick Clegg, possibly the most useless leader the Lib Dems have ever had. Give Vince Cable the job - he slaughtered the government over their handling of Northern Rock, now The People's Bank. Being criticised by Nick Clegg is like being licked to death by an overly-friendly Dalmatian.

    Vote? Don't bother!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My general feeling is that many people would prefer to vote Labour but don't like this particular set of politicians that represent the party now so they're a bit stuck.

    This topic was supposed to be about whether 16 and 17 year olds should be able to vote and what sort of influence their vote might have, but it seemed to become an issue of current politician slamming again.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    if the goverment take cash away from you at 16, i think its fair for 16 year olds to vote for who takes their cash
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    if the goverment take cash away from you at 16, i think its fair for 16 year olds to vote for who takes their cash

    If you're talking about tax, then why 16? I had a weekend job at 15 and worked pretty much full time in the holidays so got taxed. Do you suggest lowering it to 15 in that case?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Definitely, sixteen year olds should be allowed to vote. They can work, marry (no longer buy tobacco - the government sneaked that one in!) and pay taxes. If someone at 16 is too stupid or immature to vote then trust me, that person will still be stupid and immature at 18, 25, 30, 45 etc. At sixteen people are adults - not as experienced as older people maybe - but adults, they should have the right to a vote and they should be expected to take the responsibility too.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They can work, but only set numbers of hours a week, and usually for a very low wage, the incentive being to stay in education.

    Tax? I've yet to meet or hear of a 16 year old who pays anywhere near the amount of tax the rest of us have to pay.

    Marriage, they need parental consent so they're not free to marry anyone they want.

    we're not saying someone at 16 is too stupid or immature to vote, just lacking in life experience. And a 16 year old is a child. Not an adult.

    Your parents are responsible for any financial mess you might get into, you can't fight on the front lines, you can't drive, you can't work in a myriad of jobs, you can't be sent to adult prison e.t.c. e.t.c.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    They can work, but only set numbers of hours a week, and usually for a very low wage, the incentive being to stay in education.

    Tax? I've yet to meet or hear of a 16 year old who pays anywhere near the amount of tax the rest of us have to pay.

    Marriage, they need parental consent so they're not free to marry anyone they want.

    we're not saying someone at 16 is too stupid or immature to vote, just lacking in life experience. And a 16 year old is a child. Not an adult.

    Your parents are responsible for any financial mess you might get into, you can't fight on the front lines, you can't drive, you can't work in a myriad of jobs, you can't be sent to adult prison e.t.c. e.t.c.

    So you're saying 17?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I am not sure where I stand on this issue. I have been politically aware for almost as I can remember (hell, even these forums bare proof of that), but I don't think that it would be responsible to have let me or my peers at age 16 to vote. At 16 though I bet I would have argued otherwise.
    I just think that its only after you've left school that you (in most cases not all) start catching a glimpse of the world around you and not just what is in the headlines.

    Though I would be interested to hear how much lowering the age would increase the voter turn-out, as someone else said I doubt that it would add a great deal to the lot already voting.
Sign In or Register to comment.